Está en la página 1de 44
rADO Ine General Dynamics F-111E/F AEROGUIDE 22: GENERAL DYNAMICS F-111E/F Published in Great Britain by Linewrights Ltd, PO Box 832, Ongar, Essex CM5 ONH, England ISBN 0 946958 27 0 © 1988 Linewrights Ltd The contents of this book are strictly copyright and may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form without the prior written consent of Linewrights Ltd Written, designed and produced by Roger Chesneau Colour profile and line drawings by Mike Keep Cover photograph by Joananne Chesneau Photo processing by Frank Collins Typesetting by Typesetters (Birmingham) Ltd, Smethwick, West Midlands Colour reproduction by Columbia Offset (UK) Ltd, London Monochrome reproduction by M&E Reproductions, North Fambridge, Essex Printing and binding by Black Bear Press Ltd, Cambridge ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS For assistance with the preparation of this book the publishers would like to record their thanks to the 20th Tactical Fighter Wing, RAF Upper Heyford, and in particular MSgt Michael C Roberts and his colleagues at the Public Affairs Division; the 48th Tactical Fighter Wing, RAF Lakenheath, especially Sgt David N Malakoff and A1C Paul Hart; Z Joe Thornton of General Dynamics; Lois Lovisolo and Bill Barto, Grumman Corporation; Peter B Dakan, Boeing Advanced Systems Company; F M Slimmer, Hughes Aircraft Company; Barbara R Herron, Rockwell International Missile Systems Division; the Australian Department of Defence; Dick Ward; and Mike Gething. Special thanks are due to Col Graham E Shirley, Commander 20th TFW, and Col Thomas J Barber, Commander 48th TFW, for kindly granting photographic facilities Uncredited illustrations appearing in this volume are the copyright of the publishers. Cover photograph: F-111E 68-0082, 79th TFS, 20th TFW, Upper Heyford, August 1987. Back cover plate: ‘Heartbreaker’, a 55th TFS F-111E based at Upper Heyford, 1987. [inewrights,, Price £3.95 net (UK only) ay DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT Force for a replacement aircraft to succeed its F-105 Thunderchief tactical fighter-bombers. It made sense to utilise the best technology available, to ensure that the new aircraft could perform its task with the maximum degree of efficiency, but the Air Force went much further. Never willing to settle for the merely possible, it demanded great unrefuelled range, not only to enable it to deploy the aircraft to forward bases from the continental United States at short notice and without having to arrange tanking facilities or staging posts, but also to make sure that, once deployed, it could strike very deeply into the enemy’s heartland. This stringent requirement brought others in its train. For example, the ferry flight and deep-strike missions called for, respectively, the ability to fly economically at high altitudes and the ability to fly very fast at ultra-low altitudes to evade enemy radar and anti-aircraft defences; indeed, ideally the aircraft should be capable of sustained supersonic flight at low level (something no aircraft had yet achieved), which in turn implied the drag-free (ie internal) carriage of tactical nuclear weapons. Finally, heightened fears about the vulnerability of two-mile-long runways were crystallising at about this time, and since, clearly, an aircraft that cannot take off and land is no aircraft at all, it became part of of the requirement that the new machine should be able to operate safely and effectively from short, rough or semi-prepared strips Meeting all these needs presented a massive challenge, not least because, on the face of things, a number of them appeared to be mutually exclusive. To take the obvious problem, flying at high altitude — in thin air — demanded great lift and hence a very large wing span, as did the low- speed flight regime for short take-offs and landings; however, the high-speed, low-level penetration of enemy air space asked for the exact opposite, to prevent the machine from bucking around in the turbulent air currents Te F-111 started life as a requirement by the US Air Below: The official roll-out of the first prototype F-111, 6309766, took place on 15 October 1964, and the aircraft flew eight weeks later, ahead of schedule. The ground power unit was for a VG demonstration. General Dynamics Page 4 Right: One of the many development aircraft, with wings slightly swept and equipped with mock-up nuclear ordnance on the pylons. Finish is pale grey and white. General Dynamics 200ft above the ground, the crew from sustaining discomfort and nausea and the airframe from suffering such enormous stress that it would have to be built like a tank to make sure that it would not disintegrate after a few miles’ flying. Transcontinental range, powerful engines to get the speed up and an internal weapons bay of worthwhile dimensions all pointed to one thing — an awfully big aeroplane — and this, together with all the electronic goodies that would have to be packed in, spelt ‘expensive’. In June 1960 the Air Force presented its requirement in the form of SOR-183, encompassing the characteristics noted above and adding a high-altitude ‘dash’ speed of Mach 2.5 for good measure. The programme was termed ‘TFX’, for Tactical Fighter Experimental; it might be observed that this was something of a misnomer, since what was actually wanted was a tactical bomber, albeit one with a fighter-like performance. It was to have unfortunate repercussions. Debate spawned sketches and artists’ impressions, refined via a thousand calculations into drawings and scale models, as the designers beavered away to come up with the hitherto unheard of. It was while these preliminary studies were under way that the bombshell dropped. It so happened that at the time the Air Force’s TEX project was being formulated, the Navy was also looking at a new aircraft to supersede its F-4 Phantom fighter. Designated FADF, for Fleet Air Defense Fighter, it too would represent a major advance on the aircraft it would replace, mainly in order to counter the threat of long-range bombers armed with stand-off missiles. Once again, long range and high ‘dash’ speed were required, together with a formidable battery of heavy, long-range air-to-air missiles and the sophisticated radar/fire control electronics to work them. Once again, being a carrier- based aircraft, it would have to possess excellent low- speed characteristics, particularly during the landing approach. It was to the detriment of both the Air Force and Hed ¥ il 4 3 = : = UF a Wy a4 ¥ % @ Page 29 fy , i Phe Below: F-111E of the 481st TFS, 27th TFW, based at Cannon AFB in New Mexico, early 1970. Camouflage is standard (see pages 34-35), tail codes and serials white and Wing and national insignia in full colour. Fin-tip trim is bright green. The 27th has since 1970 operated the D model, its Es being reassigned to the 20th TFW in Britain Below: A 20th TFW F-111E, RAF Upper Heyford, with the early-style presentation of the fin code letters and serial. Note the absence of a Wing badge. The tail trim is red (denoting the 77th TFS), and the nose ECM panels are unpainted. Insignia are presented in full red, white and blue colours. Below: Another US-based F-111E, this time in the markings of the 422nd Fighter Weapons Squadron (57th FWW) at Nellis AFB and carrying the original tail code ‘WF’. Tail checks are black and yellow and TAC shield is applied below; code letters and serials are white, and the camouflage finish is standard, with full-colour insignia. Late 1971. Below: Prior to their deployment to USAFE, F-111Fs were operated by the 347th, and then the 366th, TFW at Mountain Home in Idaho. This profile shows a 390th TFS, 366th TFW. scheme, with red fin band, white tail codes and serials and full-colour Wing badge and national insignia, 1976. Page 33 F-111 GENERAL DYNAMICS F-111E, 79th TFS, 20th TFW, RAF UPPER HEYFORD, AUGUST 1987 Uppersurface National insignia: Wing shield (both camouflage: Tan Black ‘stencil’ style sides): Black outline _—_ 30219 Tailpipes: Stained natural metal All wheels: White All undercarriage with yellow hubs gear and wheel bay interiors: White Ejection capsule warning triangles Black outline National insignia Black ‘stencil’ style Uppersurface camouflage Shadow Green 34079 Radome: Glossy black Fin-tip trim: Black and yellow Uppersurface camouflage: Olive Green 34102 Page 34 SQUADRON SERVICE Numbers refer to Federal Standard (FS) 595a listings 1:96 scale Pitot tube: Natural metal Nosebay door lettering and serial White ~~ -——____ nner surface of forward mainwheel door/air brake: Red Undersurfaces Glossy black 17038 Interior of bomb bay: White Note absence of national insignia beneath wing Tail code and serial : ~ number: Black a Nose art (port side Bomb bay door Duct outlet: White All formating strip only): Yellow with stencilling: Yellow lights: Pale red detail (see page greenish yellow 20) Page 35 F-111 Below: The 48th TFW Commander's F-111F with a temporary tail number, in white, applied for the 1981 Royal Air Force Bombing Competition. Code letters and serial are black, as are the national insignia, although the Statue of Liberty Wing badge remains in full colour. Fin-tip trim is made up of the colours of all four of the Wing's squadrons, reading (from forward to rear) yellow, blue, red and green. Above: A 20th TFW F-111E undergoing routine flight-line major overhaul, and some three dozen aircraft are processed maintenance at Upper Heyford in the mid-1970s. Note that at per year under contract to the US Air Force. Here the 100th this time F-111s were not fitted with strip lights for nocturnal aircraft to be ‘re-lifed’, in a brand new paint finish with station-keeping. Richard L Ward complete unit markings, is handed back to USAFE ina Below: Since the early 1980s the UK-based F-111s have special ceremony, providing the uncommon spectacle of an been sent to British Aerospace’s Filton facility for periodic F-111 at rest with its wings fully swept back. British Aerospace meruron | Q 2 5 © 4 e. g 3 > z. 9 a th n p » = 158N 0-946958-27 58-27-0 958276. General Dynamics F-111E © Lnewnights .

También podría gustarte