An attack version of the F-102 Delta Dagger?
I thought I was pretty well schooled on the Century Series, for an amateur historian, but if I know anything from 17 years as an inkstained wretch, it’s to never assume you know anything for sure.
I’m throwing this out as a question, not a statement of fact, and I’d like to hear from anyone who can refer me to a photo or any historical text on the subject.
I had stumbled across the McChord AFB Museum web site, and somehow wound up on the F-102 page. In the history of the type, it said there was an F-102C (the F-102B model, as most of you know, became the F-106). The C model, of which three prototypes actually flew, was a ground attack version of the Deuce. In all my years I have never even heard a peep about this craft, nor seen a photo of it. But as soon as I saw that, my modeler’s brain began to tick over and I saw before my mind’s eye – an F-102 with a bunch of Mk. 82’s hanging from the wings. A few modifications to the Monogram kit (I’m talking like I know what this F-102C looks like. Heck, it could have been a variation on the fat, subsonic TF-102A trainer version, with those ugly vortex generators all over the canopy frame like warts on a hog.
But, if anyone has any info, please post. I don’t currently have the D&S book on the Deuce, but when I did I don’t remember mention of this C version. Does Warbird Tech make a deuce book? But then, a search of the Convair/General Dynamics history page (Where is that page? Boeing now? The mind goes blank.) might turn up something. There has to be a photo of the three birds somewhere.
Probably right under my nose somewhere, if all is typical.
Tom
Tom
Hey Sharkskin;
I’ve seen pix of a 6 shooter with mud movers but that was a joke for the ADF’s commander back in the 70’s, the unit removed the wing tanks and installed a pair of MER’s with MK-82’s on the wings for an inspection the general was doing to catch him off guard, those pix are in the old issue of Squadrons F-106 in Action, but I’ve never seen the pix of the Duce’s with mud movers
'Cuda, I mentioned that 106 with the dumb bombs hanging on it for a joke in that long thread we had about the Century Series the other day. I couldn’t remember where I’d seen it and it was driving me nuts because I thought I might be called on it, and I couldn’t cite the source. So thanks. BTW, seems like a lot of work for a joke, I would think - mounting two TERs and a half-dozen 500 lb. bombs, but it WAS funny, unless you were my girlfriend, or my mother and brothers and sisters and…well, I guess we’re about the only people around who would get the joke. Makes you feel a) kind of special or b) like a nerd. I’m a little of both, I suppose. As something of a student of humor, I’ve always believed the maxim that the funniest jokes in life are the ones in which the fewest people are in on it. Think of the hardest you’ve ever laughed in your life. I’ll bet it was over something that just you and your best friend were in on.
Now, as for that air-to-mud, down-amongst-the-weeds (remember that Apollo moon mission where the LEM pilot – was it Neil Armstrong? Sounds more like a Pete Conrad saying, really. I dunno – but the LEM pilot was skimming along the over the rocks and craters, about to land, and he reported to Houston “…and we are down amongst them.” That was an attack pilot speaking.) …Darnit, as I keep trying to say, now, about that bomb-dumping Deuce, I wanna see it.
We also have seen the F-106 with its own special 20 mm. Vulcan gun pack mounted on the missile palate, but, as with the same adaptation on the F-111, I don’t think it was ever used operationally or distributed to squadrons. And it was intended, I’m pretty sure, to gun other airplanes, not tanks and trucks.
Tom
There was mention of an RF-102 recon modifications in one of the old William Green Combat Aircraft of the World books. I’ve never seen pictures of it. Some Deuces received temporary refueling probes for overseas deployment, but no bombs or racks. I think most Century Series jets had proposed models that never came to be – F-105E two-seater, F-100S export fighter, F-104H for Saudi Arabia, etc. Maybe the 102C was just an idea.
That aside, the Brooklyn Plastic Modelers Society meeting is tomorrow night, and you’re welcome to attend. For directions, see http://hometown.aol.com/BPMSClub/index.htm
Frank
This might get you started:
http://www.airtoaircombat.com/detail.asp?id=51
A net search using the words “Project Stovepipe F-102” results in a number of hits. Might be an image somewhere for someone willing to wade through it.
I have a large selection of aircraft books and mags, one specificly is the Warplane set, no mention of of a bomb truck 102…
I did a google search on F-102C, and found some web sites…
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f102_4.html
explaining it as a propoesed version. heres another
http://www.military.cz/usa/air/post_war/f102/f102hist.htm
some strange language, but it talks about 12, 600kg bombs
Have fun finding other resources, Kevin.
I have a large selection of aircraft books and mags, one specificly is the Warplane set, no mention of of a bomb truck 102…
I did a google search on F-102C, and found some web sites…
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f102_4.html
explaining it as a propoesed version. heres another
http://www.military.cz/usa/air/post_war/f102/f102hist.htm
some strange language, but it talks about 12, 600kg bombs
Have fun finding other resources, Kevin.
Somehow it’s hard imagining such a sleek design doing ‘Attack’ roles, but then Dassault managed it with a very similar product: Mirage III / Mirage V
Well, DJ, don’t forget that the F-104C went to Vietnam all tarted up in its SEA camo scheme, and was used briefly, though extensively, for close air support. As I believe I said recently, if I were a grunt taking fire on the ground, I wouldn’t feel so secure getting CAS from a plane that will fall out of the sky if it gets any slower than 300 mph. There was a reason the A-1 Skyraider and A-10s are so good at what they do: carry an enormous load, can loiter forever, and fly verrrrry slowwwly. Think about the Starfighter, the opposite in every way. Forty-five minutes was considered a long flight in the F-104.
So, as for sleek planes being used for mud moving, they’ve tried it with every fighter for the past, well, since WW II at least. And right up to the F-15 and 16, with very good results. Does anyone remember the – what was that designation? – was it the YF-16XL, with the big cranked delta wing and tons of bombs under them?
One of those two prototypes is still used by NASA at Edwards. I’m prejudiced, because I love anything with a delta wing, but that F-16 variation was a real looker in anybody’s book.
Tom
Tom, it’s the Scamp, possibly the nicest looking F-16 ever!
Right! I was happy to see on a doc recently that it was still flying as a research testbed. May it fly a long and safe career! Shame it wasn’t adopted, and I don’t know what was bought instead. F/A-18E? or something earlier? Maybe the money went into the black busget.
TOM
The F-16XL lost against the F-15E. Too bad, I like deltas too. Which ones in particular?
Why, the mother of all Deltas, the B-58 Hustler, and it’s baby brother, the F-106, the F-102 being the red-haired stepchild of that family. And, the Mirage III/V family really get my testosterone circulating. I wouldn’t be surprised to see the latter turning up on the warbird circuit, if it hasn’t happened already somewhere.
For that matter, why not a Deuce on the warbird circuit? J-57 engines are not in short supply. But, I guess the airframes are, after they all got shot up as QF-102s. Anyway, with US warplanes, you pretty much have to build it from spare parts from the ground up if you want one, since our government doesn’t sell flight-ready tactical aircraft to private individuals (except in certain specialized cases) like many governments do. Even Canada.
TOM
Hey Sharkskin;
I used to work with a fellow who worked the ole 6 Shooters in the day and they accually did fly with the 20MM pods it was a pallet mount that took the place of the Genie A to A missile (and it was mostly used when that weapon system was retired) he also said it was the most reliable weapon on the plane because the Falcon missles where tempermental and Moody (just like a woman[}:)]), the inner doors on the weapons bay where a 2 piece plank and the outboard doors where a 1 piece plank so when they flew the gun the fwd planks where removed and the gun pod was installed, just a few hours the plane went for an all missile plane to a “gun slinger”, as for the 6 Shooters LIL Sisters the XL’s both of which are flying under NASA’s flag the 2 seater is doing the Barrier Air Flow Experiment and the 1 seater is doing a couple of other experiments and doing chase missions for the JSF & Raptor’s flights
I don’t know how things like this get started. You would think that if someone post something on the internet, they sould make sure it is accurate. I read it and found a lot of errors in in the analysis of the F-102. A lot of the technical data is all wrong.
Example, the J-57-P23A produces 10,200 pounds static thrust (Dry) / 15,500 pounds thrust (wet) with AB. They would have you think the engine is more powerful than it is.
With the MG-10 Fire Control System, it was an old system and could not lock on to any thing on the ground. Just like the APQ 108/109 radar used in the F-4C/D, it would not lock on to any air to ground target. Too much ground clutter. The IR system was slaved to the radar ( It operated on a very narrow beam ), and required a radar lock on to pick out an IR subject. Just pointing it at the ground and firing IR guided missiles would not work. The missiles would go wild with nothing to guide them. A MK-82 is much less expensive than a IR guided air to air missile.
The F-102 was restricted to air defence and CAP missions in South Vietnam only. They were not allowed to penentrate North Vietnam airspace. Just like the F-100, it was a South Vietnam Support only aircraft.
Why anyone would want to use the F-102 to fire 2.75 FFAR’s at ground targets would be beyond me. With so many other aircraft that could do a better job in the air to ground roll, why use the F-102 when it did not have selective fire with its rockets. It would be a one shot pass and all rockets would be fired. With non self sealing fuel tanks in the wings, the golden BB would be a good posibility. The aircraft was built too light and could not pull very high “G” loads, required for the air to ground roll.
The next thing you know, someone will come out and say the B-52D was used as CAS in Vietnam.[%-)]
I found out an interesting fact from one of my old Deuce-driver friends. I was curious why the two-seater had all those vortex generators sticking out from the canopy frame (making it a bear to model, if there was such a kit, and I have seen conversions advestised for the Monogram kit). He said the deuce, even the fat two-seater, was so aerodynamically smooth, you had no warning when the plane had reached an angle of attack so steep you were about to stall out, so the vortex generators generated an artificial buffet, making the plane quiver and quake to warn you you were going to die if you didn’t get the nose down. Several planes have this feature, including airliners of certain types, but these vortex generators are really conspicuous on the TF-102A. And Berny, I agree, they had a hard enough time keeping those early IR missiles from tracking the sun, or, conversely, a hot stretch of road, so I don’t know how they could get one to lock onto a campfire. I know those stories were told to me by Deuce drivers in the context (and this was long before Bush was ever even Gov. of Texas, let alone prez)of, the F-102 detachment personnel were so bored they would do anything for a little action.
I have to disagree about the Hun not going north. It did and often. The first Wild Weasels, remember, were F-100Fs, and there is a disputed, but so-so documented Mig-17 kill by a pilot flying a F-100D up north in the earlier days of the air campaign. I don’t know that the Huns went “downtown,” and really doubt it, but I do know they went north of the DMZ to places farther south of Hanoi, like Vin.
Still looking for one of those three F-102C prototypes with bombs under the wings. Even my friends who flew the thing say the closest they heard of such a thing was a proposal to add a gun, probably the one that went on the F-106 and F-111. It was not tried on the 102, as far as they know.
Tom