Your favorite post-war aircraft

[syscom3]

Did the Lightning have air to air refueling capability?

And its like a Spitfire with a rocket up its ass? hehehehehe..... I hope the pilots didnt wear pink flight suits...... heheheheheh

[Gnomey]

Nice info pD, will we ever find out the try capabilities of this great aircraft, I hope it happens sooner rather than later but then wouldn't we all.

[pbfoot]

read the post's i did not deride his dad but did question the use of of his father as a source all idid was state i preferred the 101 and said the
only ones really qualified to compare the two were exchange pilots of which there are a quite few about but I don't have access to them the main dispute is the climb rate which is for the most part indicated as initial if the a/c could maintain this climb rate it would hold the worlds record for jet powered a/c it doesn't the record being held by some russian a/c which achieved 15000 metres in 1min 10sec +/- now why would this info be held secret by the brits i think the warsaw pact had radar and other means sensitive enough to figure this out plus the fact if this a/c was all omnipotent why wasn't it sold abroad more widely
anything i wasn't able to prove was indicated as second hand info he initiated the the insults called me a liar which i'm not then a moron which i may be I've done my time in the military and hold the supplementary trades in esteem if i want to know how to work on a merlin or allison or pw i'll ask my father but not for info on the other characteristics because that info would not a reliable source

[evangilder]

I did read the posts

Originally Posted by pbfoot

you seem to be using a single source try to upgrade from the golden book of airplanes and daddys info what was daddys trade? ( cook refuelleR )

That most certainly is what everyone is talking about. Once again, keep the personal crap out of it, guys.

[Nonskimmer]

I read the post as well, and you were taunting him pb. Granted, he called you a moron. That's why I wanted both of you to stop. You're gonna stop now, right?

I suggest we continue on with the intended discussion before another one gets locked.

[pbfoot]

i publicly apologize for an unintended slur against your dad it was not intended as a slam

[plan_D]

I believe the pilot in question, Lee, called the Lightning "...a Spitfire with a kick up the arse..." but I may be wrong because I haven't heard/read the quote in a long time. However, I know who you mean although the name does elude me, he flew the Spitfire during the war.

I have already stated that the British government disallowed English Electric selling the Lightning abroad. There was a great uproar in EE when they found out a British diplomat had been warning the German government away from the Lightning.

If a government wants to keep it's aircraft a secret, or the potentials a secret, then they're not going to enter it into competitions to just try and look big. The SR-71s true capability is not known to anyone who didn't work closely with the project, odds are we won't ever know or at least not for a long time.

As said, the Lightning was always recorded as 60,000 + feet ceiling, and it was confirmed by my father who only calibrated the altimeter to 60,000 feet. However, recent interviews and disclosed evidence has shown the Lightning to fly up to at least 88,000 feet.

The F-101 couldn't even reach the alitude of the Tu-95, how can it be comparable to an aircraft that intercepted a Concorde travelling at Mach 2.2 at 57,000 feet, and flying away! The only aircraft on the intercept that did so on the stern intercept...was the Lightning which actually flew past the Concorde.

The comparisons made by Britain and the U.S between the F-104 and the Lightning proved the Lightning to be far superior except in low-level super-sonic acceleration which was "...a dead heat...". The F-104 was superior to the F-101 and the Lightning was superior to the F-104. You haven't disproved anything, you've merely stated that the Lightning isn't in the record books...but you have failed to realise that the British government didn't want anyone to know the ability of the Lightning. Never realised that surprise is the best weapon in war?

You have nothing to back up your argument for the F-101 being anywhere near as capable as the Lightning. In fact, that's laughable. The only thing you produce is a sketchy climb rate that is different throughout all sources on the internet.

Just read my above post ...do you think a F-101 could do that? Certainly not, it could only go 38,000 feet.

And for syscom, does this answer your question? (the picture)

[pbfoot]

absolutely no comment and its not because a I'm cowed by your "knowledge"
beside fact in the 80's as i participated in a launch( scramble) of 101 's from 416 sqn against the cord as it had strayed well off course entering the CADIZ "coastal air defense zone" the talk afterwords was about the difficulty of not being able to approach from the stern but that it could be "cured with a Genie"

[plan_D]

First off, the Concorde that your squadron apparently intercepted was not at 57,000 feet and travelling at Mach 2.2. The F-101 can't fly that high, and can't fly that fast.

Secondly, the Genie is an unguided air-to-air missile with a six mile range. How could the Genie solve any deficiency in the F-101s performance as an interceptor? The fact of the matter is, if this interception did happen, the Concorde was ordered to slow down and 'wait' for the fighters. Because if it was a true threat, the Concorde could have opened throttle, pulled up and left the CF-101s for standing. And the Genie wouldn't have been able to do anything about it because...it was unguided! The guided version (AIR-2B) was abandoned in 1963.

The CF-101B was also equipped with the AIM-4D semi-guided missile with a range of ten miles. However, it's burn-out speed was Mach 2 ...that's too slow to handle the speed of a Concorde, which can fly faster than Mach 2. Add that to the fact at stern intercept the missile would have to be flying faster than Mach 2 to reach it's target before the fuel ran out ...the AIM-4D...ain't goin' to do ****.

So, we have a plane with a maximum speed of Mach 1.87 and ceiling of 38,000 feet and armed with four AIR-2A 'Genie' missiles (cruise speed Mach 3, unguided, 6 mile range) internally and two AIM-4D 'Falcon' missiles (burn-out Mach 2, semi-guided, 10 mile range) intercepting an aircraft capable of speeds above Mach 2, and flying at around 57,000 feet. Please tell me, how the hell is the F-101 goin' to catch it to destroy it? Even more to the point ...how the hell is it goin' to do it from stern intercept?

[pbfoot]

it was a nuke the ceiling is 54000ft

[plan_D]

54,000 feet is the ceiling of the F-104, not the F-101. The 'Genie' was a nuclear tipped missile, with an explosive radius of 1000 metres. It would still need to catch up to the target and be in visual range, plus have a decent enough position. Either you, or the entire Canadian aerial command, were/are living in a dream world.

[Nonskimmer]

I vote for the latter. The CF-101 should have been fitted with the more conventional Sparrow/Sidewinder package, but never was.

[syscom3]

The USAF museum website lists the F101B as having a ceiling of 52,000 ft.
The F104C is listed as having a ceiling of 58,000 ft.

[plan_D]

Bill Gunston's Encyclopedia of World Air Power lists the F-104C at 55,000 feet. While the sources for the F-101B across the internet vary greatly, I believe Boeing.com list it as 38,000 feet.

[lesofprimus]

Huh??