F-101 Question

[TLB]

Actually, the Voodoo cockpit was almost big enough to do that

On one long cross-country (in a four-ship) coming back from the US, my backseater got bored and after a bit of maneuvering, he unstrapped, undressed, and at his prompt I took over the lead while he gave the rest of the section a "full moon/pressed ham" at Angels 35 !

[DALMD-11]

There can't be too many others who've flown it, around these hallowed halls.

Well, there's at least one ex-Voodoo driver here. I flew the RF-101G/H and the RF-101C from 1967 to 1973 in the ANG. This included the Active Duty recall in 1968 with a TransPac deployment to Japan. With lots of airspeed and low altitude, the 101 could be "horsed around" quite a bit. A hard turn would produce buffet before the Pitch Up horn would sound. Most of my time (800 hours) was in the G/H model. My unit didn't get the C model until around 1971. It was always my personal impression that the C was more sensitive to the Pitch Up horn than the G/H. The hung nose gear stories are true.

[innuendo]

CF-101B from '62-'64. Not the most forgiving aircraft in the world to fly but it had the means to do what it was meant to do.







Apologies for the quality of the last photo but it is a scan of a print on Pearl paper which does not scan well.

[ORAC]

CF-101B from '62-'64. Not the most forgiving aircraft in the world to fly but it had the means to do what it was meant to do.

Oh Yeah...... AIR-2 Genie

[innuendo]

From your Wiki link:

To ensure simplicity and reliability, the weapon would be unguided, the large blast radius making precise accuracy unnecessary.

That made your first priority after seeing the fire signal on your steering scope, getting out of the way of the "Large blast radius" so you did not become involved in it. Mind you if it ever came to that the world was in a pretty serious situation.

[BEagle]

Many years ago we participated in a spot of affiliation with the 416 Sqn CF-101 guys at CFB Chatham.

The idea being that we were to attack their aerodrome and they would attempt to intercept us.

Running in a 300ft and having heard nothing on the RWR, we decided to climb to give them a sporting chance. Soon afterwards a CF-101 did its simulated 'vapourise a cubic mile of sky and anything in it' thing with a simulated Genie shot, then closed for an attempted Falcon shot.

Mistake. It didn't take long to fly a few wingovers, get inside his turning circle and trap him firmly in the windscreen. As he roared around at VC, we just sat in the middle of the turn at about 60° AoB.....

Listening to the playback tape afterwards was hilarious:

Pilot: "Where'd he go?"
Navigator: "Hell, he's in our six. How the f*** did you let something that big get behind us?"

Sporting serious headaches the next morning after the generosity of our hosts, 2 of us were offered back seat trips in the '101. 'Animal' went off in one, but the one I was due to fly in went U/S. Once the rest of the crew turned up, we cranked up the tin triangle and cruised gently back to Goose Bay.

Fun times!

[DelaneyT]

Take-off in the Voodoo was dead simple (although it all would occur very quickly): release brakes - full throttles - select burners (boom boom) - about 155 KIAS ease back on the stick and raise the nose about 5 degrees - check forward and hold that attitude - and about 230 KIAS the aircraft would very gracefully leap into the sky. --TLB

F-101 liftoff at 230 KIAS {?}

Sounds a bit fast for routine takeoff roll.

Were the tires rated for that high a speed ?

[innuendo]

That 230 KIAS must be a typo. 175 -180 ish was more like it. A bit faster if you had external fuel tanks on. Landing was still pretty speedy, based on 3000 Lbs of fuel remaining and full primary armament, final approach was 175 KIAS with touchdown speed at 160 KIAS. For every extra 1500 Lbs fuel add 5 KIAS. In the event of single engine 15 KIAS on top of that.
The top figure in the check list is for 12,000 fuel, 205 final and 190 touchdown.
Landing with that much fuel would not be the norm and would probably involve hot brakes with that much energy to dissipate.
Still have my original check list.

[Flash2001]

The Voodoo tyres were something. I think they were only good for 9 or 10 landings at best and only 1 if the landing was at maximum weight. In introductory training we were told that 1 main wheel contained enough energy stored in compressed air and stretched nylon to put a golf ball in geosynchronous orbit.

After an excellent landing etc...

[TLB]

That 230 KIAS must be a typo

Yes, that was incorrect. Things happened pretty quickly - not much time between rotation to lift-off.

[Jane-DoH]

BEagle

Mistake. It didn't take long to fly a few wingovers, get inside his turning circle and trap him firmly in the windscreen. As he roared around at VC, we just sat in the middle of the turn at about 60° AoB.....

You were an Avro Vulcan pilot, I would assume? Despite being a bomber, it was pretty maneuverable from what I remember reading about it (I don't know how many G's it can pull at max) especially with those huge, thick, large-span wings.

Listening to the playback tape afterwards was hilarious:

Pilot: "Where'd he go?"
Navigator: "Hell, he's in our six. How the f*** did you let something that big get behind us?"

I'm surprised the F-101B pilots didn't realize that the Vulcan's had a turning advantage over them and didn't just use the vertical more liberally.


Delaney

F-101 liftoff at 230 KIAS

I didn't find it unusual considering the small wings the plane had. Regardless, a fully loaded F-105 would leave the ground at around 235 knots.


innuendo

That 230 KIAS must be a typo. 175 -180 ish was more like it. A bit faster if you had external fuel tanks on.

So you'd begin the rotation at 155 kts; then by around 175 to 180 you'd leave the ground?

The critical alpha for this aircraft must have been fairly low to have a takeoff speed like this and still be fairly close to stalling it when near takeoff speeds with full tanks...


everybody

If it's not classified, how did this airplane's turning performance (subsonic and supersonic), to planes like the F-104, F-105, F-4 and so forth?

[Argonautical]

"Voodoo Warriors" by Group Captain Nigel Walpole is a good book about the Voodoo.

[TLB]

If it's not classified, how did this airplane's turning performance (subsonic and supersonic), to planes like the F-104, F-105, F-4 and so forth?

If memory serves, corner velocity was around 420 KIAS. P sub S numbers were very similar to the F-104.

[Jane-DoH]

TLB

If memory serves, corner velocity was around 420 KIAS. P sub S numbers were very similar to the F-104.

Specific power were similar to the F-104 at subsonic speed, or subsonic and supersonic speeds?

[clunckdriver]

"Oh look! a Voodoo banking as if to turn! "This gem was broadcast inadvertantly at an airshow over the PA at one of our Eastern bases, as luck would have it the airplane noise resulted in a very small portion of the crowd hearing it, for which a certain junior officer was most relieved!

[Jane-DoH]

What thought processes motivated McDonnell in the creation of this aircraft?

As I understand it, it was supposed to be a fighter with supersonic capability that could fly long enough to escort a B-47 While it had the range, and speed; it's wings were too small to give it significant sustained maneuverability...

It seems as if they obsessed entirely on speed and range and focused on agility last...

[Bevo]

What thought processes motivated McDonnell in the creation of this aircraft?

The same thing that motivated the US and Canadian Air Forces to purchase 807 of them. During the 1950s when the Voodoo was developed there was a growing belief that air-to-air missiles would negate the need for turning dog fights. Many designs therefore concentrated on climb and speed performance at the expense of turning capability.

McDonnell F-101 Voodoo*Interceptor / Reconnaissance Aircraft - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft

[jamesdevice]

weren't they specifically purchased to fire NUCLEAR air-to-air missile at incoming bombers coming in over Alaska / Canada? In other words, close-in capability was irrelevant: they used a stand off missile, they just needed to get in fast, fire , turn and get out fast to avoid the flash
I know they were originally conceived as bomber escorts, but - I understand - the role was redefined before the bulk purchases were made

[Bevo]

Please see the posted link!

McDonnell F-101 Voodoo*Interceptor / Reconnaissance Aircraft - History, Specs and Pictures - Military Aircraft

[Jane-DoH]

Bevo

During the 1950s when the Voodoo was developed there was a growing belief that air-to-air missiles would negate the need for turning dog fights. Many designs therefore concentrated on climb and speed performance at the expense of turning capability.

You're sure you're not thinking of the Phantom?

The Voodoo as far as I understand in its original, non-interceptor version (F-101B), was equipped with 3 x 20 millimeter guns, 3 x Falcons, and 2.75 inch unguided rockets. As far as I know, the last two items were removed by the time the plane first flew, though TAC developed it as a fighter bomber; ADC developed the F-101B as an interceptor and fitted the provisions to carry either 4 x Falcons in a rotating pallet or 2 x Falcons and 2 x Genies.


jamesdevice

weren't they specifically purchased to fire NUCLEAR air-to-air missile at incoming bombers coming in over Alaska / Canada? In other words, close-in capability was irrelevant: they used a stand off missile, they just needed to get in fast, fire , turn and get out fast to avoid the flash

That was the F-101B, which was a variant of the F-101. It was designed to fill in the gaps until the F-102's reached operational strength. It ended up more or less replacing the F-89's in practice. It could carry nuclear (2 x MB-1/AIR-2 Genie) unguided rockets, or non-nuclear guided missiles (4 x AIM-4 Falcons, or 2 x AIM-4 falcons when 2 Genies were carried) in a rotating pallet.

I know they were originally conceived as bomber escorts, but - I understand - the role was redefined before the bulk purchases were made

As I understand it the plane was already flying by the time SAC decided it didn't want them. They wanted more range than they asked for earlier, and then decided that the B-52's range made them unnecessary (I disagree obviously: History has shown that bombers have much better survivability when escorted by fighters, and F-101 had a mid-air refuelling capability from the get-go, it even had refuelling receptacles which could use the flying boom, or the hose and drogue; the plane could have been refuelled repeatedly to keep it flying with the B-52's from takeoff to the penetration point -- at that point they would fly with it both in and out, then refuel on the egress). TAC, however took an interest in the aircraft as a fighter-bomber, and eventually ADC took interest in it as a place-filler for the F-102's.