F-111 Aardvark
- Thread starter BlueOvalFitter
- Start date
Vice Admiral Tom Connolly ; “Mr. Chairman, there isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane.”
theaviationgeekclub.com
"There isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane:” how F-111B's death led to the birth of the iconic F-14 Tomcat - The Aviation Geek Club
"There isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane:” how F-111B's death led to the birth of the iconic F-14 Tomcat
theaviationgeekclub.com
That's a very educating article. I really liked the video. Very interesting.Vice Admiral Tom Connolly ; “Mr. Chairman, there isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane.”
"There isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane:” how F-111B's death led to the birth of the iconic F-14 Tomcat - The Aviation Geek Club
"There isn’t enough thrust in all Christendom to make a Navy fighter out of that airplane:” how F-111B's death led to the birth of the iconic F-14 Tomcat
Guy I knew at wotk flew one in the Vietnam war. Got shot down, cockpit ejected and they got captured and were POWs. It was towards the end of the war, so they weren't POWs for very long. Told me the whole story on a business trip while at dinner. Crazy stuff, and lucky they made it back home alive.
The Air Force's F-111 turned into one hell of an all weather strike aircraft. It could carry a huge load a long way, go in fast on the deck and put that load right down the hatch and get outta there in a hurry. In nearly any weather.
They lost a few that way.
I believe it was the only fighter, and I use the term "fighter" loosely, in the history of the Air Force to never have an official nickname during it's service life. The name "Aardvark" was officially adopted only after it retired. Pretty much let's you know what the Air Force felt about the plane.
There is one on display in Clovis, NM, just a few miles from Cannon AFB, it's at a main intersection coming into town headed back towards Texas on US-84, I drive by it pretty regularly. It's pretty cool. There is also an F-100 Super Sabre a little up the road on the same Hwy in Melrose, NM.
John Boyd had a lot to say about how bad that design was after refining his energy/momentum theory - and before it ever got into service.
Also have a friend who sat in the cockpit of one waiting to roll as a spare for Eldorado Canyon. Not a fan of the airframe.
Sure it looks good, but it was a bad design with unreliable electronics critical for its mission. Air Force scuttlebutt I've heard is bamboo trees 3, F-111's, 0.
Also have a friend who sat in the cockpit of one waiting to roll as a spare for Eldorado Canyon. Not a fan of the airframe.
Sure it looks good, but it was a bad design with unreliable electronics critical for its mission. Air Force scuttlebutt I've heard is bamboo trees 3, F-111's, 0.
That's the mission. Low and fast. That's not inherently safe. In fact, interdiction may be one of the most dangerous missions, outside of Wild Weasel duty. We've lost Strike Eagles, too.They lost a few that way.
Maybe the evaluation that should be heard is that of its foes. The North Vietnamese had a justified fear of this aircraft because they simply couldn't stop it. It took out bridges in bad weather in one sortie that previously withstood hundreds of sorties by other aircraft. It could hit them anytime on any day or night with dead-eye precision.
I'd imagine Iraqi tank and armored vehicle crews whould have a few things to say about it, too. If they could.
It gave the Australian AF a strike capability that nobody else possessed anywhere in the Pacific. The F-35 still gives them a lethal strike ability, but with MUCH less bombload and MUCH less range. They loved the aircraft.
I'd love to hear a Vark pilot with combat experience chime in on this. I think we'd hear a very interesting take on this airplane.
Where it failed was as a Navy fighter. Where it excelled was as an interdiction and strike aircraft. It had the ability to sustain speeds that enabled it to run away from just about anything.
Also if I had to eject from an aircraft, I'd take the Vark anyday, as the capsule offered a slightly more comfortable experience with dramatically reduced chance of injury. You could eject at supersonic speed at max altitude. The darn thing floated, too. It gave 10 minutes of emergency oxygen. In other aircraft, 02 is gone when you eject. The only advantage I see to other aircraft's ejection systems is that they are rated for zero altitude/zero speed. The Vark's is zero altitude and 50kts. Big deal. I'd trade that off for the ability to get out at mach speeds and to float. I'd suspect you could stash more survival gear and food in it, too.
It also excelled as an EW/ jamming platform that could accompany a fast moving strike package, again with tremendous range. I'm sure lots of Eagle and Falcon drivers were happy to see an EF-111 come along with the party.
So I'd agree it wasn't a good fighter. But what it excelled at the interdiction/strike role and even the EW role. While hindsight shows it to have been a terrible adaptation as a carrier fighter (or fighter in general), the concept wasn't a complete failure. The F-4 Phantom was a massive success. So it had been done before. But I think the F-111 was just asked to do too much for the available technology of the day. Fortunately it worked out in one of the roles it was assigned.
Btw, many forget that there was a strategic nuclear bomber version that was in service for a good while. What other strike aircraft could even dream of doing that? That's a testament to its range. (I know it had to be refueled. But it still had long enough legs to make it viable with air refueling.) I'd suspect it would have been superior to the B-52 at penetrating Russian air defenses of the day.
The capsule ejection system was a great concept, but it didn't work so well in real life. According to a number of crewmen I knew who flew the plane, the problem was in the landing.
The capsule had an air bag that inflated under it to cushion the landing. The air bag had blow out plugs that functioned as the bag hit the ground. The problem was the capsule would hit the ground and bounce, the plugs would blow deflating the bag, then the capsule would return to earth with nothing to cushion it. This resulted in an very high number of broken backs among surviving crewmen.
Early ejection seats were almost as bad, using an explosive cartridge to propel the seat from the aircraft. The F-105 Thud pilots and EWOs I knew that had ejected had a very high rate of compressed and crushed disks. F-4s were better, but the Martin Baker rocket assist seat had so many parts that had to work in unison, malfunctions were all too common. The ACES II seat that is in almost all current US fighters is the gold standard.
The capsule had an air bag that inflated under it to cushion the landing. The air bag had blow out plugs that functioned as the bag hit the ground. The problem was the capsule would hit the ground and bounce, the plugs would blow deflating the bag, then the capsule would return to earth with nothing to cushion it. This resulted in an very high number of broken backs among surviving crewmen.
Early ejection seats were almost as bad, using an explosive cartridge to propel the seat from the aircraft. The F-105 Thud pilots and EWOs I knew that had ejected had a very high rate of compressed and crushed disks. F-4s were better, but the Martin Baker rocket assist seat had so many parts that had to work in unison, malfunctions were all too common. The ACES II seat that is in almost all current US fighters is the gold standard.
I've never spoken to F-111 aircrew, either those who survived ejection or those who never ejected. So take what I say for what it is worth.
That said, I think we agree that ejection is risky under any circumstances. But everything I've read suggests the overall safety record of the F-111 pod is comparable to the seats of its generation. But those kinds of injuries are not good, nonetheless. Beyond simply saving crew's lives, they've then got to survive on the ground or at sea. Those kinds of injuries would obviously put them at risk of dying afterward, too, and of not being able to return to duty quickly, or at all.
The Aces II, good as it's rep is, is not rated for Mach 1 at 100 feet, which was the F-111's spec.
I did read that the F-111F had improvements made to its pod to address some of the shortcomings you describe. But I haven't found exactly what those were, nor have I found their level of success, either in testing or in actual use.
Interesting quote from Jim Rotramel, who is listed as serving in the USAF from 1973-1993, and was an F-111 Weapons System Officer, taken from Quora.com.....
"Statistically, it was as good as ejection seats. But, it could also allow you to survive ejections that would have been fatal in a seat.
One crew was at Mach 2 when they had a flight control malfunction and went out of control. They walked away without a scratch.
Also, since the capsule would float in the water, we didn’t have to wear anti-exposure suits (although they were available in the capsule, if we needed them), a huge plus in England."
I still wouldn't want to test it out. I've also read of an incident where two ejections resulted in problems in the water, including one where the capsule went a few feet under water and the crew escaped unharmed and the other where it capsized in the water but partially righted itself when back-up bouyancy devices were deployed that were designed to correct an inverted position in water. Again, the crew survived uninjured, but in both cases they felt fortunate.
"Statistically, it was as good as ejection seats. But, it could also allow you to survive ejections that would have been fatal in a seat.
One crew was at Mach 2 when they had a flight control malfunction and went out of control. They walked away without a scratch.
Also, since the capsule would float in the water, we didn’t have to wear anti-exposure suits (although they were available in the capsule, if we needed them), a huge plus in England."
I still wouldn't want to test it out. I've also read of an incident where two ejections resulted in problems in the water, including one where the capsule went a few feet under water and the crew escaped unharmed and the other where it capsized in the water but partially righted itself when back-up bouyancy devices were deployed that were designed to correct an inverted position in water. Again, the crew survived uninjured, but in both cases they felt fortunate.
Another interesting take by Les Frazier, USAF 1955-82, also on Quara.com....
"I flew the F-111A & F for 650 hours. I did not like the ejection system but I think it was as good as an ejection seat. I think the problem was that too many times the crew tried to stay with the airplane when something bad was happening. The F-111 was so expensive that guys hated to leave it, especially if they caused the problem that they were in. Lgf"
"I flew the F-111A & F for 650 hours. I did not like the ejection system but I think it was as good as an ejection seat. I think the problem was that too many times the crew tried to stay with the airplane when something bad was happening. The F-111 was so expensive that guys hated to leave it, especially if they caused the problem that they were in. Lgf"
Every fighter pilot tends to stay with the plane as long as, in their mind, they have a chance of recovery. It's human nature they try to train out of you, but nobody wants to be "that guy" who lost a plane due to his mistake (apologies to other pronouns, fighter pilots were all male when I was in sometime during the last millennium) or if the plane could have been recovered. This is the main reason so many crewmembers are lost by delaying the ejection decision until they are out of the envelope.
I'll give one example of a delayed decision that is all too typical. F-4G out of George AFB on a local range gunnery ride. Pilot was the Squadron Commander (CC). EWO was Blackie. Both highly experienced. Plane experienced multiple malfunctions (hydraulics, flight controls, stuck throttles, etc.- I'm a bit fuzzy remembering specifics) that went well beyond making it recoverable. Controlled ejection warranted at this point. CC points it towards Edward's AFB, thinking that somehow he can get it down on the dry lake bed. Not too long thereafter, wingman keys the mic and says (lol, this is a cliché) "Lead, you're on fire". CC was still thinking he could recover it. Then the airplane takes over and starts an uncommanded and uncorrectable roll to the left. CC commands ejection. Blackie goes out with a positive vector, CC a negative as the plane is inverted by the time his rocket motor fires.
Now I know what you're thinking. I set it up to lead you to believe the CC went out too low inverted and didn't make it. But they had enough altitude and the CC was ok. Blackie not so much. Perfect ejection, well within the envelope, but he got a streamer for a chute that was uncorrectable. Somewhat of a miracle he survived ground impact.
Now, the ejection decision should have been made as soon as the number of malfunctions dictated it. But the plane was still marginally controllable, and they had altitude. Then when the wingman told them they were on fire, they should have punched out. Nope, still had some control and altitude. Then the airplane made the decision for them when it went out of control and they went.
I'll give one example of a delayed decision that is all too typical. F-4G out of George AFB on a local range gunnery ride. Pilot was the Squadron Commander (CC). EWO was Blackie. Both highly experienced. Plane experienced multiple malfunctions (hydraulics, flight controls, stuck throttles, etc.- I'm a bit fuzzy remembering specifics) that went well beyond making it recoverable. Controlled ejection warranted at this point. CC points it towards Edward's AFB, thinking that somehow he can get it down on the dry lake bed. Not too long thereafter, wingman keys the mic and says (lol, this is a cliché) "Lead, you're on fire". CC was still thinking he could recover it. Then the airplane takes over and starts an uncommanded and uncorrectable roll to the left. CC commands ejection. Blackie goes out with a positive vector, CC a negative as the plane is inverted by the time his rocket motor fires.
Now I know what you're thinking. I set it up to lead you to believe the CC went out too low inverted and didn't make it. But they had enough altitude and the CC was ok. Blackie not so much. Perfect ejection, well within the envelope, but he got a streamer for a chute that was uncorrectable. Somewhat of a miracle he survived ground impact.
Now, the ejection decision should have been made as soon as the number of malfunctions dictated it. But the plane was still marginally controllable, and they had altitude. Then when the wingman told them they were on fire, they should have punched out. Nope, still had some control and altitude. Then the airplane made the decision for them when it went out of control and they went.
The F-111 was born about the same time as the TSR.2. Same mission. Similar solution to the same problem.
The variable geometry gave the F-111 the ability to operate from reasonable runways while maintaining the high speed at low level.
TSR.2 had very high wing loading. Caused some handling issues and certainly caused some take off and landing performance issues.
The F-111 was a good jet. It was fully developed.
The TSR.2 was canceled long before they were able to work out the bugs.
Here’s the sole survivor of the TSR.2 program, on display at the IWM in Duxford.
The variable geometry gave the F-111 the ability to operate from reasonable runways while maintaining the high speed at low level.
TSR.2 had very high wing loading. Caused some handling issues and certainly caused some take off and landing performance issues.
The F-111 was a good jet. It was fully developed.
The TSR.2 was canceled long before they were able to work out the bugs.
Here’s the sole survivor of the TSR.2 program, on display at the IWM in Duxford.
In other fighter jets there is a small charged oxygen bottle on the ejection seat to give oxygen through the pilot's face mask while riding with the seat.
The emergency O2 bottle can also be activated by the pilot (not during an ejection event) if the on-board O2 system fails and the pilot needs enough O2 to decrease altitude enough to get outside oxygen.
Last edited:
My Dad flew F-111s in the Vietnam war. Unfortunately, he passed away some time ago. I was just a kid at the time but I do remember him talking about the only thing he worried about was the terrain following radar not working properly.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
Similar threads
