mike_45 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 I was pointed to this on another message board, but this is a pretty interesting read about the F-111 http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/4595/flying-the-iconic-swing-wing-f-111-aardvark-at-the-height-of-the-cold-war Sorry if repost Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Air-Craft Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Good read on an awesome aircraft - thanks for posting! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Raptor01 Posted January 27, 2017 Share Posted January 27, 2017 Thanks for the link. I worked on the Avionics Systems for 17 years. -D, -E, EF, & FB. We knew the Vark was an awesome aircraft, it was not glamourous for airshow air displays, but the down & dirty work is where it excelled. John Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Don Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Thanks for the link. I really enjoyed that read. Always liked the F-111 aircraft. Cheers! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Nice read about one of my favorite aircraft. Always knew that the Vark was a maint pig, very interesting to read about the ways the crews worked around those issues. Thanks for posting Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gordon Shumway Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 Cool article, lots of interesting info. F-111's in that S.E. Asia camo scheme always looked good to me. In fact S.E. Asia camo scheme looked good on all USAF combat aircraft. I knew the Vark was a good especially low level bomber. A dog fighter I knew it was not, but I did not know it was such a pig in terms of air combat maneuvering. All in all still a slick jet. The 1986 Libyan Raiders history is one of the Vark's best stories IMO. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, Gordon Shumway said: The 1986 Libyan Raiders history is one of the Vark's best stories IMO. Great as in you have to admire the bravery of the flight crews. As far as being a testament to the effectiveness of the -111, from the linked article: "But let's look at the raid on Libya: 24 aircraft launch, several break and return, one crashes. Out of the three targets targeted by the aircraft that made it to the target area, only three aircraft hit the target—one on each target. All the others missed. It was terrible when I look back on it, but hats off to the crew who flew it!" Not exactly a great endorsement for the aircraft. I'd say the F-111's finest hour was flying into North Vietnam solo during Linebacker II. Edited January 28, 2017 by 11bee Quote Link to post Share on other sites
mike_45 Posted January 28, 2017 Author Share Posted January 28, 2017 Glad you guys liked the article! Mike Quote Link to post Share on other sites
venom Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 we need a new tool 48 family of varks .great read ! Andrew Quote Link to post Share on other sites
habu2 Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 8 hours ago, Gordon Shumway said: I knew the Vark was a good especially low level bomber. A dog fighter I knew it was not, but I did not know it was such a pig in terms of air combat maneuvering. Makes you wonder about how the the Navy's "B" would have performed in service, especially when compared to the A2A capabilities of the Tomcat. Several other good articles linked off that page, I also enjoyed the one about the Navy's experience with the F-16N in dissimilar combat training. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Tailspin Turtle Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 3 hours ago, habu2 said: Makes you wonder about how the the Navy's "B" would have performed in service, especially when compared to the A2A capabilities of the Tomcat. Several other good articles linked off that page, I also enjoyed the one about the Navy's experience with the F-16N in dissimilar combat training. Part of the F-111 image problem is that it wasn't a fighter, per se, certainly not an air-superiority fighter. The F-111A was a bomber. The F-111B was a missile truck (I don't think that there is a letter designation for that) optimized to shoot down enemy bombers and cruise missiles (big radar, six heavy missiles, long time on station, dash speed to engage the threat as far from the carrier as possible). The F-14 was a fighter, albeit big, that could do 75% of the Phoenix fleet-air-defense mission as an overload. The F-111B would have been better at the Phoenix mission (bigger radar dish, longer time on station, bring back all six Phoenixes, less wind-over-deck for launch and recovery) and potentially a replacement for the A-6 with a different suite of avionics. The carrier air group's air-superiority mission would have to have been fulfilled by something that looked like a Super Hornet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
joeltc Posted January 28, 2017 Share Posted January 28, 2017 4 hours ago, venom said: we need a new tool 48 family of varks .great read ! Andrew Yep, I've been saying this for years. Apart from the !/72nd Hasegawa kit fans of the Vark have been severely short changed when it comes to scale representations of this aircraft. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
11bee Posted January 29, 2017 Share Posted January 29, 2017 8 hours ago, habu2 said: Makes you wonder about how the the Navy's "B" would have performed in service, especially when compared to the A2A capabilities of the Tomcat. Several other good articles linked off that page, I also enjoyed the one about the Navy's experience with the F-16N in dissimilar combat training. The Tomcat was a bit over-rated in A2A as well (especially the A version). Like the F-111B, it was never intended to be a dogfighter, it was supposed to be a long endurance missile truck that could take out hordes of Backfires that were threatening it's carrier. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bashace Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 My boss here has flown some of those in the article, he really appreciated the read! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.