LO #75: splendid find, many thanks. Nahum presents MoS' 1947 assignment of the supersonic research job to EE as due to their "more sound management" than was then common in UK Aero (and to EE's possession of WEW Petter). He also presents selection of (to be) Lightning in 1957 in preference to mixed-powerplant SR.177 as due to Avon's evolving grunt, which, he suggests, had no benefit from German aero-engine technology.

Others have traced the IR sensors of Firestreak/Red Top to German work. Ferranti AI23 AIRPASS evolved in reciprocal partnership with Westinghouse. Very little in 1950s was wholly British: we shared RAE technical papers with US (and France).

LO's link has rapid climb-to-height as the defining attribute from Day 1: knock down incoming (Sov. V-craft equivalents) head-on, first pass is the last. US had Arctic depth, so F-102/F-106+BOMARC. UK did not, so...was Lightning that good: certainly, for the Specified job. That is why the reviled Sandys retained it, 4/57, when deleting so much else.

BOMARC was a stand-alone SAM. More a case of F106/F101 + AIR-2 GENIE.

CM,

Come on old chap, it was only a bit of banter!:ok:

Thanks, Ken...

Just to amplify a little: in 1951, contemporary with the P.1 windtunnel model in the Nahum paper, no practical Mach 2 fighter design existed in the US. The F-104 was as yet not conceived and the F-102 was being built in its pre-Area Rule and unsuccessful initial shape. The second-best supersonic design to have reached that stage by 1951 may have been the Draken!

Another WIWOL tale here on the RAeS website today...

Royal Aeronautical Society | Insight Blog | Bolt into the BLUE

Yeah, 1.3, I know. Just sticking up for the Navs. BTW, apart from flying the aircraft, what was the main thing that Phantom Navs didn't really do - despite their branch name? Should be a good opening for some interesting answers, I guess.

Ho hum.

Wasn't that Mr Ch** of the flaming engines off Cyprus? I was there, saw it, got the t-shirt :ok:.

Re the OP's question; as a missile chappie the Firestreak had the best performance but it wasn't all aspect so had 'less to do' as it were. There was some concern over the Red Top's performance. I think given a choice most WIWOLs would have gone with a couple of Firestreaks.

I was part of a team that did a feasibility study into fitting four 'winders in place of the two RT/Firestreaks. It was a bit late in the day though to be cost effective and as I remember there was no where to put the cooling bottles for the 'winders. They wouldn't fit where the ammonia bottles went in the pylons.

Pride of place in my office is my Firestreak nosecone with a model Lightning inside in a vertical climb (surprise, surprise), and just to show even handedness it has 11 Sqdn markings on one side, 5 on the other and a pair of Red Tops!

CM,

Buy a round!;)

Its ok CM, we all know that only the very thick pilots went onto the Frightning. :rolleyes:

but not many Navs did...........!

Courtney
ISTR that in RAFG F4 air defenders the pilot was responsible for navigation..... Or as someone else said "One small seat for navigators, one big step backwards for mankind".....

The Lightning was good enough to make a Massive Impression on me at a certain Biggin Hill Airshow!

As a youngster in the Air Training Corps, the all Silver star of the show, how can I say. Oh yes, all those vertical climbs with the chest reverberating sound of freedom; made my want to join the RAF. :ok:

Lightning area rule?
 

Just a curiosity about area ruling on this era of aircraft. I know about the F102 redesign to get the perfomance back but did the Lightning / Draken / F104 design teams know about this quirk beforehand or did they stop and incorporate it?

Wasn't the T.4/5 the fastest mark of Lightning due to the 'area rule' effect of the bulged forward fuselage? Or did I just imagine it? I'm sure I read it somewhere...

-RP

p.s. I think the two seat Hunter variants enjoyed the same speed advantage too for the same reason, although I may have imagined that as well! :}

My first ATC camp was at Coltishall at 226 OCU. As a kid was so enthralled seeing them take off.

Best view I had was at school in Blackpool one day when the TSR 2 flew over with a Lightning either side.:ok:

A bit about the 102 and 106.

F-106 Delta Dart - Specifications

The F-106 was quite a bit faster than the Lightning and did it on a single engine.....1535 mph with a climb rate of 29,000 fpm and a range of 2,700 miles.

The Lightning stats show 1300 mph, climb rate of 20,000 fpm, and a range of 855 miles.

BB,

You have seriously underestimated the Lightning's climb rate!

IIRC the Lightning ROC at sea level was 50,000 fpm....

Read 'The Lightning Boys' by Richard Pike! A collection of 'war stories' by the pilots who flew it.

Chapter 1 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!
Chapter 2 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!
Chapter 3 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!
Chapter 4 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!
Chapter 5 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!
Chapter 6 - There I was at 30,000ft when I had a No1 Engine Fire!

...and on and on and on!

Anyway, you get my drift and that tells you something about the Lightning's reliability!

Look here:

https://maps.google.co.uk/maps/ms?ms...a=0&dg=feature

And you'll see a map of Lightning losses and just how far they got to/from base before they speared in!

Bloggs
Here to help!:ok:

PS. The entry for XR768: October 29th 1974 on the map is wrong. I was bombing on Wainfleet Range that afternoon when we heard the Mayday from Tex Jones just before he ejected. We cleared the range and, in a Buccaneer, assisted the rescue chopper (Whirlwind, if I recall) who had no Violet Picture with locating the survivor in tumultuous seas just before dusk. Tex Jones did survive because he rang me afterwards to thank me for 'raising his morale' as he sat being tossed around in his dinghy and we orbited overhead - he promised a crate of beer as a reward... ...it never arrived! That's Lightning pilots for you!:{

Drifting off thread, but that trumps my ATC cadet memory of seeing the Bristol type 188 land at Filton (with Canberra escort) while waiting for my Chipmunk flight...

A more relevant memory is a cadet camp at Geilenkirchen, where 3 Sqn had Canberras (with special weapons), 92 Sqn had Lightnings, 60 Sqn had Pembrokes and I started learning about German beer. I have a vague memory that we beat the Germans at some big football match that year, but soccer's never been my sport...

I particularly remember the Lightning in the hangar which had gone into the safeland barrier when the braking chute failed to deploy. Both engines were out so they could rewire the aircraft, so it certainly wasn't designed for ease of maintenance

Only one of those figures is near right with respect to the later, longer serving marks.

I try and avoid Wikipedia.

The Lightning's best claim to fame was as a recruiting tool for the RAF!
At least it worked on me though sadly I never got to fly one.....closest I got was as an air cadet in 1977 in Malta courtesy of 5 Sqn. Sadly the X-wind was out of limits on the day.
Another chance came later back at Binbrook but this time a partially blocked eustachian tube got me so the closest I ever got to the pole was a ride in the sim!

MB

The F-106 was maxed at M=2.0 in service.

http://www.f-106deltadart.com/manual...06A%201964.pdf

Shaft109 - The Area Rule had not been formulated when the Lightning was designed (and as the above-cited document shows, the Lightning as we know it was basically designed by 1951) but someone involved was clearly aware of the need to avoid a clash between peak body cross-section and the wing, and knew it would be beneficial to have a near-constant-section body and a swept wing.

It might have been Multhopp, who after his RAE days went to the USA and helped design a bomber with two engines in front of the wing and one behind it.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...et.asp?id=2663

(Seriously, you could paint the XB-51 blue and green with black crosses and fool anyone.)

However, once the Area Rule was defined, it was recognized that the cross-section could be adjusted and the Lightning grew its belly tank. I have no idea about the T.4/T.5 but it smells a bit of urban legend.

Stacks,

Why not add to the discussion by providing some facts or data.

I am quite sure if Wiki had shown the Lightning to be superior there would be no squawking from the Gallery.

Others had compared the Lightning to the 102 and 106......I was merely adding some information about them from sources found on the internet.

The Lightning may have been a fast, climbed like a raped ape, but so did a lot of other aircraft of its time and since.

I shall remind you that Brit isn't necessarily best always....sometimes other nations Air Forces and Aircraft builders get it right too.

The Soviets set a few records you might remember.

BB

I think we can all agree that the capabilities of most military aircraft are less than optimum for a whole range of reasons. No Nation of which I am aware has a particularly good record of producing 'acceptable' Military Aircraft. Of course, such an assessment requires knowledge of the problems that Contractors do not mention, which are often quite significant. Consequently, Military Aviators invariably need to compensate for platform deficiencies and, mainly, they do pretty well at coping.

With respect to Records, almost exclusively the 'high performance' records are gained by 'stripped down' specials that have little in common to the equivalent operational version.

lm

Another vote for "Lightning Boys", a cracking good read.:ok:

The F-15 "Streak Eagle" on display at the USAF Museum set eight records before being retired.


http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/fac...et.asp?id=2283

54Phan,

Oh really! I thought it was tedious (unless you think that story after story about a No1 Engine Fire is worth reading over and over again!). And the last chapter! Talk about self-congratulation!!!:mad:

Try 'Buccaneer Boys' - much more entertaining and written by real characters!

Bloggs:ok:

PS. I suspect that 'Lightning Boys 2' is just the same!

The Streak Eagle was indeed impressive but as, lightningmate alluded to in his post, it was a stripped out hotrod, and not representative of a production F-15A...

-RP

Well, YMMV (Your Mileage May Vary). I enjoyed reading it, as well as LB2. I will look into Buccaneer Boys, thanks for the tip.

The crash map is interesting but remember most pilots will try to get home rather than jump as soon as there is a problem, unless you are trying to say they couldn't get far from base.

And that relates to my post how?

I was the Met. man at RAF Guetersloh in the heyday of 19 and 92. Our OMQ in Zeppelinstrasse was not much further from runway end than a good throw of a cricket ball.

I have to say I just loved it! The aircrew were super guys. Bryan Smith was my next-door neighbour. Laurie Jones a fine Wingco. I got on well with Pete Naz and Bob Barcilon.

My youngest of four was born there ........... slept through the sound of freedom rather well.

Never been so in love with the job as in those years.

Record-setters are often development or pre-production jets. (1) They're lighter and (2) they have reached the end of their usefulness, so nobody cares if you overrun a temperature limit.

If I recall correctly the good 'ol USA achieved the time to height record with a 104 with a wicker chair replacing the bang seat - we Brits (being always best) would never stoop so low.

LB - stirred memories: Peter Naz a QFI with whom I flew, Bob Barcilon was my second Stn Cdr at Binbrook, after the tragic loss of his new son-in-law at Hyde Park. Later in my second career he was ag reat help to me when he was at the RAFBF and I had a pretty serious welfare case.

At first did they look inverted when they came round on to finals 04 at 200ft ? or was that because the over-wing external tanks were fitted.:ok:

FB
We did on occasions detach to Lossie with 4 lightnings from Leuchars ( "I fear no man") during the Russian exercise weeks, although it was strange operating from a naval base during those periods.We did one time join the "tot" queue but the disguises it not work !!

Jaguar boys.. At least one chapter is different from the previous one..

I may be wrong here, but I believe that seat was a Mandarin style wicker designed by Pier 1 Imports to subsequently be used operationally in the failed Century series 'Comfort Fighter'.