My favorite Century Series is the F106. It looked great (especially in test range orange) flew great and was operational until displaced by the F15 in the 1980s! Only the F104 stayed in service longer and F106 didn't have the nasty characteristics that killed so many German F104 pilots. Of course it only helped that my dad knew most of the engineers who designed the F104. Another reason it is seared into my brain is getting bused by one flying 9 foot above the road we were driving on. Dad told me it was an F106 that was testing ground hugging radar out of China Lake NAS. Instead of flying over us (that would probably blown us off the road) the F106 banked left then right. When he passed us his wing was 3 feet above the ground in a 90 degree bank and I could see the top of the pilots helmet. The F106 then pulled in front of us and disappeared disappeared after flew over an approximately 10 foot tall hill on the road. It was a thrill of my life and I latter found that most jets of the era would probably have fallen appart trying that maneuver. Yes give me an F106 With no gun just rockets It flies real fast Destroys enemies with an expensive missile, can dog fight but doesn't, Just comes home with no rockets and bingo fuel, and a happy pilot who sees love after every mission. The F106 was retained in the USA as an interceptor. It's missile system was the 1st of its kind and designed to shoot down Soviet bombers without getting lose enough to the bomber to be at risk. It was only exceeded by the YF12A which didn't go into serial production production. It's missile was the basis for that used on F14. While the F4 was superior in almost every way, there were never enough F4s to replace the F106 in homeland interceptor role. The F106 was too expensive to build, but those that were built kept on flying .
@ConvairDart1062 ай бұрын
The six was the favorite mount of ADC pilots. Not only does it still hold the world record speed of single engine turbines at 1,525 mph, it also had "supercruise" ability 40 years before the F-22. It was said that the six could get there the fastest, with the mostest! In combat loadout, it was faster than the F-4 as it remained aerodynamically clean. Nothing slows plane down faster than hanging ordinance out in the wind! The six deserved a few more minutes than what she got here.😢
@CraigBlevins-bx9kh2 ай бұрын
What a thrill that close buzz was. Wish it could have happened to me! I like the whole series, but I think I like the 106 best. From what I understand, F-15 can't get inside of in a turn contest. I heard that from a retired ANG pilot.
@tomdurkin7321Ай бұрын
Yes the F 106 was the best,not easy to work on but definitely the best
@davidjernigan81612 ай бұрын
The F-106 was in service until 1988 with the ANG.
@fredericborloo19102 ай бұрын
This man knows his aerodynamics. Not many people do. Very cool! Thanks!
@caseruels19242 ай бұрын
I loved having Joe on here and how he can explain aerodynamics in laymen’s terms while showing innovations on existing century fighters. I do wish he would have spent more time on The Six. Still the fastest single engine jet ever and had about 30 years of frontline service with the U.S. Air Force. It truly was something special
@Rafael-nz6ppАй бұрын
That was great. Please bring Joe and the airplanes in the museum for more videos.
@jackthebassman12 ай бұрын
What an utterly fabulous museum. Also, the knowledge of the presenter is equally amazing, excellent post, and now I'm hooked.
@sayrerowan73423 күн бұрын
The F-106 was in service for over 20 years Pretty stark omission.
@damcasterspod22 күн бұрын
But not in frontline service for that time, which was the focus in this video. She did amazing service with the Guards units as you mention.
@TomTurner7042 ай бұрын
Joe did an excellent articulation of the design principles and philosophies. That is the truly interesting subject Which doesn't often get discussed.
@bobyoung169811 күн бұрын
I toured Pima two years ago on a brutally hot day. The heat dictated a trolly tour, so I didn't get to see many of the aircraft as I would have liked; still, it was quite interesting.
@lyndonbull35812 ай бұрын
Those bumps on the rear fuselage of the F102 are called Whitcombe bodies I believe, linked to the area rule and named after the NACA engineer who developed them. The Handley Page Victor bomber in the UK also had these on the trailing edge of the swept wings.
@oswaldoramosferrusola52352 ай бұрын
Whitcombe a NACA engineer?
@danbenson7587Ай бұрын
Check out ‘Kuchemann carrots’. You correct they streamline according to area rule. Convair 990 another (extreme) example. A lesson here is Whitcomb visualizing the flow, a bit of a story in itself. His later contribution =winglets= ubiquitous nowadays. Great contributions to flight..
@taofledermaus2 ай бұрын
Outstanding!!! Audio levels are perfect now, I might add!
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Fab!
@dirkl96892 ай бұрын
Great explanations - perfect video !
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Glad you liked it!
@MrSurguy-fb2hy16 күн бұрын
Excellent video, so interesting! I’ve never been that interested in the older generations of jet aircraft, but this was fantastically informative. A really great exploration into an era that was filled with such ground breaking concepts and research. I’ll definitely be looking further into your channel. 👍
@damcasterspod15 күн бұрын
Thanks for watching and I hope you find more interesting things on the channel.
@PhilbyFavourites22 күн бұрын
Gents, I have to say that was a supremely interesting presentation. I was like a kid rapt with interest listening to the pair of you. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻
@damcasterspod21 күн бұрын
Thanks for watching!
@finetti09Ай бұрын
the F 106 is the most beautiful Plane ever made in my opinion
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
It does have lovely lines
@AirlinerHistory2 ай бұрын
Century series fighters were always my favorite period of aircraft, especially the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. But I always favor anything designed by Kelly Johnson. If memory serves, I believe crews working on the F-104 had to put wing edge gaurds on the front and trailing parts of the wings to minimize injuries, those things were so sharp. a shame the F-108 Rapier was never produced. I think it would have been an interesting addition to the Century series. I look forward to you guy's next video.
@user-xz9hu4rd2vАй бұрын
Back in the 70's I would watch that particular F-104 when I was a child growing up in San Juan when it was part of the Puerto Rico Air National Guard. One of the things that kindled my thirst for flying and my 40-yr career as a military and airline pilot.
@phantomf4747Ай бұрын
I've been in and around military aircraft for 50+ years. Still, I learned something here. Great video.
@WildBillCox132 ай бұрын
Gladly shared. Intake and wing shape and how they relate to flight regime are covered very well here. Excellent coverage.
@CraigBlevins-bx9kh2 ай бұрын
Hi Guys! Great episode. When I was a young man, I built lots of models of the Century Series aircraft. They were all in use at the time. Good info here. Thanks for making this.
@mikemcgonegal16162 ай бұрын
I had models of all of them when I was a kid. Got to see some of them in the flesh when I was in the military.
@jerrywatt681321 күн бұрын
Great explanations in super sonic air flow my dad worked for Kelly Johnson and I worked for Ben Rich we were a Lockheed Family but didn't talk about work mutch for obvious reasons thanks
@billenright27882 ай бұрын
They were NOT un-successful. All groundbreaking in their own right. some served with honor in 'Nam. Led the way to better planes.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Joe's point, which he expands on throughout the video, is from that intial design perspective. Yes, some of them had long careers but it also took a while to work out the quirks. We are big fans of F-105 here and have interviewed Gen Russ Violett about his two tours on the aircraft.
@ditto19582 ай бұрын
I don’t think they were unsuccessful. The F-100 was outstanding at the beginning of the American involvement in Vietnam. It was moved to other missions and served well for the duration. The F-105 Thunderchief also was a workhorse in Vietnam. The Century series fighters were developed in the 50’s at a time when intercepting Soviet nuclear bombers was the big priority. The fact that they did as well as they did in a completely different kind of war in the mid-60’s in Vietnam is kind of impressive to me.
@WarblesOnALot2 ай бұрын
G'day, A couple of points. Vietnam's AmeriKan War was Fought because Robert MacNamara publicised the mistaken US Navy Midshipman's fear that 2 Dolphins in the Tonkin Gulf MIGHT Be "Communist Torpedoes"...; But MacNamara and Kissinger then kept the Updated report - which arrived in Washington, from CINCPAC in Hawaii, 35 minutes later telling that the Not-Torpedoes were actual Dolphins..., a Secret which lasted until the release of The Pentagon Papers in 1971 or '72. Therefore, thus, and because, Vietnam fought an Honest Honourable War, defending against an Invading Nation whose ENTIRE "justification" for Launching and waging and making War..., was a Dirty filthy transparently fraudulent Lie. And so, there was NOTHING Done by Anyone who fought for ANZUS In Vietnam, That was in any way, shape, or form, "Honourable". Everyone in ANZUS was out there, Killing Strangers for pay because their own Politicians pretended that their "National Honour" Demanded that SOMEONE had to try not to die, While living in a Ditch..., fighting to control a Crossroads - in the Muddle of nowhere on Earth that anybody in their own Hometown, had ever previously heard of... Such is life, Have a good one... Stay safe. ;-p Ciao !
@larryhill72862 ай бұрын
Yeah that just made me quit watching, stupid comment
@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe27 күн бұрын
T37 led to better planes.
@clippership8381Ай бұрын
Worth viewing.
@waldoanddenisestakes63926 күн бұрын
That dude is fantastic and really knows his shit
@dorightal49652 ай бұрын
Back in the day, when the rocket sled research was being conducted at Edwards AFB, the F 107 ejection system was tested and found to have some contact with the inlet above certain speeds. The seat would be sent into a back flip spin and that was problematic. I learned this from one of the engineers who worked at the sled track facility. He was father to a classmate in my high school. He took me along with his son to the facility on a weekend to get something caught up work wise. Later on, the track at Edwards was shut down and the track sections were shipped to New Mexico to add to the track at Holloman AFB. Pima is a fantastic collection of all kinds of aircraft. Schedule about 3 days to see it all.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I've spent two full weeks with unlimited access at Pima over the last couple of years and still haven't seen it all! So I'm heading back in the fall. :)
@charlesbritzman501Ай бұрын
Excellent tour. I have a nodding acquaintance with some of these ideas but. . .learn something new every day.
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@jameskelly85062 ай бұрын
I live in Tucson, the F-100 in the Pima museum, came from our unit the 162nd. ANG. I flew in the "F' models several times.
@thomasbreeze3965Ай бұрын
I never noticed it before. Take the F-102's intake and turn it 90 degrees, and voila! you have the F-16's undernose intake/inlet.
@bonnerapplegate482410 күн бұрын
Fantastic video, and I am sad the Voodoo got passed over, although i understand for the wings, and it's nice seeing 3 of my favorite jets, the 104, 106, and 101
@damcasterspod8 күн бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it! We will return for the 101 in a future episode
@naoakiooishi6823Ай бұрын
This one really saved me for enduring the day`s hardship in terms of what happening in the world now
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
Thanks for watching and I'm happy the video helped.
@104thDIVTimberwolf2 ай бұрын
The missing ones were the F-103, which he mentioned, the F-109, which was the proposed designation for what became the F-101B, the F-108 Rapier (I wish that one had flown!), and the F-110 Specter, which was the Air Force's original designation for the Navy's F4H-1 Phantom II.
@RetroGamesCollector2 ай бұрын
Fantastic groundbreaking planes. Some of my favourites.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I find them fascinating! They all pushed the boundaries and led us to where we ended up, for better or worse, today.
2 ай бұрын
Awesome, and thank you!
@Satchmoeddie29 күн бұрын
The F110 actually did happen, at least on paper anyway. The USAF tried to call it the F110 and then decided to just go ahead and call their F110 the F4 Phantom like the USN did.
@damcasterspod28 күн бұрын
The redesignation was part of the Tri-Service aircraft designation system in 1962 which standardised all US combat aircraft going forward. Based on the F-110 never flew in service and because of that we decided that it didn't count in this discussion. But, it is not that there isn't a lot of love for the F-4 on the channel, as you can see where I hijack my discussion with Eileen Bkorkman to talk all things Phantom at Edwards.
@blindandwatching2 ай бұрын
The ones that lasted were F-100 and F-106. F-104G/S stayed in service outside the USA.
@mikeck4609Ай бұрын
F-105 and F-106 being the best at what they were designed to do: low level tactical nuclear delivery and strategic interception respectively.
@user-ym2ve7be8lАй бұрын
The F-106's variable intake ramp is called a vari-ramp, by the way. It's variable in movement via the air data computer in the nose wheel well, which gets its data from the pitot tube(s).
@vinkerdoodles2 ай бұрын
Been to Pima twice. Bucket list checked off for sure! One of the best aviation vids on KZfaq so far! Wish you went more over the F-101, but hey...
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I have a plan to look at the CF-101 in more detail. On the day, we didn't have as much time as we had hoped so the Voodoo was the one that got cut.
@KawaTony19642 ай бұрын
@@damcasterspod Oh. OK. I was wondering why so little time was spent on the Voodoo. I imagined it over there saying sadly "hey - what about me? Am I chopped liver over here?".
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
It certainly isn't as sexy as say a F-104 or F-106 but she'll get her turn.
@donscheid9719 күн бұрын
Missing 3, the F-110, F-111, and F-117. Technically speaking, they were not part of it, the F-110 was the AF model of the Navy F-4 but was later renamed back to standardize the numbering system, F-111 was never used as a fighter but as a bomber with the FB-111 having a heavier load capacity, and the F-117 designed years later, also as a fighter/bomber. But they could explain all that at the museum. Airplane nuts (like me) love the background details.
@damcasterspod19 күн бұрын
We covered the F-117 from a pilot's perspective earlier with our interview with Jon Boyd. As for the F-4, we haven't done anything specific, yet, but we will. I'm not a fan of the F-111 so I've avoided it so far!
@caskoevoets871317 күн бұрын
Love to hear your comments on the avroe arrow
@damcasterspod16 күн бұрын
I'm working on a couple videos looking at the Arrow, both the aircarft and the intel that lead to the decision to cancel the program. Hopefully they will come in the autumn.
@stephenbond24782 ай бұрын
THAT was a great summary guys , cheers to Joe !!!
@chucksdesk2 ай бұрын
I understand that the F4 Phantom was originally called the F-110. I early films I've seen it actually called it the F-110.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
It was nominally the F-110 Spectre but the dropped the designation early on.
@Greidiawl2 ай бұрын
wasn't there a heated discussion about funding between the F4H and the F-110 (Senate/Congress?) which contributed towards the push for a common designation
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Yes, it lead to the Tri-Service Designation System in the early 60's which is still followed today (I think).
@martindice54242 ай бұрын
Very interesting and I want to go there! 👍
@jatoav8orАй бұрын
When speaking of the 60s the F4 phantom can’t be forgotten
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
The Phantom certainly is not, but as it was redesignated by the 1962 Tri-Services Designation system as F-4, it is not Century Series, so not within the remit of this video. Plus, all the aircraft considered entered service in the 1950s so that also played into the criteria for the video. We will return to the F-4 in future, it is just too big a subject to fit into a video like this.
@jatoav8orАй бұрын
First off this was an extremely interesting and informative video. I wasn’t speaking clearly as usual but at 51:15 Joe commented that when you move into the 60s the revenue tightened up and as a result only the F-111 and F-14 are developed and put into service. I was simply saying that the F-4 was also an icon of the 60s along with the F-111 I might be mistaken but the tomcat took to the air in the 70s ?
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
The development of the F-111 and it unsuitability for carrier ops lead directly to the F-14, which is what Joe was saying. I'm not a fan of the F-111, another do everything achieve some aircraft.
@larrydugan14412 ай бұрын
Really well done and interesting video. Small point on Area rule was discovered by the Germans and used on their first jet fighters like the ME262. An interesting point on the 104 is that the faster you went the faster it accelerated. It would slow a bit through transonic regime. After about 1.2 Mach the drag curve reduced and the ram effect increased engine thrust. Temperature was the limiting factor not thrust or aerodynamics. If memory services max temperature was 121 degrees C. The big red slow light would come on.
@learningone77862 ай бұрын
This was pretty good, thanks for posting, although I hope there is more on the 101 later, saw them many times in late 60's when we lived in KC.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
There will be a F-101/CF-101 episode in the future. Promise.
@michaelchevalier98592 ай бұрын
Fantastic video.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Thanks for watching!
@campbellbox2 ай бұрын
Fascinating stuff! Off to avoid some lateral flow
@dodgebro2 ай бұрын
Just to add, the 104 had the leading edge droop for landing as well. That coupled with the boundary layer control on the flaps lowered the approach speed to 180 or so knots, iirc, but the engine needed to be above 80% for the BLC to work. Otherwise the approach speed increased to over 200knots
@terrywallace51812 ай бұрын
Very interesting program. Thanks.
@eriktruchinskas37472 ай бұрын
All works of art in their own way. The f105 is ptobably my favorite but they are all deaf sexy
@Absaalookemensch2 ай бұрын
The F-107 is tail #55118. You can see several pictures of it from 1956-7 on Wikipedia.
@v1-vr-rotatev2-vy_vx313 күн бұрын
Knew a ww2 Ace,, P51 Mustang pilot,, He became a shooting star fighter test pilot.After ww2,, Silky Morris was his name...
@damcasterspod2 күн бұрын
That is a fantastic name
@toddjelle56122 ай бұрын
Nice info, I love the info on intake development. Got to say the F105 was way underrated. It was a bomber that could be a fighter. It’s gum kills say something about its actual capabilities as a fighter
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Agree with you on the F-105. Have you watched our interview with Gen Russ Violette on the channel? He did two tours on Thuds in Vietnam.
@eriktruchinskas37472 ай бұрын
The f105 and it's pilots were absolutely screwed over, the story is tragic. There was a time when the meet sortie quotas f105 were being sent with one or two bombs, there's an interview with a thud pilot who recounts one of these single bomb thuds being shot down and him asking was the bullshit target worth this one bomb and this pilot and planes life?
@tomboldway727423 күн бұрын
Pima has a B-58. Nothing faster when it was operational.
@daneshivers29212 ай бұрын
Enjoyed the video...seem to have neglected the F-101 Voodoo, and one was visible behind you Dane
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
With the design elements we wanted to discuss, the F-101 was more conservative and we decided to focus on the other aircraft. I have a CF-101 video in a very early planning stage. I will return to the Voodoo. :)
@DouglasJenkins23 күн бұрын
My cousin was a test pilot who almost lost his life doing aileron flutter test on the later extended fuselage F104.
@flyboy363326 күн бұрын
Good video. I was a little disappointed that he never mentioned any advanced features of the electronics through the years. The F-86 gunsight. The 105's terrain following computer. The 106's ability to relay information to other planes and the ground to coordinate attacks. And that the 104 had none of that since it was designed from the start to be an absolute hot rod. And it was the longest flying of the series being retired by the Italians in 2004.
@damcasterspod26 күн бұрын
We took a lot on trying to cover as many as we need and we decided to stick to the aerodynamic on this video. So many facinating features on each of the aircraft we could have disapeared down any number of rabbit holes. Did you see the Italians have got one of their F-104s flying again?
@saltyroe31792 ай бұрын
The D21 did work, the USAF didn't want to pay for another mother ship after it lost one. The problems could have been worked out but the cost wasn't worth what advantage of having it. Some people claim that there were successful D21 flights and the D21 was successfully recovered by a C130 towing a hook on cable like some of the early Mercury capsule recoveries. There are even stories of successful operational missions of D21. The real killer of the D21 was the development of satellite reconnaissance and the fact the SR71 never got shot down. The most amazing thing about the YF12A is that design work was started during the end of the blank check period before McNamara ended that too expensive era. It did take a long time to get to 1st prototype because Lockheed had to develop so much new technology. Unlike the U2, the YF12A was a giant leap forward.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I would suggest checking out our chat with Paul Crickmore on the SR-71 and D-21. While it flew successfully, the operational surveillance flights over China were a disaster so therefore the drone cannot be considered a success.
@saltyroe31792 ай бұрын
@@damcasterspod I agree that the D21 was not a success. I liked the idea of putting on top of a rocket booster and launching it vertically. With the C130 recovery. It still would not be coat effective and the SR71 and satellites already filled the D21 role.
@andrewcox4386Ай бұрын
The F104s blown flap was also problematic when only 1 of the valves opened (there was one for each side). That had a tendency to flip the plane over and dive it into the ground.
@chromalighting23632 ай бұрын
I love the podcast but this is my first time seeing Matt Bone- I'd no idea he was so young! Matt, you sound a lot older- or perhaps (more charitably) you look a lot younger! Great podcast, I'm loving it, thank you!
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
lol! I've shared that with my wife. :)
@wildweasel856428 күн бұрын
Less we forget the F-100 Super "Sabre Dance" were Charles Bronson met his end in the 1961 movie X-15.
@macsarcule26 күн бұрын
I don’t know it’s the origin, but Monogram models in the 60s heavily advertised their 100s model kits as “the century series” encouraging people to build them all.
@NoManClatuer-pd8ck15 күн бұрын
1:16 I'll take one of those, 2 of those, 1 of that one......
@kimraymond27492 ай бұрын
The F-111 is much loved in Australia as a low level long range bomber. Since it's retirement Australia was left with no long range strike capability.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Austraila made superb use of the F-111. The memory of the aircraft is much less rosy here in the UK where the F-111K cost the Navy her strike carriers and the RAF the TSR-2. Richard Moore's article on the subject in the Winter 2015 issue of Air Power Review is a facinating read.
@kimraymond27492 ай бұрын
I'll look it up. It sounds interesting.
@richardherring637828 күн бұрын
How were the SR- 71's Drones recovered? Great history here- Thanks Matt!
@damcasterspod27 күн бұрын
Good question! A number were not (I believe the chinese still have them). Off the top of my head, we cover the D-21 in more depth in our SR-71 episdoe with Paul Crickmore who is The Guy on the subject.
@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe27 күн бұрын
F101 was in movie the Russians are Coming. Great aircraft with Canadians.
@oxcart41722 ай бұрын
That's the oldest SR-71 that still exists
@saltyroe31792 ай бұрын
Century Series was a term in use in the late 1950s, while many were still in operation.
@REKlausАй бұрын
Video should be titled "All about Wings" as that is what the presenter spends the most time talking about. There was a small Air Force base where I live while I was growing up (was put in place during the Cuban missile crisis of the early 1960's.) It was originally equipped with F-101's so I was rather disappointed it was skipped over in this video, especially since it set several records when it went into service. The One-O-Wonder and it's Witch Doctors will always have a soft spot in my heart.
@preciousroihomeshoppingnet79082 ай бұрын
IIRC the inlet had to be on top because otherwise it would interfere with launching the Genie air-to-air nuclear missile.
@utahrusty75552 ай бұрын
As you guys forgot the F-110, the ( Original Design Number for what would become the Phantastic F-4 Phantom ) from your "Century Series," How about it's OWN video with all the good , bad and Double Ugly, what some would call a real turkey, but most recognize as the Worlds best Jet fighter for more then 50 years, America at it's finest, when you say Jet Fighter, the F-4 is what comes to mind! And if we were to REALLY split hairs here, you should really do a video on the often forgotten F8U Crusader, the Last Gun Fighter, also a part of the Century series, but it's own special blend of Navy Cool!
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
As I imply in the introduction, the F-110 didn't really happen as it morphed into the F-4, which is not generally considered to be Century Series. Now, that doesn't mean there isn't a lot of love on the channel for the Phantom (see our interview with Eileen Bjorkman), it just doesn't fit in this discuss. Plus the F-4 is far too big a subject to give justice too when considering all the aircraft we did chat about.
@maxlever919628 күн бұрын
It was the F-4 Phantom II that was the joint service fighter mandated by McNamara. He also ordered the destruction of all of the tooling for the SR-71, the A-12 and related. Finance guy, no practical real world experience except in appliances.
@doggystaves2 ай бұрын
Fascinating walk around video and great commentary. Love the century series. Wish you'd spent a bit more time on the superb Voodoo, but first rate all the same! Thanks!
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I will be returning to the F-101 and its Canadian version.
@DirkDiggler69032 ай бұрын
Nice channel.
@spladam38452 ай бұрын
Glad I found this, good work, very interesting, I grew up making models of the century series, the first model I ever completed was the 105 Thunderchief. They were still hot when I was a kid, but as the 4th gen moved towards the 5th gen fighters, folks stopped talking about them. Always thought the Super Saber was sexy.
@dukecraig24022 ай бұрын
People can say the F105 wasn't really a fighter all they want but they're very wrong about that, naturally any aircraft that's heavily bomb laden isn't going to dogfight, but once they dropped their load the fangs came out on that aircraft, of the 27.5 air to air kills the F105 was credited with (one had a shared kill with a Navy F4), 24.5 of them were gun kills, that's as dogfighter as it gets right there, I don't know of any other missile carrying fighter that had anywhere even close to that high of a percentage of it's kills with guns, they're all the opposite, it'd be 24.5 out of 27.5 kills with missile's with all the others like the F4, F14 and F15, so that really makes it the last real dogfighter jet that ever was.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
4/6th Gen are not nearly as cool looking as this series.
@bobmano66Ай бұрын
How about the F111 it was also a century series fighter bomber jet and the F-4 Phantom for the airforce which started out as the F110 but thanks to the defence secretary MacNamarra he changed the aircraft designations before the first delivery of the F-110A
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
The F-111 was not technically in the 50s bracket we were focusing on plus I'm not a fan so we skipped it. The F-4 was redesignated before it entered service, therefore we didn't feel it truly counted. We have talked a lot about the Phantom on the pod, especally in our chat with Eileen Bjorkman who was a backseater at Edwards on the F-4.
@robertmunoz754325 күн бұрын
Phantom is part of this here series too!🤔 Jman
@damcasterspod23 күн бұрын
Technically yes and technically no. The F-4 never flew for the USAF as the F-110, so for this video it is discounted. But, there is a lot of love for the Phantom here! Check out our chat with Eileen Bjorkman who was a backseater at Edwards in the F-4.
@robertmunoz754323 күн бұрын
@@damcasterspod Thanks! Jman
@andrewcox4386Ай бұрын
You missed out F110 (there was one in the background disguised as an F4) & F111, both of which are century series.
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
The F-4 isn't considered to be century series and neither is the F-111. The Phantom crops up often on the channel, so haven't missed discussing. She does need a full video though. As for the F-111, outside of the politics of the aircraft, it doesn't interest me.
@thomascreary990Ай бұрын
The F-106 tail number 90003 was stationed with me at Minot before it was retired the last one left Mar-April 1984 it was a cold and rainy day like Minot was crying for loosing her the F-15 was a pig to compared her
@aviationdeltadart13312 ай бұрын
The F-106 was a good dog fighter. Also, the first with super cruise.
@oldtugs2 ай бұрын
I always wondered about the 102 and 106 as dogfighters. When I was young I lived on Elmendorf AFB where the resident interceptor squadron flew the 102A. At an airshow one year a local aviator named Red Dodge flew his P-51 in a mock dogfight against a 102 and it really didn't look good for the 102. Of course recips against jets and bullets against air to air missiles isn't really a dogfight but jet against jet looks more like a regional conflict compared to old school fighter battles.
@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935Ай бұрын
Delta wings lose speed rapidly in manoeuvres, they are stall resistant but the vortices are draggy.
@thomascreary990Ай бұрын
And Minot was the last active duty unit to fly her not a guard unit that unit was in Fargo flying F-4s
@billcasso54282 ай бұрын
We were holding short of the runway at Edwards waiting for takeoff and F-104's were doing touch and go landings. They would extend the gear on short final which I though was interesting not exactly sure why they were doing this? This was in 1966
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
Reducing speed I believe. Airliners do it going into Heathrow over Richmond as it means they can run less flap, which annoys the locals below.
@billcasso54282 ай бұрын
@@damcasterspod The were putting the gear down at 200 feet something in my 62 years of flying airplanes is something that I have never seen before or since.
@Erikr-ex9dj2 ай бұрын
Convair was way ahead of the competition.
@nextechsolutions59552 ай бұрын
I’m pretty sure the F-110/F-4 Phantom II was turned into McNamara’s one fighter fits all, minus a gun. The F-111 was too heavy to land on an aircraft carrier which caused Grumman to create the F-14 Tomcat for fleet air superiority. This in turn leads to the Air Forces fighter mafia craving what became the F-15 and F-16…
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
The F-4 was already in the pipeline before McNamara, the F-111 was his dream aircraft.
@markendicott68742 ай бұрын
Why so dismissive of the Voodoo? It was just as innovative than the others, was honest on it's top speed (way faster than the Hun or the 102) and it's planform evolved into the F4 - so pretty important right there. Plus the recon bird did solid service in Nam.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
I did the F-101 dirty here as I hope to return to it with a look at CF-101 and the politics around that. So it will get a look in in the future.
@user-vw4fp5wn3v2 ай бұрын
Where is the F-101?
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
We will return to the Voodoo in the future.
@davidwelsh8292 ай бұрын
How do you ignore the F4 Phantom, a multiservice fighter bomber that served for decades?
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
While technically in the Century Series as F-110 it was redesignated and as such doesn't fit with the accepted convention. Lots of love for the F-4 on the channel, as the video with Eilen Bjorkman showed!
@rogerbeckner6419Ай бұрын
Rather disappointed in the curt dismissal of the F-111. It was still in the older design philosophy of the 60's; purpose-built for one job. It was when it was shoehorned into other roles that it fell on its' face. When you left it to do its intended job, it performed admirably. Just ask the Iraqi tankers about it on "The Road of Death". The only comparable aircraft in mission type was the "Iron Tadpole" aka the Grumman A-6 Intruder. Both aircraft were all-weather day or night bombers, but the F-111 had almost double the weapons capacity, terrain following radar, much better bomb-nav suite, and almost 300 mph faster at sea level. No one complains about the A-6. I am slightly biased since I was a crew chief on F-111A's in the 80's. My bird, SN 67-0100 is a gate guard at Nellis.
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
I'm afraid, from the outside especally here in the UK, the politics of the F-111 is such that it leads to the curt comments! As for the A-6, I could talk to someone about that aircraft all day.
@rogerbeckner6419Ай бұрын
@@damcasterspod I'm sorry,...... I forgot about the poor record of our country's actions in regard to the "Switchblade Edsel" being sold to England. Also some of our aviation corporations were not really playing fair at that time with your government.
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
That is ok! I'm not sure TSR-2 would have been everything it is thought it could have been. But the "swiss army knife" sales pitch for multi-role aircraft is always sprikled liberally with wishful thinking. See F-35 today.
@organicpaul2 ай бұрын
That was execellent!
@saltyroe31792 ай бұрын
F107 doesn't have intakes on sides because the intakes would interfere with the wing structure. A top intake doesn't cause these problems and doesn't vacuum objects off the runway. The scarry part for the pilot is ejection and being sucked in.
@alaindrolet84912 ай бұрын
It is really interesting that you presented the 101 as lest important. Taking into account your government manage to convince my government (Canada) to cancel in 1958 our jet development program (CF-105). that would had a longer range to go up north of the 101 and be able to meet the bear, would had been able to fly Mac 2.5, equip with fly by wire control and inclose armement. I understand you country manage to provide some of those requirement on the F-22 and 35.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
As a Canadian, I'm not sure what "you country" means! :) From a design perspective, the F-101 is more rudimentary, which is why we skipped it. From a political perspective, it is fasincating and I'm working on a specific CF-101 episode for the future.
@ralphmarkasher2 ай бұрын
Davis-Monthan AFB nearby flying A-10
@theohughes71702 ай бұрын
Each focused on 1 or 2 issues at a time
@KawaTony19642 ай бұрын
One more thing about the F-107 inlet location: abominable pilot visibility.
@johnrusac68942 ай бұрын
Something was always closing on the pilots six o’clock: the inlet!
@KawaTony19642 ай бұрын
@@johnrusac6894 Yeah - and this from the company that gave us the P-51 Mustang.
@thomascreary990Ай бұрын
Again do your research the D-21was later released from B-52s it didn't need to be supersonic to be launched
@andrewcox4386Ай бұрын
First swept wing fighter? Me262 & Me163 would like a word......
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
Within the context of the video looking at US fighters, then Joe is correct
@jollyjohnthepirate31682 ай бұрын
What I find amazing was that there there wasn't any electronic calculators. All math was preformed by human brains using slide rules.
@damcasterspod2 ай бұрын
The maths these teams did it certainly enough to blow my mathematically challenged brain for sure!
@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935Ай бұрын
People think slide rules are unsophisticated, they are far from it and they engender a good grasp of function, scale and realistic precision.
@andrewcox4386Ай бұрын
F106 lasted into the 80s, as did the F105, F104 lasted into the 2000s, F101 lasted until 1984, I'm not sure what you mean with short service lives? 🤷♂️
@damcasterspodАй бұрын
Not as frontline USAF fighters, which was the point Joe was making.