1970s Mil Collection

[Pete]

tomh wrote[quote]Below we see an F-105B from the NJ ANG with Bicentennial Markings at McGuire AFB, NJ 31 May 1976/quote].

Is this one equipped with thrust vectoring devices?

Regards Pete

[Hans Rolink]

tomh wrote

Below we see an F-105B from the NJ ANG with Bicentennial Markings at McGuire AFB, NJ 31 May 1976/quote].

Is this one equipped with thrust vectoring devices?

Regards Pete

The petals served a dual purpose. First, they could be used to control the surface area of the jet pipe, much like the turkey feathers of F-15's. Second, they served as speed brakes. They had no thrust reversing function. The only tactical fighters with thrust reversers were SAAB Viggens and Panavia Tornados.
Besides, keep posting this great stuff Tom!

Hans.

[Pete]

tomh wrote

Below we see an F-105B from the NJ ANG with Bicentennial Markings at McGuire AFB, NJ 31 May 1976/quote].

Is this one equipped with thrust vectoring devices?

Regards Pete

The petals served a dual purpose. First, they could be used to control the surface area of the jet pipe, much like the turkey feathers of F-15's. Second, they served as speed brakes. They had no thrust reversing function. The only tactical fighters with thrust reversers were SAAB Viggens and Panavia Tornados.
Besides, keep posting this great stuff Tom!

Hans.

Thanks for your explanation Hans, the device looked similar to the one on the MBB X-31 for me. I have never seen them on a F-105 so i guessed this could be a very early stage of experimenting with thrustvectoring.

again thank for your explanation.

Regards Pete

[tomh]

This makes me feel good. I can post a photo that I think is only interesting because it shows somewhat unusual markings (Bicentennial). But someone else sees an aerodynamic question due to some of the detail and the angle of the shot. Then a third person provides a correct answer. Great stuff, this.

As I recall, Pete, the lower petal on the airbrake would eventually assume a near-vertical position as the jet sat on the ramp over time due to slow hydraulic pressure equalization. I'll post some photos of this.

On the thrust-vectoring: In the early 1970s, Grumman operated a very pretty white F-11A Tiger with thrust vectoring and/or reversing (Maybe both). It was no longer an operational aircraft during these tests.

[Pete]

This makes me feel good. I can post a photo that I think is only interesting because it shows somewhat unusual markings (Bicentennial). But someone else sees an aerodynamic question due to some of the detail and the angle of the shot. Then a third person provides a correct answer. Great stuff, this.

As I recall, Pete, the lower petal on the airbrake would eventually assume a near-vertical position as the jet sat on the ramp over time due to slow hydraulic pressure equalization. I'll post some photos of this.

On the thrust-vectoring: In the early 1970s, Grumman operated a very pretty white F-11A Tiger with thrust vectoring and/or reversing (Maybe both). It was no longer an operational aircraft during these tests.

Well I am learning a lot on this regular wednesday evening, your picture Tom is the first i saw of a F-105 featuring these petals, do you know if this was only used on the B model or was it wide spread in use?
Thanks for your pictures from the past.

Regards Pete

[tomh]

This was a design feature of the F-105 from the drawing board, Pete. All models of the Thunderchief had them AFAIK. The big advantage to this design was that it offered symmetrical drag, based on the aircraft centerline, at the rear of the aircraft when applying the speed brakes. This meant fewer corrections on the part of the pilot once they were deployed. I was surprised more aircraft didn't feature this design, though I can see where it would complicated in the twin engine types.

Here is a shot of a "T-Stick II" variant of the F-105D model at Westover ARB showing the "at rest" position of the bottom petal of the speed brake

[Basman]

Great pictures again, Tom and others. Probably my favourite topic on this board, containing many types I missed by a few or by many years.

A question about the above picture of F-105D 61-(0)100. I found on the web that the 'humpback' modification houses a Thunderstick-II (AN/ASC-19) fire control system. Was this a permanent modification or just a 'package' that could be bolted on and off any Thud? And if it was permanent, then why didn't this version receive a dedicated designation (like F-105H or so).

Bas

[tomh]

Thanks, Bas. From my copy of the Encyclopedia of U.S. Air Force Aircraft and Missile Systems, Vol 1, the "T-Stick II" mods came late in the active duty career of the F-105D. Begun in 1967 to increase the bombing accuracy of a batch of only 30 Thunderchiefs, the program was beset with problems and was not completed until July, 1971. The AN/ARN-92 Loran system, produced by ITT, was the heart of the mod. According to my 1989 edition of U.S. Military Aircraft by Gordon Swanborough and Peter Bowers, they served with the 23d TFW in the USA and did not see combat service. As can be seen in my photo, they later equipped the 457 TFS, AFRES.

[Pete]

The big advantage to this design was that it offered symmetrical drag, based on the aircraft centerline, at the rear of the aircraft when applying the speed brakes. This meant fewer corrections on the part of the pilot once they were deployed. I was surprised more aircraft didn't feature this design, though I can see where it would complicated in the twin engine types.
Here is a shot of a "T-Stick II" variant of the F-105D model at Westover ARB showing the "at rest" position of the bottom petal of the speed brake

Well at least they have a "similar" speed brake on the F-16 that is offering symmetrical drag at the rear of the aircraft, so not all the lessons from the past have ended up in a museum.

Strange to see this petal in the rest position, you could easily think it is due to a flaw in the system and tow it in for repair.

Thanks for your additional info and photo.

Regards Pete

[tomh]

You would first have to pass your observation on to your shop chief, and he/she would then need to initiate a change in aircraft status with Maintenance Control. You can't touch the aircraft until Maintenance Control gives you the OK. I worked in the MOCC some years back.

[Slijfie]

One F-100 from me, or to be honest: I bought this slide 25 years ago. On the K64-slide it reads 'MA ANG'. That's all I can tell.

Cheers, Rob

[tomh]

Hey, there you go, Rob-I may not have a shot of that one. I show that bird as one of the 104TFG aircraft in my personal records, and it does look quite a bit like Barnes ANGB. Nice shot, but of course I'm biased!

[Slijfie]

Thanks Tom. Massachusetts it is then. Please please keep uploading your photos from that era.
Rob

[tomh]

I've been neglecting the choppers in this thread, so for those interested in the rotary-wing birds, here's a real workhorse. This is the last operational Sikirsky H-34 that I saw, photographed on Kodachrome at Hancock Field, Syracuse, NY on 19 August 1972

[Javindo50]

some B&W stuff, Brustem 23-06-1968 (50 years Airforce 1918-1968)

North American F-100D #56-2951


Fiat G-91R/4 Luftwaffe #3241


De Havilland Canada DHC-3 Otter Belgische-Nederlandse Zuidpool Expeditie #OO-HAD
(ex US Navy # 144669)