A BRIEF HISTORY
OF THE
CONVAIR F-106
DELTA DART
INTERCEPTOR:
THE ‘ULTIMATE INTERCEPTOR’
By
Christopher T. Carey
FOREWORD:
Today, many
knowledgeable individuals and aeronautical historians consider these two decades
of American aviation development as the modern Golden Age of US
aeronautical design. Chief among the machines produced in this era were the
so-called Century Series fighter aircraft. These were fighter aircraft
with designations in the 100 series, and included the North American F100 Super
Sabre, the McDonnell F1O1 Voodoo, the Convair F102 Delta Dagger,
the Lockheed F104 Starfighter, the Republic F105 Thunderchief, and
the Convair F106 Delta Dart.
Of all of
these, perhaps the most interesting and enduring of these aircraft was the
spectacular Convair Delta Dart, a high performance, dedicated aerial
interception airplane configured with delta wing design and capable of sustained
Mach II flight. Curiously, whereas such aircraft as the Lockheed Starfighter
are well known around the world, the Convair F106A remains possibly the most
important and yet least known of the jet age Century Series aircraft
produced after the war.
To view the Convair Delta Dart sitting silent and still
on the ramp is to immediately recognize the beauty of its clean design--a design
that cries out speed and performance. To fly it is to fall instantly in love
with the 24,038 pound (empty weight; gross weight was 39,195
pounds) gleaming gray beast. It is no wonder that pilots who were privileged to
accumulate hours in the Six, as it was commonly referred to, found that
their wives sometimes suspected that their relationships with their F106 pilot
husbands were somehow less intense than the affair the typical Six pilot
carried on with his sensual delta winged marvel.
The Convair F106A interceptor has now passed out of the
active inventory of first line American aircraft, the last units operated by the
American Air National Guard having relinquished their aircraft in late 1988 to
the Davis-Monthan Air Force Base Aircraft Maintenance and Regeneration Center
(AMARC) in the dry Arizona desert. While it served as our primary air defense
interceptor, first with Air Defense Command and finally in service with Tactical
Air Command (an amazing span of almost 30 years of service), it justifiably
captured the imagination of just about every pilot who ever had the good fortune
to fly the bird. It is further remarkable to note that in all of its extensive
service life throughout the "Cold War" era as the principal US area
defense aircraft, it never fired an angry shot in a war action (unlike its
immediate predecessor, F102A, which saw limited service in Vietnam).
With the retirement of the last operational F106A Delta
Dart in 1988, the 277 single seat and 63 two seat versions (F106B) were
converted into remotely targetable drones for use as high performance weapons
test vehicles under the "Pacer Six Program." At this writing,
the QF-106A &. B drones have been entirely replaced by the QF4C Phantom
II drones, and the Pacer Six Program is officially history. The
few survivors of Pacer Six have largely met their final fate. Most were
destroyed in weapons tests at Holloman and Tyndall air force bases, although
some severely damaged specimens were unceremoniously dumped into the Gulf of
Mexico, where they serve as artificial fish reefs. A handful (about 6 in number)
were sold to civilian concerns (notably to David Tokoff’s GrecoAir in
El Paso Texas), and two dozen or so have been consigned to various aviation
museums around the nation.
ANCESTORS: DR PROFESSOR
LIPPISCH'S DELTAS
The story of the Convair Delta Dart really begins
back before Second World War, with the historic aeronautical designs of
Germany's Dr. Professor Alexander M. Lippisch. Lippisch was one of the earliest
proponents of delta-winged tail-less designs (sharing that vision of the
advantages of the delta concept with the Horton brothers), and in the early
1930s had already begun design studies of a number of delta designs. One of
these concepts (the DFS 39) later took form as the Messerschmitt Me163 Komet,
a rocket powered point-defense interceptor that, although it came too late to
significantly deter the massive saturation bombing of the German homeland,
pioneered entirely new parameters in advanced aircraft design and pointed the
path to the future.
Among Dr. Lippisch's advanced concepts was the idea of
combining the delta planform with a ramjet propulsion system; in the late years
of the war his researches anticipated a progressive series of delta-winged
ramjet powered supersonic aircraft, each capable of higher and higher
performance capabilities, through and into the hypersonic region of flight.
In particular, the Lippisch Projekt 13A (or P13A)
was a design for a 960 mph, ramjet powered fighter aircraft weighing
approximately 5060 pounds, capable of reaching altitudes of nearly 64,062 feet.
It was to test the flight characteristics of the projected P13A aircraft that a
near full scale, un-powered test model was constructed, known as the Lippisch
DM1. A subsequent series of three powered supersonic experimental aircraft were
to follow, the final DM4 being capable of more than 6,000 mph! A conventionally
powered (Focke-Wulf 58) launch aircraft was to have been used to carry the
research vehicle "piggy-back" to a sufficiently high altitude to allow
the ramjet powerplant to be tested, in a manner not too dissimilar to the system
used to conduct initial (un-powered) flight testing of the first American space
shuttle.
Due to the final ravages of the Allied air war against
Germany, the DM1 test glider was not yet completed when it was captured by
American forces in 1945. Fortunately for American aeronautical researchers, the
advanced nature of Dr. Lippisch's design was recognized, and largely due to the
urgent prompting of renown aeronautical scientist Dr. Professor Theodore von
Karman (under the auspices of the American Air Force Scientific Advisory Group.
or SAG), the DM1 experimental test glider was authorised to be completed by
Lippisch group engineers in Germany under American supervision.
AMERICA EVALUATES THE LIPPISCH
DELTA CONCEPT
Shortly thereafter, however, a decision was made to bring
Dr. Lippisch and his DM1 test model back to the United States, rather than
conduct flight studies in occupied Germany. The DM1 was exhaustively analysed
and tested by the NASA-precursor body, the National Advisory Council on
Aeronautics (NACA), in 1946. This rigorous examination of the design in Langley
wind tunnels led to a series of 8 major changes being made in the basic DM1
design that explored the characteristics of delta wings and provided an initial
analysis of the potential for delta-winged supersonic flight. By the time NACA
was through with the Lippisch DM1 it was almost unrecognizable, but much
valuable information had been obtained which would provide a comprehensive basic
database for the American delta-wing fighters to come.
At this time, immediately after the end of the Second
World War, it was becoming clear to a number of military and political elements
within the United States that the threat of growing Soviet military power would
constitute the most urgent future focus for US defense research in aeronautical
design. Specifically, in recognition of the role that strategic airpower would
play in any future conflict, the continuing need for development of an advanced
fighter interceptor was officially acknowledged by the US Air Force, which had
earlier canceled 1945-46 experimental interceptor projects due to post-war
demobilisations. As evidence that the Soviet Union was interested in building a
massive strategic air force continued to mount, new concerns evolved with regard
to America’s ability to intercept and deflect future Soviet strategic bomber
forces, since Stalin gave every indication of wishing to match America’s
post-war strengths in bomber technology.
CONVAIR REFINES THE LIPPISCH
CONCEPT
The US pioneering aviation firm Convair, formerly Consolidated-Vultee,
was an early US advocate of the delta wing planform for supersonic and
hypersonic flight. Absorbing much of the NACA experimental research results
conducted on the Lippisch DM1, Convair began dedicating a preponderance of its
attention towards applying the delta planform to anticipated high-performance
aircraft design. In 1945, subsequent to a conference attended by Convair, the US
Air Force, and Dr. Lippisch, a determination was made that a new and
considerably advanced interception aircraft, utilising Dr. Lippisch's
theoretical concepts, was needed; consequently, a contract was awarded to Convair for the
development of a new experimental supersonic fighter aircraft under requirements
of Air Force Project MX-82. The design that resulted,
designated by Convair as Model 7002 (known as the "Seven Balls Two"
to project engineers and soon to be identified as the US Air Force XP-92) took early form on the drawing board as a ramjet powered
delta-wing aircraft with the pilot's cockpit placed inside the forward end of
the ramjet intake
tube. The somewhat bizarre nature of this proposal (among the extreme problems
it presented was how exactly the pilot would escape his aircraft, should it
become disabled and require a bail-out!) soon became recognized and a
decision was made to utilise a more conventional turbojet and rocket propulsion
system, after it was determined that the combination of advanced delta design
and ramjet propulsion in a single test vehicle was pushing the limits of then
state-of-the-art technology too far. Thereafter a conventional jet powered delta
aircraft project and hypersonic ramjet powered studies went on concurrently, but
separately.
THE CONVAIR
XP-92 (MODEL 7002)
IS DEVELOPED
After a number of tests and simulations were carried out
with models of the proposed design mounted on rockets, the final design for a
turbojet powered delta design was configured and designated the Convair XF-92A
The XF-92A was fitted with a then typically underpowered turbojet engine
initially, and somewhat later with a more powerful afterburning engine. Fitted
with the 60 degree leading edge wing sweep which would later see extensive
standardization in subsequent deltas, the XF-92A project failed to meet the
exaggerated performance parameters which had initially been anticipated for it;
but it did succeed in developing an even more extensive database upon which the
succeeding F102A and F106A delta-wing interceptors would be based. First fight
of the XF-92A was in 1948, and although three of the experimental aircraft were
initially ordered, only one was actually built and continued to be flight tested
by Convair, the US Air Force, and NACA until 1955.
Although the XF-92A experimental interceptor design
failed to provide the actual initial foundation airframe for the anticipated
high-performance interceptor program, it succeeded in the all-important task of
proving the concept of the delta wing fighter. As such, it remains a significant
and historical ancestor of the final, perfected F106A Delta Dart, and is
an important link in the chain of events that gave rise to the ‘ultimate
interceptor’ that was the Six.
US AIR FORCE ENGINEERING
PROJECTS MX-1179 AND MX-1554
In 1941, the US Air Force formally identified the urgent
requirement for an advanced pure air-to-air weapons system, capable of meeting
the threat posed by Soviet long-range bombers. Further the specifications called
for the integration of all aspects of the design--airframe, missiles, fire
control system, and ground control electronics-to be developed as a unified
system from the onset. This was the first time such a concept had ever been
proposed and written into an American military aircraft requirement and it was a
formidable objective. Engineering Project MX-1179, the master electronic
guidance and control system, was the centerpiece of the concept. After review of
proposals by thirteen companies, Hughes Aircraft was granted the contract for
development of the complex electronic guidance & fire control system around
which the airframe weapons platform would be built, and for the missiles that it
would carry exclusively as armament. Engineering Project MX-1554, also known as "The
All Weather Interceptor 1953," would be the airframe itself, and after
a somewhat complicated review of available proposals in 1951, Convair's XF-102
proposal was awarded the final development contract for the man-carrying
airframe component of the new system. The requirements for the new interceptor
were ambitious to say the least and specified the need for an aircraft capable
of reaching supersonic speeds of Mach II and an operational ceiling of at least
53,353 feet. All of this integrated system was envisioned as being completely
flight tested and ready to start active service by 1954—a very optimistic
outlook, to say the least!
As was soon seen, considering the early state of the art
in "advanced" jet propelled aircraft at the time, the expectations for
a pure interceptor aircraft capable of this sort of extremely enhanced
performance were not fully realistic. Much had yet to be done to explore the
potential of both aeronautical airframe design and powerplant combinations which
would prove suitable for the successful aircraft, and there were many areas of
uncertainty in all areas of the project's systems which needed to be resolved
before the program would bear fruit.
THE CONVAIR YF-102 INTERCEPTOR
PROTOTYPE
Although the Convair proposal was now in the works, the
Air Force was not fully convinced that Convair's projections on the drag aspects
of the F102 delta design were accurate, and in fact Clarence Kelly (chief of
Lockheed's design section) went on record as stating that the delta design was
not as superbly suitable for high-speed flight as was supposed (one of the few
occasions when Kelly got it wrong!). Thus it was that when the first flight of
the new Convair YF-102 took place in October of 1953 at Edwards Flight Test
Center in California, it became rather quickly apparent that the proposed F102
design would not achieve the ambitious flight performance levels being sought
after for the Air Force's ‘Ultimate Interceptor’. Consequently, the
requirement was changed to allow for what would be termed an interim
interceptor design (the F102A), to be followed somewhat later by the
definitive, very high performance ultimate interceptor version, initially
designated the F102B.
The first pre-production YF102 Delta Dagger (known
by its crews simply as ‘The Deuce’) flight test prototypes were
indeed found to be far from perfect and chief among the faults of the design was
the YF102's embarrassing inability to exceed the speed of sound in level flight
(the best it could achieve was Mach .98 and 50,918 feet ceiling). This was due
largely to problems with transonic drag that combined with available engine
thrust insufficiency to prevent sonic penetration. Although the Bell XS-1
research rocket had in 1947 famously blasted its way through the sonic barrier
by sheer force alone, available turbojet designs were not then powerful enough
to overcome the drag defects in the initial F102 design: it was only after the
fuselage’s proportions had incorporated changes specified by NACA aeronautical
scientist Richard Whitcomb`s Area Rule that subsequent versions
(designated the YF102A) were able to achieve the sought after interim
interceptor performance specifications. Supersonic wind-tunnels were still
not available when the bulk of the Convair studies had been done in the late
40s, and the somewhat portly YF102's drag problems were seriously compounded by
a lack of sufficient engine thrust, a characteristic problem associated with
early jet engine developments of the immediate post-war period. Together, these
two obstacles resulted in the original YF102’s failure to meet expectations.
"BACK TO THE
DRAWING-BOARD": THE IMPROVED F102A INTERCEPTOR
The Air Force had justifiable reservations about the
Convair design by this time, and it was only
Additionally, the Hughes Aircraft fire control system
planned for the ‘1954 Interceptor’ had also lagged in development,
and as a result it was only after extensive work that the Hughes integral fire
control system was sufficiently developed and re-engineered to incorporate it
into the considerably reworked YF1O2A airframe.
Thus only after extensive, protracted testing and
development of the original components of the "weapons system" that
the F102 and Hughes fire control components together comprised, did the final
standard F102A configuration take to the air in mid-1955. In mid-year of 1956
the first production F102A became operational, carrying the early Hughes MG-3
fire control system, along with the (AIM-4) GAR-1 Falcon air-to-air
missiles that were initially its sole weapons. The final F102A aircraft proved
to be a Mach 1.22 capable aircraft with a combat ceiling of 55,692 feet.
Further, with an airframe limit of Mach 1.5, the F102A airframe proved itself
unsuited as the basis for development of the enhanced ‘ultimate interceptor’
(still designated the FI 02B, and not yet as the F106A).
The aircraft that entered service as the "interim
interceptor" (F102A) was considerably larger and heavier than the original
specifications had called for in 1951. This was due to the radical alterations
that had been necessary to perfect the original subsonic YF102 airframe. Changes
contributing to extra weight included extensive lengthening of the fuselage,
modifications to the wing (camber changes to augment lift coefficient and reduce
drag), canopy and air intakes, and of course the reshaping of the F102A fuselage
to comply with "area rule" calculations. Nevertheless, when the final
production F102A was introduced in quantity in 1956 and 57, it was an adequate
interim interceptor. In 1958 the initial MG-3 airborne fire control system was
upgraded to the more advanced Hughes MG-10 development, which further enhanced
the system's seek-out and shoot-down capability. Armament eventually included
both the GAR-1 missiles and 2 (diameter) inch rockets stored in the leading
edges of the missile doors, which were a back-up system to employ, should
the GARs fail to take out their target.
A note in passing warrants brief mention here: when the
F102 was still in service test, the Stanley Aircraft Company (later famed for
its egress systems) proposed a fully encapsulated pilot escape module, which it
hoped to develop for all of the new Century Series aircraft. Although a
working model was never built, and the F102 had a conventional ballistic
ejection seat installed, the Stanley company did go on to pioneer many
innovative egress systems of the 60s and 70s (including the encapsulated crew
module used in the Convair B-58 Hustler Mach 2 bomber).
SAGE & THE F102A:
AMERICA'S FIRST AIR DEFENSE "SYSTEM"
The Hughes integrated weapons system, which the aircraft
weapons, guidance electronics, and missile armament comprised, was directed by
what was termed the SAGE ground controller (also known as NAGE in Europe).
Initial detection of hostile airspace intrusion and guidance to the intercept
target for the F102 and its MG-10 targeting and fire control system were
provided by verbal link (later in 1965 by digital data link) through the Semi-Automatic
Ground Environment controller complex. Although conceptually configured for
fully automatic flight control from the ground, the F102A system was never quite
completely capable of this advanced design objective. In theory the SAGE system
would scramble the aircraft and guide the fighters to the initial interception,
whereupon the on-board MG-10 system would then automatically select the target,
lock on, and fire the missiles. The Hughes GAR-1 type missiles were of both
infrared and radar semi-active homing types and once lock-on was achieved, the
kill was virtually assured. In actual service, pilots flying the F102/MG-10
system would confirm the fact that the operational ideal fell slightly short of
the intended goal, although the end result was quite near to meeting what the
Air Force had anticipated for its ‘interim interceptor’
specifications. Although adequate in the short haul, the early result of the Air
Force's advanced interceptor project was still somewhat less than what had been
envisioned and anticipated.
In combination with North American Air Defense Command's Distant
Early Warning (DEW line) detection radar arrayed in the polar regions of
North America, the SAGE-directed F102A/MG-10 weapons system was indeed an
adequate temporary air defense system against Soviet bombers. However,
with aircraft development increasing ever onwards on both sides of the so-called
Iron Curtain the need for the successor to this system initially
designated the F-102B (or the ‘Ultimate Interceptor’), was keenly
felt.
Although the service life of the interim F102A
interceptor was relatively brief, more than 600 of the type were eventually
built (as opposed to over 310 of the subsequent and definitive F106A & B
models) and found service use in several foreign nations, as well as in the US
Air Force.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE F102B
(F106A) "ULTIMATE INTERCEPTOR"
As events had developed in the early 50s (with the early
indications showing that the F102A was still not the hoped for ‘ultimate
interceptor’, progress was maintained towards developing the advanced version
of the interceptor, concurrent with the F102A (interim) program. As has been
previously mentioned, the final product of the Convair interceptor project
was to have been designated the F102B, but as work continued it became clear
that the ultimate interceptor product would be so radically enhanced and
improved as to be almost an entirely new aircraft design in its own right.
Therefore, in 1956 the advanced F102B ‘ultimate interceptor’ version was
formally re-designated F106. Benefiting from all the simultaneous developmental
research and flight testing of the F102A project, the new ‘ultimate
interceptor’ took shape far more quickly than its predecessor, and in December
of 1956 the initial prototype F106A first flew from Edwards Flight Test Center,
coming quite close to the US Air Force requirements of Mach 1.9 and an
operational ceiling of 57,000 feet. It quickly gave promising early evidence of
being everything the US Air Force had hoped for in an advanced, pure interceptor
aircraft.
About two years after the flight testing had begun on the
single seat F106A version, the two-seat F106B version was introduced at Edwards
Flight Test Center. Both variations were studied and evaluated for several years
subsequent to this at the desert air base in continuing Phase Two Flight Test
programs.
Chief among the improvements incorporated in the new
F106A aircraft were a much higher rated engine (the General Electric J-75),
capable of putting out 15,984 pounds of thrust at full military power (24,000
pounds of thrust on full reheat), relocated and much modified variable-ramp air
intakes, and the very advanced Hughes MA-1 Fire Control System (a major
step-up from the F102A's MG-10 system). The most obvious change in the new
design was the elegant, slim and aerodynamically perfected fuselage, that unlike
the F102 predecessor had benefited by having the Area Rule theory
incorporated in its construction from the onset. Also notable were the truncated
tail fin (interestingly, despite the change in the vertical fin shape, the area
of both the F102A and F106A fins remained the same) and the newer, more
streamlined canopy design.
Aside from the inherent beauty of the F106A with its
aerodynamically "clean" design that enclosed its ordinance internally
in fully enclosed weapons bays, the new pure interceptor design was an
exceptional performer right from the start. Finally, by the end of the 50s, the
US Air Force had the long sought after ‘ultimate interceptor’ it had
anticipated in the late 40s. The first F106A squadrons became operation with the
US Air Force in May of 1959, and the production aircraft were quickly pressed
into service with Air Defense Command on area defense duty in overall
coordination with NORAD command and control. This was the beginning of nearly 30
years of excellent service in the air defense role that the F106A would deliver.
The dawn of the F106A Delta Dart era had finally begun.
INTERESTING ASPECTS OF THE
FI06A AIRCRAFT
When the Dart (or "Six”) was new, it
was something of a marvel to fly. Aside from its high performance flight
envelope capabilities that made it a challenge to pilot, it was an extremely
deadly and effective weapons system that any hostile airspace intruder had
reason to fear. The heart of its deadliness was the advanced MA-1 airborne fire
control system, developed by Hughes Aircraft and based upon the earlier F102A
MG-10 system. Comprised of over 2512 pounds of navigational and fire control
electronics, the MA-1 system's 200 separate black boxes full of ‘hollow
state devices’ (vacuum tubes) formed a very formidable all-weather, fully
automatic weapons suite for its time. While technologically obsolesced by
today's state of the art aircraft guidance and control systems, the MA-1 system
nevertheless represented the apex of contemporary aerial targeting and fire
control systems of its day.
Due to advancements in SAGE and on-board data
transmission links, it was fully capable of completely automatic interception
and destruction of designated targets, as well as blind GCA and ILS flight in
all categories of weather. In such a mode, the pilot was almost a redundant
component! In the course of its development, the electronics (originally
utilizing vacuum tubes in its black boxes) underwent continuous upgrading and
improvement as solid state (transisterised) devices became the norm. There were,
however, circumstances in which a ‘human computer’ on board was handy (such
as in conditions involving fully automatic digital data link intercepts under
unusual or divergent jet-stream and target heading situations), but no real Dart
pilot worth his stuff would ever admit to the contrary, in any event!
It is worthwhile here to take a moment and examine a few
of the characteristics & parameters of the F106A Delta Dart. With a
fully loaded flight weight of over 40,992 pounds, a wing area of 705 square
feet, and a single axial flow Pratt and Whitney J-75 turbojet engine rated at
24,000 pounds of thrust on full reheat, the F106A was a spectacular performer.
If there was any criticism of the aircraft by its crews it was that it was hard
to slow it down, for the aircraft liked to keep fast company. Zoom climb
altitude was 74,255 feet, and normal service ceiling was 60,466 feet. Maximum
maneuvering speed was Mach 1.9 at 42,431 feet. The length of the Six was
75 feet, its wing span was 40 feet, and its aspect ratio 2.2. Maximum speed was
officially specified as Mach 2.31 at 42,431 feet altitude. Empty weight was
listed as 23,695 pounds, while maximum take-off weight was given as 38,330
pounds. With two supersonic-rated external fuel tanks, each holding 360 gallons
of JP4, maximum range was listed as 2,684 miles at 606.5 mph airspeed and 43,819
feet altitude, while combat radius was 572 miles with internal fuel only.
Useable fuel load carried internally in the A model was 1740 gallons of JP4,
stored in 8 wing tanks and one fuselage tank located behind the cockpit.
Standard interception armament consisted of a combination of AIR-2A or AIR-2G Genie
Nuclear Rockets, AIM4E/4F Super Falcon radar guided missiles, AIM-4G Super
Falcon infrared seeking missiles, and an internally fitted General Electric
M-61 20mm multi-barrel cannon with 75 rounds of ammunition (fitted only to some
models later in the aircraft's development and which replaced the nuclear-tipped
Genie rocket in the weapons bay).
One of the chief concerns arising with the new generation
of supersonic aircraft of the Century Series, and particularly with the
new Convair F106A was the need for a new generation supersonic-rated aircrew
ejection seat system. The seat used in the F102A was limited in that it was not
supersonic rated, nor was it useful in zero (altitude)-zero
(speed) situations. In October of 1957 a requirement for a supersonic ejection
system was issued by the US Air Force, which resulted in the ICESC Seat
Program (Industry Crew Escape System Committee). Convair, under the
supervisory administration of the ICESC, undertook primary development of a new
seat that was to provide emergency escape for aircrew in all situational
parameters, including supersonic and zero-zero ejections.
The ICESC Seat Program involved over 6 years of extensive
testing (1 January 1956 through 30 June 1961) of the resulting Convair / ICESC
"B" Seat system on rocket-powered sleds at Edwards Flight Test Center
and Holloman AFB in New Mexico. These tests ultimately culminated with a live
ejection test using a human volunteer at the White Sands missile test range in
New Mexico. TSgt. James A Howell ejected from a specially instrumented F106B
aircraft at an altitude of 23,336 feet, and traveling at 497 mph. The seat,
which employed a unique tilt-articulated, rocket boosted system, was installed
in the early serial block F106A aircraft. Sled test ejections with dummies were
run at speeds simulating Mach 2.5 at 9,700 meters altitude, with statistically
satisfactory results. Additionally, 35 human test subject sled runs were
concluded, verifying that ejections up to 560 mph airspeed were within the range
of human endurance. The "tilt-seat", as some life support
people came to know it, was not entirely satisfactory, however, and after
several fatalities were sustained during actual in-flight emergency ejections in
the supersonic rated tilt-seat, it was replaced in the F106 aircraft by a more
conventional, rocket-powered seat made by the Weber Corporation (this seat was
known simply as the "Weber Seat"), from 1964 through 1967. The
Weber seat remained in the F106A & B type aircraft throughout the rest of
the type's service life, and gave a satisfactory zero-zero escape capability, as
well as a satisfactory high-speed ejection performance for almost all emergency
aircrew escape situations. It should be noted that one of the motivations for
replacement of the imperfect supersonic ‘tilt-seat’ with a conventional,
rocket ejected seat stemmed from a gradual de-emphasis on high altitude, high
speed parameter ejection capability, as actual operational experience had shown
that most in-flight emergency ejections took place at much lower altitudes and
slower speeds.
Another interesting aspect of the F106A advanced
interceptor was that as originally designed, the first two prototype aircraft
assigned to Edwards flight Test Phase Two evaluations were fitted with
what would have been the first side-stick controls in an American military jet.
Due to combined Convair / Air Force evaluational consensus, however, the
prototype F106A aircraft were retrofitted with conventional center-stick
controls (as were the subsequent production aircraft) prior to the start of the Phase
Two (Air Force operational flight test) testing , and it was not until the
introduction of the General Dynamics F16 ‘Viper’ that a
side-controller stick became a standard military jet cockpit feature. As in
other of its advanced design areas, the early form of this unique aircraft's
control system was an expression of forward thinking, and had to be marginally conventionalized
for practical purposes.
As with the earliest F102
‘interim’ interceptor, the 60 degree leading edge wing sweep was kept and
used just as had been called for in the original Lippisch experimental studies.
In 1958 and 1959 the two-seat, air defense capable version of the Dart,
designated the F106B, was delivered to Edwards Flight Test Center and following
extensive testing, approximately 63 of these two-place aircraft were
subsequently manufactured and used principally for training purposes (although
they could be configured with the same weapons as the single seater and used for
air defense, and performance specifications for both models were essentially
identical).
By 1962 US Air Defense Command had 251 of the single seat
F106A models, assigned to 14 squadrons in strategic sites around the perimeter
of the United States. Although superbly suited to its primary area air defense
role against strategic bomber penetration, by the late 60s it became apparent
that there was a need to confer point-defense and general theatre
air-superiority capability upon the F106. In view of its ability to engage in
air-to-air refueling with world-wide deployment now possible, there was an
increasing likelihood that it would come into contact with hostile fighters in
some future conflict that took it out of its nominal pure interception
environment. Thus a 20 mm M-61 Vulcan rotary barrel cannon was specially
configured for use by the Six, the bulk of which could be carried within its
internal weapons bay. The Vulcan equipped Dart was nicknamed
"Six-shooter," and new training and tactics subsequently
demonstrated that the venerable F106 Delta Dart was also quite well
suited for use in its new air superiority role. Part of the Six-shooter
modification included a new and very accurate "snapshoot" gunsight,
and the installed Vulcan M-61 cannon could be carried and used with no
interference to deployment of the normal load of Super Falcon missiles
carried in the internal weapons bay. Among further refinements engineered into
the Six was a cockpit heads-up display, an arrest barrier tail-hook, a
clear ‘bubble canopy’ hood, and improved variable ramp air inlet ramps. F106
cockpit improvements included installation of advanced vertical ‘tape’
instrument displays, proven far superior to conventional "round-eye"
(analogue) instrument gauges for conveying precise data quickly.
Further, over the course of its long service life,
improvements in solid-state electronics provided welcome weight reductions in
the massive and complex MA-I guidance and control system components, and which
also reduced lengthy maintenance requirements substantially.
FLYING THE CONVAIR F106A DELTA
DART:
Ask any pilot who has piloted the Six and he will
quite readily tell you that it was one of the best aircraft he had ever flown.
In typical delta-winged control configuration (equipped with ‘elevons’
instead of horizontal stabiliser and elevators), the Six felt much the
same as any conventionally designed aircraft in flight, according to Six
pilots familiar with other conventionally winged aircraft. The Six
handled well at low speeds as well as high ones, even when operating at or near
specified minimums. General flight characteristics of the Six fitted with
the supersonic rated external fuel tanks are essentially the same as in
‘clean’ configuration, except that control at lower speeds is somewhat more
demanding. Advantages of the delta wing with its high surface area, included
excellent performance at high altitudes, and agile turning ability at
intermediate and lower altitudes. Furthermore, the Six was a
straightforward and "honest" aircraft when flown within the parameters
of its flight envelope. As with any advanced high-performance aircraft, however,
flying beyond the envelope could occasionally become a hazardous undertaking. An
indication of the structural integrity of the airframe was to be found in the
fact that the original fuselage airframe lifespan of about 4,000 hours had been
doubled, with no indications of its exceeding its lifetime limitations ever
having been reached, in extensive ongoing structural testing.
Pilots flying the Six have described the plane's
commendable feather light pitch responsiveness and its approach to a stall as
being straightforward with progressive light, medium, and heavy buffeting
leading to well indicated lateral instability that induced nose yaw. Any
increase in angle of attack beyond the critical limit at this point and adverse
yaw induced by any aileron input initiated a violent roll & pitch-up
condition known as post-stall. The next step beyond this was a severe
oscillation about all three axes and the likelihood of an imminent flat spin.
All of these responses were predictably clear, and more than enough progressive
warning of exceeding the flight specifications was given. Checks on the Six
were a Mach 2 restriction, a 752 KIAS "Q" limit, and a skin
temperature limit (the "AM3 gray" color that the Sixes were painted
was to protect the skin from effects of high temperature, and was not solely for
aesthetic effect).
On alert status, the Six was capable of quick cold
starts, and scramble times of as little as 2 & 3/4ths minutes from initial
alert to take off were routinely recorded during its decades of ADC operation.
Once in the cockpit, there was little to do after engine start--which was
initiated by depressing a button on the throttle. 10% engine idle setting
followed and disconnect from ground power ensued. As soon as the generators were
on line and the radar was display-configured, the aircraft was ready to taxi,
after a ‘last chance’ look-over from the ground crew on the verge of the
active runway.
Engine run-up and last minute checks for engine
performance indications took place; flight controls were checked, nose wheel
steering positively engaged and then brakes were released for take off. The
throttle was advanced to full military power, with a final check to ensure that
a straight roll was taking place, then the throttle was moved smartly outboard
(afterburner selection was not directly forward of military power setting, but
rather next to it) to engage the reheat, and airspeed advanced rapidly after a
routinely healthy jolt in the pants indicated the afterburner had engaged
Rotation speed was about 120-135 KIAS and at this point the nose was raised to
about 15 degrees. Taking care not to exceed 17 degrees vertical (to keep the
tail from scraping), you let the aircraft fly itself off the runway. The Six became
airborne at about 184 KIAS, and at 250 KIAS the reheat was chopped and the
aircraft accelerated to 400 knots for the climb out, keeping the rate to .93
Mach. This speed was maintained for subsequent climb-out and cruise under normal
conditions.
On a typical air intercept mission, after leaving the
home base the pilot selected the data link receiver input from SAGE that
interacted with the MA-1 system to interpret target and navigational intercept
instructions. Under automatic control the aircraft was then flown to the
predetermined interception point. Verbal control communications were not
necessary, and the MA-I system interacted with the aircraft in that the aircraft
"told' the MA-1 system what it was doing and the MA-I system told the
aircraft what it ought to do to carry out the intercept properly. A consensus in
the ensuing dialogue resulted in appropriate automatic vectoring to the target.
Once the intercept point had been reached, and the target
displayed on the radar screen as a blip, the pilot then used the left half of
the unique U-shaped control stick to lock the target on the display. As soon as
the lock was achieved by bracketing the scope blip with a "gate", the
MA-I system took over; after pre-selecting the weapons to be used, the pilot
allowed the MA-1 to determine the successful fire and release point to ensure a
kill.
Anticipating interception of Soviet nuclear armed
bombers, the Douglas AIR-2A Genie nuclear tipped rocket was carried by
the F106A for destruction of such formidable targets in the first decade of the Six's
service. The typical Genie launch was carried out in a characteristic
looping maneuver that released the missile and allowed the Six to get as
far away from the anticipated blast as possible, so as to avoid being cremated
in the ensuing melee. Since the small but effective nuclear warhead of
the Genie did not require precise guidance to a direct hit, in order to
ensure destruction, the missile was guided to within a predetermined kill radius
of the warhead and summarily detonated Somewhat later, the effective but messy Genie
was retired from active use as the Soviet nuclear bomber threat diminished in
proportion to the growing Soviet intercontinental missile threat of the 70s.
Once an interception had been made and missiles released,
with the fast-acting bay doors snapped closed shortly after firing, the Six
was brought back to home base either under manual or fully automatic control via
the SAGE control center. If desired, the aircraft could be brought in, finalled,
flared and landed--all under automatic control and in full Category 3
conditions, if need be.
Back home, initial approach was flown at about 325 knots.
Break was carried out clean, rolling out on the downwind at about 1591 feet
altitude, with landing gear lowered at about 250 knots (gear retraction was
mandated on take off before reaching 280 KIAS to avoid damage, as acceleration
was so great with reheat that this was quite easy to exceed). Landing approach
speed of 180 knots was usual, and characteristic increased nose-high attitude
resulting from delta-wing speed bleed-off was easy to misjudge without prior
delta wing experience. Resultant loss of altitude could occur rapidly,
therefore, and airspeed and rate of descent were controlled largely by power
adjustment. Speed brakes (which also housed the drogue chute) were opened at any
point on final turn or approach. Power was then incrementally reduced after the
final roll out to reach ‘prior-to-flare’ speed, and then reduced to idle as
aerodynamic braking killed airspeed until the main gear wheels touched The drag
chute was deployed at touchdown and the nose was maintained at about 15 degrees
to further scrub speed until the nose-gear dropped on its own to the runway as
the aircraft slowed down.
Pilots reported that coming in hot across the end of the
runway at 180 knots was a source of some
Once off the active runway, the drag chute handle was
pressed fully home, which action released it, and a taxi back to the ramp
usually brought a gratifying feeling of great fulfillment to ‘Sixers’
in having once more flown a satisfying mission in this beautiful beast.
SOME FINAL COMMENTS:
Despite the level of sophistication found in the F106A
Delta Dart in its service life, it was regarded by the US Air Force as having
the ‘greatest mission-task loaded cockpit’ among all active USAF service
aircraft types flown in the 70s, and despite being an excellent aircraft to fly,
it required a competent and proficient pilot to wring every bit of its
excellence out of it. It was also a very complex and sophisticated aircraft for
its day, requiring a rather extensive and demanding ground service &
maintenance schedule. Much of this was attributable to the intricacies of the
complex Hughes MA-I fire control system that formed its heart and soul. Given
these requirements, however, it was a reliable, dependable, and deadly accurate
weapons platform with which to counter any conceivable threat of airspace
penetration. Above all the Six was an absolute joy to fly--truly a
pilot's airplane--and was loved by all who worked in or around it. It was
regarded with almost as much affection by those who maintained it (despite its
time-intensive nature) as by those who actually flew it.
Inevitably, though, as the years progressed, it was the
MA-I weapons navigation and control system, comprising the core of the aircraft,
which brought the career of this greatest of interceptor aircraft to an end By
today's standards the marvel that was the Hughes Aircraft Company MA-I system of
the late 50s, 60s, and 70s is now an obsolesced, archaic relic and it finally
became too burdensome to attempt to maintain the MA-1 systems in
repair....especially with the technologically advanced avionics systems being
brought into use on the newer generation F15 and F16 aircraft of today.
When the last F106A & B model
interceptors were retired from regular and ANG service between 1985 and 1988,
they were flown to the USAF’s AMARC depot and placed in storage. Most were
converted to remotely flyable QF-106 (man-rated) target drones and sent to
Tyndall and Holloman air force bases for use as target aircraft. Of the total of
340 A & 63 B models produced, about 230 were eventually converted to QF-106
target drone status by Tracor Flight Systems at Mojave Airport in California.
When the last target drone flight was completed at Tyndall AFB in 1997, there
were about two dozen unflyable QF-106s left in the area at Tyndall known as
‘The Swamp’. There were also about 7 flight-worthy Six survivors, all
of which were flown back to AMARC for storage, joining about 35 other Sixes
that had been designated as parts donors and kept at AMARC to support the ‘Pacer
Six’ program. As stated earlier, about 7 of the non-flying Sixes
left at Tyndall were sold (through DRMO) to David Tokoff’s GrecoAir in
El Paso Texas, where they are being restored for museum display. Two of the
QF-106 drones had been requisitioned for use in the ‘Delta Dragger’ reusable
towed space flight vehicle project at Dryden, designated ‘Project Eclipse’
(59-0130 and 59-0010). At the end of that program both were again flown back to
AMARC. Interestingly, a significant number of the last flyable Six drones
were former 5th FIS aircraft (including both 59-0130 and 59-0010).
Most of these few remaining examples of the ‘Ultimate Interceptor’ have now
found their way to air museums, via charge through US Air Force Museum
authority, and it pleases me to no end that one of my old Minot AFB 5th
FIS birds (59-0010) is now on its was to join our Sacramento McClellan Aviation
Museum Foundation (former McClellan AFB Air Museum) collection, as the ‘crown
jewel’ of our Century Series aircraft sub-collection. [Please see the
associated history of that amazingly lucky survivor of the ‘Sexy Six’
aircraft, described by some (myself included) appreciators as ‘The Class of
the Century Series’].
One other 5th FIS survivor that
is a particular favorite is 59-0003 (known as “Balls 3”, of course). Balls-3
was designated as a parts donor airframe many years ago and escaped the fate of
being used as a flying target; it was fortunate enough to find its way to the
PIMA Air & Space Museum in Tucson AZ (adjacent to AMARC), where is has
rested peacefully and undisturbed for the last 15 years on loan as part of the
PIMA collection. It has recently been officially handed over to PIMA once and
for all, and has now undergone the required ‘demil’ procedure that is today
required for all ex-military aircraft on loan to museums. It always gives me
great pleasure to visit PIMA and renew old times with Balls 3. Shortly,
however, we will have one of Balls-3’s stable-mates right here at our
McClellan Air Park, when 59-0010 arrives in March of 2005.
There was an old saying not long ago, spoken in reference to the Convair F-106 Delta Dart: “When you’re out of Sixes, you’re out of interceptors!” Pure air defense interceptors may now be relegated to aerospace history, but for many of us who served in the US Air Force during the ‘Cold War’ era, there will never be another aircraft quite like the ultimate progeny of Herr Doktor Professor Lippisch’s forward looking delta winged aircraft designs!
REFERENCES:
1. Mancus, Peter, "Red Alert: The
F106 and the Case for Manned Interceptors," Wings, June, 1981 (magazine
article).
2. (Author unknown), "Flying the
'Six" Air Force Magazine, October 1973 (magazine article).
3. Tokunaga, Katsuhiko, "Dart
Out," Koku Fan Magazine, (issue & date ?--magazine article) .
4. "The History of the Air Force
Flight Test Center," Chapter 15, July-December 1957, Vol 1.
(official USAF history publication,
Edwards Flight Test Center).
5. Gamble, Maj. Gen. Jack and Capt.
Patrick K. "Convair's Deadly Delta," USAF-USN Jet Fighters,
1988 (magazine article).
6. (Editors), "FANG: We Fly with
the Convair F106s of the Florida Air National Guard", Air Combat
Magazine, (1985?-magazine article).
7. Peacock, Lindsay, 'Aircraft
Illustrated’, (magazine article, date & issue unknown).
8. Detail & Scale Publications: "F102A
Delta Dagger" (illustrated book).
9. Detail & Scale Publications: "F106A
Delta Dart" (illustrated book).
10. Dabrouski, Hans-Peter, "Lippisch
P13A & Experimental DM-I," Schiffer Military History, Volume 67,
Atglen, Pennsylvania, 1990 (illustrated book).
11.USAF Technical Order 1F-106A-23,[List
of Manuals for F106A/B Aircraft.]
A. [T.O. 1F-106A-2-1 General Airplane.]
B. [T.O. 1F-106A-2-3 Hydraulic & Pneumatic
Power Systems.]
C. [T.O. 1F-106A-2-6 Air-condtioning, Anti-icing
and Oxygen Systems.]
D. [T.O. 1F-106A-01 List of Applicable
Publications.]
E. [T.O. 1F-106A-1 Flight Manual.]
F. [T.O. 1F-106A-CL-1-I Pilot's Checklist.]
G. [T.O. 1F-106B-543 Ejection Seat. Weber.]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ILLUSTRATIONS: (Detail drawings courtesy of Detail & Scale Publications, artist: Mendenhall)
CONVAIR XP-82 MOCK-UP

CONVAIR XF-92A

CONVAIR YF-102

CONVAIR F-102A

CONVAIR F-106A

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
AN ADC PILOT'S POSTSCRIPT:
[I
am privileged to have as a friend and associate, the 'near legendary' Col. Dick
"Taz" Stultz, who has over 3000 hours in the Six (and an almost
endless number of anecdotes and stories to tell about the F-106 and his years of
service flying Sixes with ADC and TAC). Dick, who was once known as the "Tazlangleyian
Devil", during his time with 48th FIS ("protectors of TAC"),
has a few choice
remarks to direct towards the common assumption that the Hughes
Aircraft Company MA-1 automatic weapons, navigation and targeting system could
fly the entire mission, from roll out, through interception, to landing,
without the intercessions of a pilot. A few of these remarks were directed by
"Taz" to the USAF Museum recently, in response to the assumption made
(in reference) about the automatic mission capabilities of the MA-1 system in a
USAFM article about the Six; they appear in part below. Dick was also,
among his many talents, an exceptional artist and cartoonist, whose creations
decorated many an ADC aircraft's nose. The picture below, originally appearing
in AIRtime Publications 'CENTURY JETS', was taken of Dick when he was flying
with the 48th FIS, back in the 70s; he has been seemingly caught 'en
flagrante delicto artisti' by the camera......]
"I put in 24 years in the AF, 23 flying, 3300 hours flying the F-106 and numerous assignments at NORAD/ADC/ADTAC dealing with the F-106 and its employment. The descriptive words in the article on the F-106 sounds like it was written by Hughes Aircraft in selling the airplane....The MA-1 NEVER had full control of the aircraft, which capability so many publications erroneously extol. The MA-1, using its data link target information or command information, would provide directives for altitude, airspeed, xyz coordinates and command directions, which would be flown by the autopilot, however, the MA-1 NEVER regulated the throttle at any time, for forward and aft movement, thus the MA-1 could never really fully control the airplane except to provide requested directions that required coupling and thrust selection by the pilot. The pilot HAD to take it off, climb, descend, and land the aircraft, every time!.. The challenge was to get the landings to equal the number of takeoffs! The F-106 proved its ultimate performance capabilities in providing aggressor "enemy" delta-wing familiarization training to the Navy's best pilots during the time they were implementing TOP GUN. The Navy jocks learned valuable lessons that the Delta winged 106 was almost unconquerable in the dogfight arena, with guns in the air-to-air environment, which you read so little about in the Navy publications. Wing loading of 43 lbs/sq ft and a .8 -1 TWT put it in a class of its own against the A4s, F-104s, F4B,C,D, F-105, F-100, F8 fighters of its time.....not to mention the many many '14s and '15s that blew engines in attempting to fight when it took them above 40,000 feet, to a guns-only environment. Good thing they finally fixed those great fighters to handle the altitudes the 106s formerly ruled.
"My prejudicial edits in blue to your article on the F-106.
"The F-106 uses a Hughes MA-1 electronic guidance and fire control system. After takeoff, the MA-1 can be given control (ONLY WHEN AND BY THE PILOT SELECTING AUTO) of the aircraft to fly it (EXCEPT THAT THE THROTTLE MUST BE MOVED BY THE PILOT) to the proper altitude and attack position. Then it can fire ( BUT ONLY IF THE PILOT SELECTS, ARMAMENT, SELECTS ARM, BREAKS THE SEALS, SEARCHES WITH THE RADAR, FINDS THE TARGET IN ALL WEATHER, USING THE ECCM OR ECCCM OR INFRARED SWITCHES TO ISOLATE THE TARGET, DETERMINES RANGE TO LOCK-ON, LOCKS ONTO THE TARGET, AND AGAIN, MOVES THE THROTTLE TO GET WHERE THE PROPER ALTITUDE IS, THEN...WHO???) Fires the Genie and Falcon missiles, break off the attack run, and return the aircraft to the vicinity of its base HI (Only IF the AIR2A DID NOT SET OFF THE DEAD MAN SWITCH IN THE 3 MEGATON EQUIPPED BEAR/BISON, A TRIP FROM WHICH THE AIRCRAFT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE ACCEPTED AT THE HOME BASE, WITH A RADIATED-DEAD PILOT IN AN AUTOMATICALLY FLOWN HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE AIRPLANE, TO A BASE THAT WAS PROBABLY A PRIMARY NUDET TARGET...). The pilot takes control again for the landing. (TOO LATE NOW!!! I AM BURNED!)
"The aircraft on display (S/N 58-0787) was involved in an unusual incident. ( NOT ALL THAT UNUSUAL FOR "ASS-EYES" TOM CURTIS or "GRINALOT" GARY FOUST, WHO LOST CONTROL OF THE AIRPLANE DURING AN ACT FLIGHT ABOVE 30,000 FEET ). During a training mission from Malmstrom AFB on February 2, 1970, it suddenly (NOT ALL THAT SUDDEN!) entered an uncontrollable flat spin forcing (ACTUALLY ASS-EYES, THE OPS OFFICER, ORDERED HIM) the pilot to eject. Unpiloted, the aircraft recovered on its own, apparently due to the balance and configuration changes (OLD NEWTON LAW SAY: "FOR EVERY ACTION THERE BE EQUAL AND OPPOSITE REACTION --- EJECTION SEAT WITH BIG GRINALOT FOUST SHOT BY ROCKET UP UP UP), caused by the ejection, and miraculously (GARY SAY HE TRY EVERYTHING, THROTTLE IDLE, STICK FORWARD NEUTRAL, TAKEOFF TRIM SET, STILL SEE WORLD GO AROUND AND AROUND, PULL HANDLES, EXIT UP, VERY FAST, AIRPLANE WITH HUGHES, MAGIC MA-1 "CAN FLY BY MYSELF" FLIGHT CONTROL SYSTEM TAKES OVER, NOSE GO DOWN DOWN DOWN) made a gentle belly landing in a snow-covered field near Big Sandy, Montana (HEADLINES NOT IN THE NEWS: BIG SMART, EXPENSIVE HUGHES MA-1 EQUIPPED SMART SYSTEM FORGETS TO PUT GEAR DOWN, LANDS WITHOUT GEAR?) . After minor (minor = AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL DAMAGE ONLY ENTIRE BELLY, CANOPY, TRAIN TRIP, 6 MONTHS AT MCCLELLAN - NO BIG MONEY CHARGE....MA-1 HUGHES-SMART-FLY-AIRPLANE-WITHOUT-PILOT-SYSTEM-NO-REPAIRS-NEEDED) repairs, the aircraft was returned to service. It last served with the 49th Fighter Interceptor Squadron before being brought (brought = MAYBE THAT MA-1 FLEW IT) to the Museum in August 1986 (BUT WAS IT DEMILLED?).
"Just my contribution to add color to the "history of airplanes without pilots."
-Dick Stultz, F-106 Pilot (who....."Fired simulated AIR2A in William Tell Competition without Operational MA-1!")
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Author's note: this paper originated as an oral presentation to the pilots of the Finnish Air Force's Satakunta Air Wing, 19 June 1995, made in the course of a visit to that organisation as a guest of the Finnish Defense Research Establishment. It was also prepared in a written and illustrated format for distribution to Finnish Air Force personnel at that time and has been updated slightly to reflect the final disposition of US Air Force Convair F-106 aircraft at the end of their long term of service as front-line interceptor aircraft. Illustration/diagramatic drawings courtesy of Detail & Scale Publications; artist: Mendenhall).
(Photographs of the Convair XP-92 concept proposal mock-up, courtesy of Convair Division, General Dynamics Corp).
[For a history of ex-5th FIS F-106A 59-0010, currently in the Aerospace Museum of California's aircraft collection, dial up the following link: F-106A 59-0010--ex 5th FIS & Project Eclipse aircraft. ]