F-106 Delta Dart - The Unexpected Story - Part 4

The F-106 Delta Dart is one of the most beautiful planes ever built, and it has a special place in the history of American aeronautics. In this 4th and final episode of the series about the first delta wings in American service, we go through its incredible story.
A particular thanks goes to the web site www.f-106deltadart.com/ that opened its enormous photographic archive to me. You guys rock! Without you, this video would be way less interesting!
#F-106 #Delta #DeltaDart
Support me on Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/millenn...
Support me on Patreon / millennium7
----------------------------
Ask me anything!
Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below!
tinyurl.com/y4g528lt
--------------------
Visit the subreddit!
/ millennium7lounge
---------------------
All images and additional video segments contained in the Thumbnails and/or B-roll segments are used in strict compliance with the appropriate permissions and licenses required from the source and in accordance with the KZbin Partner Program, Community guidelines & KZbin terms of service.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Support me on Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/millennium-7-history-technology Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7 ---------------------------- Ask me anything! Take part to the community Q&A clicking the link below! tinyurl.com/y4g528lt

[@jeffcormack4718]

Pp

[@johnbeaulieu2404]

How come no mention of the Douglas F4D Skyray or the F5D Skylancer . Admittedly the Skylancer never progressed beyond the four prototypes, but 419 of the F4D were produced for the US Navy.

[@erik5549]

I reviewed my hand-held, front seat solo video flying with other f-106s. I have more than 400 MB of footage. No audio but I guess I could re-narrate it interested. GL

[@Leptospirosi]

There is an error here: Only the AIM4D , which the Delta Dart didn't use, were limited to direct hits: both the AIM-4F and AIM-4G had proximity fuses. The AIM-4D was in fact a heavily stripped down revision to allow the Phantom to shoot the missile. The F4D and E were in fact completely lacking the sophisticated cooling system of the F106, which required even less coolant for a faster response, and which completely removed the problem with the coolant running out after a few minutes in the AIM 4 seeker. The highly sophisticated firing system of the F-106 was in fact capable to lock the target via radar, activate the missile without operating it on the seeker coolant, transmit the data to the seeker and allow it to instantly lock on the intended target as soon ans the weapon's bay was opened, using the internal AIM4 coolant only for keeping it operational during it's flight to the target. The addition of the IR retractable sensor also had the function to lock the missile seeker at the target on a very short range, like usual in a dogfight, before firing it. The critics of Col. Robin Olds to the AIM4D in vietnam were in fact all faults of the plane limitations

[@colinw7205]

In college I joined Air Force ROTC program in the late '70's so I can fly the F-106 in particular. Most cadets dreamed of becoming TAC pilots with the then new F-15's and F-16's coming on line. But I wanted to be an ADC pilot and defend the homeland. Bad grades and 20/40 eyesight in my left eye put an end to that dream. But I did get a field trip to Tyndall AFB in Florida home to the ADC Interceptor Training School though. Got a little simulator time (not a full motion sim, in fact no motion). God the Six was so beautiful! They looked like they were going Mach 2 just sitting on the tarmac.

[@ConvairDart106]

You can tell by my handle, that I loved her too! Let me explain why. I was a fresh fireman right out of Chanute AFB, when I was stationed at McChord AFB, where the 318th FIS flew the darts. The first time I saw them, was during a scramble for a UFO, not the ones from space, but something flying inbound off the west coast without clearance. We were called out to the runway to standby. I saw a pair of them down at the far end, begin their takeoff roll.Tthey went gear up and accelerating while flying level at about 50 feet. Then they lit the burners and as they flew by about 100 yards away, I stuffed my fingers in my ears as they went by as the noise was deafening! Only sex has ever gotten me more excited! The day was gloomy and overcast with a ceiling of 800 feet. They then pulled up into a steep climb in formation, and disappeared into the clouds. As I stood there with my mouth wide open, came the twin sonic booms as they went ballistic. It has been my favorite jet ever since. One other thing not mentioned here, was it's ability to "supercruise" long before the F-22 Raptor. They could go to mach 1.5, and pull it out of burner, and sustain that for 500 miles! I believe it was Bruce Gordon, who said that when flying next to F-4's carrying an external weapons load, (massive amount of drag) they would race back to base after an exercise, and leave the Phantoms far behind. This is also why they were said to "get there the fastest, with the mostest! Here is an interesting read for you. theaviationgeekclub.com/did-you-know-the-f-106-supercruised-before-the-f-22-former-six-pilots-explain-why-the-delta-dart-was-the-perfect-bomber-interceptor/

[@michaeledlin9995]

Stationed at Tyndall 80-86

[@mathewcaldwell2945]

The best looking plane ever.

[@magoid]

For those interested on the operational side of the F-106, there is as YT channel from a former Dart pilot, Bruce Gordon. He was a F-100, F-102 and F-106 pilot. In his channel he shares lots of info on the operation of the F-106, like the performance of the Falcon missiles (very good), his practical advantages in range and acceleration over the F-4, among other things.

[@magoid]

My favorite anecdote he told, unfortunately not on video but on the comments, was during a tour in South Korea on the F-106. On a exercise involving Phantoms, one of his wingmen dove on a F-4 that was penetrating the protected area at ground (sea?) level. Since the Dart came from above, it was much faster. To show a "kill" to the intercepted aircraft, he was supposed to pass on the opponent side so the crew could see him and confirm they were intercepted. But because he build too much energy on the dive, he cut-off the engine and extended the air-brakes so the F-4 crew could had time to see him and confirm the "kill". So after the exercise at the airbase mess hall the crew of the intercepted Phantom were there and manage to talk to him. They said the F-106 pilot was showing off because "we were at full speed and he passed us with his air-brakes opened".

[@lycossurfer8851]

Yeah, Mr. Gordon has some great stuff. I hope someone gets in touch with him too see this series.

[@williamampuero2841]

SAGE will be a very interesting watch. My Father worked at "The Block House" at Luke AFB way back . I remember going inside this HUGE building that was the computer system and walking down the ailse of huge racks of thousands and thousands of Tubes. It was so SCI-FI to me. great memories.

[@willc1294]

Was the computer called multivac? 😉

[@gort8203]

Very nice video. Fighter development during the era of the Century Series fighters is sadly often overlooked these days. Could you please do a supplemental video with more detail on the wing of this airplane? I would love to hear more about how the pronounced camber near the tips is reconciled with the usual desire of a thin symmetrical airfoil in supersonic flow.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Interesting suggestion

[@robertl606]

Sir, I have to say what I most enjoy about your channel is that you do a great job covering aircraft that most people seem to have forgotten. Keep up the great work.

[@AlphaWhiskey_Haryo]

salute to the research, especially for this particular airplane. this airplane is one of the rarest topic in youtube.

[@shadowgunner69]

Nicely done. Almost identical to the presentation I give at our local air museum. I crew an F-106 there. Some of the photos used here were mine via the F-106 website. Good job.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Great to know that I got it right! Which photos are yours?

[@shadowgunner69]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech The IRST photo is mine. The photo of the wingtip, intake and the anti collision light may be mine also. Regardless, the aircraft is the one that I crew; 590086. I share your passion for this aircraft. Not as a criticism of your excellent video, but adding information: The F-106 was not as fully automated as most descriptions state. The pilot is usually portrayed as "along for the ride". In fact, due to Nuclear weapon release protocols, the MA-1/SAGE system was unable to deploy and launch the Genie without human intervention. This is an often overlooked detail. In order to launch the Genie, electro-mechanical safeguards were incorporated into the cockpit. In order to select the Genie, the Armament Selector Switch had to be physically unblocked to rotate the switch. This would break lead seals that armament personnel would safety wire to the switch ( I was an armament technician). This was to provide notice of tampering. There was also a Circuit Breaker that had to be closed to provide power to the rack. Once selected, the pilot would have to unlock the Genie's rack by flipping a switch to operate an electrically driven safety pin to unsafe the mechanisms. the MA-1 system was able to provide a launch solution for the simple timing system, but the pilot was absolutely necessary as a Nuclear Weapon safeguard. The pilot also was required to operate the trigger and track switches to enable the MA-1 System to launch the missiles. The MA-1 was an advanced system that had years of teething problems; all corrected by conversion to solid state electronics. The F-106 that performed the flyoff against the F-4 was disadvantaged by an MA-1 system that had not been tuned up. The F-4 had radar that was not significantly better than the F-106. The F-4 radar had longer range, but wasn't designed to take advantage of the SAGE System's capabilities. The F-106 in full combat configuration had longer unrefueled range with near super cruise speed than the F-4. Two factors that made it superior for reaching the Arctic Circle for intercepts. Also another factoid from a fellow sixer: Also, the pilot had to lock on to the target prior to weapons selection and arming of those weapons. The target may be ECM, Chaff and flare equipped making the F-106 pilot use his superior Electronic Counter Countermeasures to achieve lock on of the target. The main ECCM Feature of the F-106 MA-1 system was it's inclusion of the Rapid Tune Magnetron ( RTM ), known as "the Maggie". The Maggie could slide through radar frequencies exceedingly fast, rendering the target's ECM, pointless. And the main secondary ECCM Feature being the IRST ( Infra Red Search and Track ) seeker head. Genie blast radius was 1500 feet or 457 meters. Do not take these factoids as criticism please. You are welcome to delete my comment if it is inappropriate. I call it the best airplane no one heard of.

[@sidv4615]

@@shadowgunner69 have you seen Bruce Gordon's video on the F-106? He also mentioned the rapid Tune magnetron at the end. Regardless the F106 was a beautiful aircraft. By the way do you share Robin olds hatred of the Genie?

[@kevinkilleen6375]

Thank you for explaining the air intake shock problem and solution. I like the way you explain control of the shock waves and air flow on the different parts of the body and engine.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Glad you liked it!

[@mosca3289]

So much info packed in and so well told. Thanks 👍🏻

[@darveshzamindar]

Yet another wonderful video 👍. Keep going....

[@billkunert7281]

I worked on F 102 fire control and F 101B fire control and the 101B was a really decent aircraft and the MG13 FCS was an improvement on the MG10A/AT FCS. You should cover the 101B sometime. The 106A with the weapons bay mounted gatling gun performed well enough that it could have beaten the F 4E in combat because of it's superior turn rate.

[@chucksdesk]

Thankyou for the episodes on the F102/F106

[@bret9741]

Wonderful memories for me. Thank you. I grew up on a large ranch in New Mexico near Holloman AFB. Our ranch was on the mountain range just to the east. Anyway during WW2 AND during the Korean and Vietnam the US Government used Eminent Domain to take private land. We were fortunate and owned all the land, water and mineral rights. Because of this we had a stronger claim. However a lot of land owners owned BLM lands and the government simply came in and took the land for about 1/3 it’s value…. a very sad story for some folks. Anyway by the time I was born, most of the families affected were gone and I just saw their abandoned homes, barns, livestock water tanks etc. An interesting fact that most people don’t believe without seeing it was how much better the land was with livestock (goats, sheep and cattle) eating and living on it. Our grasses, brush and even invasive plants were almost non existent. The goats, sheep and cattle have different eating patterns. Goats kept the small woody brushes and trees cleaned up. The sheep are grasses on the mountain sides and valley while the cattle ate grasses, brush and weeds in the valleys, plains and hillsides. It really was a beautiful area. If your interest look at the mountains just East of Alamogordo NM online. So by the time I came along in the 60’s New Mexico was one big military training and military scientific, research and development area. On a daily basis I got to see what US and even foreign aircraft were taking part of training exercises. The Germans spent a lot of time training in the US. In the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s and 90’s military aircraft practiced low level flying through the mountain passes all over NM and the western USA. It was common to have fighters flying lower than I was while on horseback rounding up or driving livestock. The most common aircraft were F-4’s, F-111’s, T-38, F-5’s rarely B-1’s and only once B-52. Back through the 70’s, the military broke the sound barrier daily, sometime hourly. Often we would have 2-10 loud booms occurring within 4-10 seconds. It broke windows occasionally and we could submit requests for reimbursement when we repaired the windows. The white sands missile range was very active, we would see the smoke trails of missiles launcher and we sometimes would see the intercept and explosion of the unmanned aircraft or drone. I loved to go to the air Shows in El Paso or Lubbock Texas. The F-106 were almost always represented with a pair of planes and the pilots. In the 70’s the F-106 was still very much in use. Younger people will never fully appreciate how massive the US Navy and Air Force was up until 1995. When I was in the Navy, we had 16 Aircraft Carriers a fleet of nuclear cruisers (about 600 active duty ships). The Air Force had 4x more fighters and bombers with 900,000 active Air Force personnel and almost 1,000,000 civilian employees working on bases and or supporting services. Today the Air Force has less than 325,000 active personnel and the number of fighters and bonnets is 1/4 that of the 1960’s. To even better understand how much smaller the impact of the military is today, there have been five rounds of base closures: 1988, 1991, 1993, 1995, and 2005. From 1988 until today the US has closed nearly 500 bases in the U.S. alone. The point of my rambling is the F-102 and F-106 were a part of something so massive and unprecedented in history. WW2 ended and a Cold War began that drove innovation. Think about it. My paternal grandfather was born in 1889. Basically for 99% of the people in this world prior to 1880 lived pretty much like the people since the beginning. Life was hard. Children died frequently and mothers died often in child birth. Wars… well most wars saw disease, hunger and infected injuries kill far more than the fighting! My grandfather died at almost 100 years of life! He literally went from traveling by horse or foot to traveling on airliners that could take him from El Paso Texas to Asia in less than a day!!!!! The F-102 with all its faults was simply amazing considering the fact that just 10 years earlier the P-47 / P-51 were cutting edge technologies.

[@erik5549]

Very well done and better informed that I was when I flew them. Our paint scheme (84th FIS) was the best. I REALLY enjoyed dogfighting with the F-106. It was like cheating...

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Do you have any episode you would like telling? Or maybe would you be available for an interview?

[@erik5549]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech Yes I do, and even better I have about 25 minutes of unauthorized, choreographed and edited film from the cockpit! email [e-mail]

[@shadowgunner69]

I was 84th at Hamilton and Castle. Weapons Shop, one of the best squadrons I worked in.

[@erik5549]

@@shadowgunner69 Tail number 115 was mine. As you know, individual plane varied widely and 115 was one of the best.

[@rickwagoner5316]

Gregory - Gotta agree about the paint scheme and patch. I was at Hamilton & Castle 71-80 (MA1 flight-line and Mock-up) Not sure if we ever met, but I know I CND'd some of your write ups! ;-)

[@danstinson7507]

A perfect follow-on to this series would be one on the B-58 Hustler, the Dart's bigger brother.

[@ccarlley]

The most gorgeous aircraft ever made for sure

[@bernarrcoletta7419]

Back when I was in college, Northrop was trying to sell the F-20. They were looking at the interceptor mission because they had an exclusive license on the ring laser gyro. It was the only plane that could scramble in a similar time as the F-106.

[@GaryMCurran]

I'm not sure I would call your comment about scramble times accurate. When were were at Langley AFB in Va., we have First Fighter at the base, with the relatively new F-15. First Fighter was the first squadron to go operational with the F-15. As an evaluation, they put two -Sixes and two Eagles in the alert barn. Yes, the -Sixes did get out a little faster, but only by a minute or so. When both airplanes are prepped and ready to go, there wasn't that much of a difference. I doubt the difference would have been much greater with a -4 or any other jet.

[@goodbonezz1289]

Great video..really like your style!

[@yanktornado5121]

I’m going Recommending Bruce Gordon’s book “Spirit of Attack” also. It’s an in depth story of a 106 pilot and what it was like to be on high alert in those days. He was one of the few selected to prove the 106 could indeed dog fight if necessary with the best of them and helped train. Great read.

[@GaryMCurran]

In the mid to late 1970s, I operated and maintained an F-106 flight simulator training device at Langley Air Force Base at Hampton Rhodes, Virginia with the 48th Fighter-Interceptor Squadron. The -Six was a great airplane. We had two on constant alert status, and we'd scramble 2-4 times per week for escort duty. The Russians would fly TU-95 Bears from Russia to Cuba routinely, and they'd pick them up out of Iceland. They'd get escorted by Iceland, Greenland, Nova Scotia, and then ADCOM would pick them up around Maine, and they'd get escort by both F-4 and F-106. We'd pick them up from our sister squadron out of New Jersey, and then hand them off to our Detachment in South Carolina, and eventually they'd get handed off to a squadron out of Jacksonville, Florida. Then, when the bombers came back from Cuba, we'd pick them up just in reverse. Not that I'd ever get to fly a mission, but the pilots would talk about how loud the Bears were, and they could be sitting off the wings a couple of hundred yards, in a jet fighter with their helmets on, and the prop noise from the Bears was still loud in their cockpits. I can't imagine what it must have been like in the Bear!

[@charlestaylor253]

Ah yes, not many people in the West have heard the legendary roar of the Bear. 8 4-bladed turbine powered propellers counter-rotating at supersonic speed makes you wonder just how many Tu-95 pilots and aircrew have been discharged from the Soviet Air Force over the decades due to hearing problems alone!...😬

[@pdutube]

No expense should be spared to get one of the sixes into a civilian flight display program. I absolutely need to see an F-106 fly in my lifetime. I was a kid when they were flying out of Otis AFB and I never got to see one!

[@rogersmith7396]

I used to see the Montana ANG plane at Richards Gebauer air shows. It was immaculate. Better than new looking.

[@coreyandnathanielchartier3749]

I really enjoy your videos. Lots of little details, an unbiased presentation. On another note, I've experienced the discomforting sensation of having a door pop open on a Cessna 172.....I can't imagine how it would feel to have your canopy disappear on a '6' at 500 knots!

[@charlestaylor253]

Talk about a "red eye" flight! 😏

[@sorryociffer]

The tandem seat 106 is a drop dead sexy aircraft....

[@ThomisticAmerican13FOX]

Great use of charts!

[@edgarblumenfeld9479]

Nobody called them "The Dart", they were referred to as "The Six".

[@couchfighter]

lol I know an old fella that called it both of those things depending on the context...lol

[@user-pk2fg8im4u]

Worked on both Convairs, the "deuce" and the "six". From '69 to '75. They were awesome.

[@dukeford8893]

What Jack Broughton wrote about the original "bobsled" ejection seat was incorrect: there were plenty of successful ejections with the supersonic seats right from the start, but also some rather gruesome unsuccessful ones. The replacement zero-zero seat worked very well.

[@Idahoguy10157]

I’d like to hear a comparison between the interception abilities of the F-102, the F-106 and the F-4. Also compared to the design specifications of the AVRO Arrow

[@fieldlab4]

The "6" would run rings around the crappy F-4. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqmokp6Zj8Zpndk

[@EDCandLace]

Without a doubt... No comparison in the intercept role between the F4 and 106. If the interception role still existed today... Newer variants of the F106 would likely still exist. It was an amazing aircraft and handled its job superbly. The design and engineering of the 106 created one of the sexist and highest preforming aircraft of its day. Still to this day its performance specs are amazing.

[@fieldlab4]

The freaking US military avoids superior designs like the plague because they would only order half the number of planes due to less obsolescence. F-107, XF-8U Crusader III, F-23. Amazing that even the Navy didn't pick these far better planes up.

[@rogersmith7396]

106 had no external bomb racks. F 4 did. End of story. They then bought F 111. Even though they had B 58. Your tax dollars at work. Navy always wanted twin engines which is somewhat reasonable. Don't know why F 35.

[@rogersmith7396]

Bruce Gordon says the F 106 missles work just fine. Maybe a pilot problem.

[@edmundscycles1]

You should talk to the guy that does "Spirit of attack" , search on KZbin. He flew f106 in the 60's and even fought in vietnam .

[@eduardocharlier7560]

I was gonna say that, that's another wonderful channel

[@edmundscycles1]

@@eduardocharlier7560 I love watching him . The one of fighter maneuvers is fantastic

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I e-mailed him before starting the series but I never got a reply, unfortunately. Happy to do an addendum if anyone shows up.

[@patrickmcgee9910]

Bruce Gordon - Spirit of Attack. Also visit our F-106 Delta Dart Facebook page at facebook.com/groups/369820889709561/ Cheers www.f-106deltadart.com

[@rogersmith7396]

@@Millennium7HistoryTech He likes selling books. Hes also a bit of a jar head.

[@Sir_Godz]

makes a good drone sums it up accurately

[@afterburner94]

The polite jab at the F-35 manufacturing debacle got me to chuckle, ngl.

[@rogersmith7396]

Hey, its the Air Force. The real travesty is B 21.

[@deweywatts8456]

Your good annnd... I'm subscribing.

[@leoarc1061]

Can you make or have you made a video dedicated to supersonic flow? (i.e. how the flow interacts with the shockwaves). There is a lot of misconceptions on KZbin and in literature alike regarding how the flow behaves after passing through shockwaves of different types. Thank you very much for your wonderful educational content.

[@petter5721]

Nice video 👍🏻 Would be interesting if you did a video about the Draken fighter. Fist flown in 1955...

[@gragrn]

Probably the best plane that never saw combat, still gorgeous after all these years!

[@marioshadjikyriacou3381]

Don't be so sure! Two of those jets of Turkish air force, have been shot down from two Greek F5's in 1974, when tension between those countries was on top due to Turkish invasion in Cyprus

[@goUkraine]

@@marioshadjikyriacou3381 The Turks had F-102As, not F-106A Delta Darts. Get your planes right! The F-106A was NEVER EVER exported.

[@adenilsonsouzaaguiar5981]

muito bom o canal , sou do Brasil

[@Raptorman0909]

The 106 was and is one of my favorite aircraft of all time.

[@colinw7205]

Mine Too.

[@BBitri]

Ahhaahah i was just leaving when you said "stop there"

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😆😆

[@michelbrown1060]

The C-105 Arrow on it's 2 nd flight reached Mach 1,98 still climbing, still acceleratind. . .In 1956. .

[@parrotraiser6541]

I bet the 106's pilots loved their role as parking valets and back-up systems. Using nuckear weapons for air-defence over your own territory is a bit like usiing hand grenades for home defence.

[@Kevlar67476]

You know nothing

[@rogersmith7396]

See Gordons shoot down of a hypersonic BOMARC missle.

[@charlestaylor253]

Trivia: Several F-106's were scrambled and were in pursuit of the Boeing 727 hijacked by the enigmatic D.B. Cooper in 1972. 😎

[@bret9741]

When you consider this aircraft was flying less than 20 years after ww2... the end product was quite incredible but... the F-4 ultimately was a better rounded platform for the direction warfare was heading. Regardless the F-106 still outperforms many fighter aircraft today on range and speed.

[@bret9741]

@William Mulvaney well… we still intercept bombers and even fighters today. The F-15 and F-22 perform this frequently in Alaska and with increasing frequency on the East Coast. The Navy uses the F-18 as an interceptor every day somewhere in the world. I think ICBM’s reduced, not eliminated the need for Bombers to fly deep penetration nuclear bombing runs. Today, China, Russia, and the US still use nuclear armed bombers as part of their nuclear “Triad”. The difference is they are launching stand-off hypersonic and subsonic stand-off nuclear weapons when in that nuclear role. If you look at Norway, Sweden, England, and even Germany routinely use interceptors that also have a ground attack capability. The Eurofighter is primarily and interceptor / fighter that is being further developed/ modified to carry air to ship and air to ground munitions. The F-106 was truly a remarkable aircraft for what it was designed to do. It was even successful at ground attack having a similar loss rate as the P-47 and P-51 in WW2… that is 1 loss per every 30-40 missions flown.

[@konsum949]

Could u please make a video about the J-35 SAAB draken, a double delta fighter with a astonishing long operational time, and a interesting radio system for recieving orders from ground control as early as First half of 1970! A very very interesting design of SAAB!

[@marioluizandradecosta3241]

F 106 foi um excelente dogfigther.

[@johnstuckey2384]

Great video, so how many F-106 are still at the bone yard?

[@VectorGhost]

its seriously disappointing we didnt further develop this plane into the F106X or the 106C

[@rogersmith7396]

The SAGE system was tube based. It weighed a ton and required its own generator on board. Tubes will drift. Gordon describes how he got good results by correcting for the drift. Tubes were obsolete by the mid 60s. Only recently with stealth have they become interested in getting rid of external weapons again. See B 36 for real early tube ECM. Amazing.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

The F-106 suffered first from the delay of entry into service caused not by avionics, but from pushing the envelope on electronics. Second was that the threat for which the F-106, F-108 and Arrow had been designed to counter, didn't exist and wouldn't exist. The day of the strategic bomber as a nuclear delivery system was fading in the early 1960s with the rise of the ICBMs. And the Soviet threat that was to exist in the early 1960s, the large formations of supersonic strategic bombers never came to be. The U-2 was the factor that confirmed that the threat had been over-estimated, a lot of which had been mirror-imaging. There was no need for the F-108 or the Arrow or the thousand F-106 fighters planned. The designs were straight forward all-weather long range multi-mach interceptors that were no longer valid in a world where "Flexible Response" had become the US strategy, not "Massive Retaliation". Fighters like the F-4 which could perform multiple missions including bomber interception were far more valuable. Possibly if the F-106 had not relied on bomber-killer missiles like the AIM-4, AIM-26 and AIR-2 and had been modified as an air superiority fighter and interceptor able to carry two or three AIM-47 or a load of Sparrows and Sidewinders, it could have continued in production, maybe even flourished as a "MiG killer". But the USAF was now not the premier service and its budget was cut to fund the conventional forces of the US Army and Navy. It could not afford a modified F-106 and F-4s.

[@ConvairDart106]

They are called missiles, and not hittiles, that is why you always fire two!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😂😂😂

[@AvroBellow]

The Genie, a nuclear unguided rocket designed to shoot down another plane. This is called "Almost a good idea". Hey, what could go wrong, right? We had the Genie in the RCAF on our CF-101 Voodoos because we were too stupid to not keep the CF-105 Arrow.

[@michelbrown1060]

very sad ending for f-106. . 😪

[@trancamortal]

All I have read from pilots us praise for the plane and the whole system, both as interceptor and as a dogfighter

[@rogersmith7396]

Said to be a joy to fly. See Cornfield Bomber at Wright Pat.

[@samsquach3799]

USAF ADC SAGE 1970 We had about 15 minutes to live before an ICBM took us out. All that hardware was just a deterrent.

[@urban3921]

You say that the -4F was at the rear, but all photos show the IR guided -4G at the rear. I don't know why, but if I guess it might be because the rails extend faster than they retract so a salvo of all four might be faster that way.

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I might have mixed the 2 in the script, actually

[@nicholasmaude6906]

In regards to the F-106's ejection-seat Convair should've just bit the bullet and equipped the aircraft with licence produced Martin-Baker ejection-seats just like what the US Navy did. On another note the AIM-26A nuclear Falcon was derived from the AIM-4 Falcon not the other way around also it's a pity that the F-106 wasn't adapted to fire the Sidewinder including the AIM-9C radar-guided variant as the Sidewinder was a far better design than the Falcon.

[@Leptospirosi]

Absolutely false: in 1962 the hit rate of the falcon was superior that of the Sidewinder in every test, when conducted with the proper airplane. The real problem, confirmed by an F106B pilot was that the F4D and E were completely lacking the complex fire system of the F106 and was shooting on a Korea style let all in the hands of the missile. All the complains of Col Olds about the Aim-4D were in fact related to the plane's fault. What the F106 was doing is actively cooling seeker of the F4F and G (it did not carried the D in fact) until the tracking could pass to the missile and be fired: this avoided the whole hassle of waking up the seeker on the missile, and having just a few minutes before the cooler run out. This is also the reason because the IT sensor was later added to the plane: It cut the time for getting track of a target compared to the radar lock and allowed an even faster response from the Aim-4F. BTW, only the AIM4D was limited to a direct hit solution: both the Aim-4F and G were in fact equipped with proximity fuses. The Aim-4D used on the Phantom was in fact an attempt to make the missile work on an inferior tracking system no better then that of the one on a Sabre or a Super Sabre and it never had any problem being successfully adapted except for the phantom (Draken). In the end, the Falcon was a great weapon, superior in may ways to the Sidewinder B, but to hide the limitation of the Phantom firing system, the USAF blamed the missile. Point is that during Red flag, even deep in the eighties, the AIM 4 armed Darts were regularly slaughtering their Phantom opponents equipped with Sparrows and Sidewinders. It took the F15A to bring the F106 out of service.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

building in concurrency didnt work out in the 1950s either? who could have guessed that "more updates" were needed. savage ;)

[@russvoight1167]

5th FIS, Spitten Kittens. Minot AFB ND

[@magoid]

19:18 Wasn't the Phantom acquired by the USAF because McNamara was pushing for equipment commonality among the services?

[@Mungobohne1]

Was also thinking this

[@MajinOthinus]

One reason doesn't exclude the other.

[@mitchellsmith4690]

Yes..USAF was opposed.

[@rogersmith7396]

Well they were using the F 105 as tactical and it was pretty obsolete. Lots shot down in Nam. F 104 no good. Bribe the Germans to take them, many deaths. Gordon was flying Super Sabers in Nam and speaks highly of them.

[@TLTeo]

With all the 3rd gen aircraft being turned into aggressors, I wonder whether one could do the same with those stored F106s. If private firms can stick AESA radars in Mirage F1s and buy the entire Australian Legacy Hornet fleet, why not?

[@fieldlab4]

Amazing and thorough background on this obscure but historic fighter. I have been around these planes but never knew most of what you found out about them. Very good and thorough work. The "6" would run rings around the crappy F-4. kzbin.info/www/bejne/jqmokp6Zj8Zpndk A couple of other interesting planes from that era that will be full of surprises upon research would be the B-58 and the XF8U Crusader III, not to mention the A-12. Also the A-5 Viliante. A more modern plane with a story that is likely still frustratingly classified is F-23 black widow.

[@nicholasmaude6906]

There were supposed have been 1,000 F-106As produced not the ~330 that were made in the in and the design could've been upgraded especially with the radar that was developed for the F-15.

[@jeanvaljean9293]

It's start to be boring ! you're work is great as usual ! I don't get to complain ... at all ;)

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

😆😆😆

[@Karl-Benny]

Sweden Made the Draken similar time but Mach 2

[@guyfleetwood8004]

What happens when you add a stealth plane and electronic warfare against a ground target?

[@davy1458]

I used to fly these in my imagination.....just like all the times I flew f14 tomcats with Tom cruise.

[@rogersmith7396]

Goose, I thought you were dead!

[@oleksandraverchenko9920]

The only downside is there is no part 5.

[@lubbas72]

When was the first J79 engine put on a flying aircraft?

[@gort8203]

@Gort Just to add, the F-106 was powered by the P&W J-75 rather than the J-79. They had similar thrust in AB. The GE was lighter but the Pratt had better specific fuel consumption. It also powered the F-105, heaviest single engine fighter ever built.

[@lancerevell5979]

The J75 also powered variants of the U2 Dragon Lady. She was subsonic, but sure could climb like a scalded ape!

[@gort8203]

@@lancerevell5979 Without the afterburner of course. I've been told that the version of the J-75 used in the U-2 was essentially de-tuned to produce max continuous or 'normal' thrust at full throttle rather than military thrust. This provided more than ample thrust at low altitudes, and allowed the pilot to simply push the throttle to the stop for takeoff and leave it there for much of the flight, climbing ever higher as fuel burned off.

[@garyyoung4074]

​@@gort8203 Just saw this video. It's good. But have to say the highest thrust rating of a J79 was 17,800lbs on the Phantom. The P+W J75 was rated up to 29,500lbs in the Super Crusader had it been built. The version in the six was 24,500 and it still claims the single engine speed record at 1,525mph. The J79 was smaller.

[@gort8203]

@@garyyoung4074 You're right. I made that comment so long ago I can't remember what I was looking at. It couldn't have been the J-79. Perhaps I made a typo. Now a mystery.

[@papaburger]

F-106 vs F-16 in dogfight ... who will win ?

[@lavaljeantet]

Hello, could you post one day some technical comments on the UK 6th gen TEMPEST mock-up which seems so unappropriate for supersonic cruise and low drag. It's a FAKE....do you agree ?

[@KATAERO1]

Do you know why canard-delta configuration has never gained popularity with both the Americans and the Russians?

[@jeanvaljean9293]

Russia was for it in the 90-2000 but no money to get it from demonstrator to real program. the only us plane that was made in the same time was the F18SH that was a derivative of the F18h. after the beginning of the 2000 the canard were not stealthy enough to be implemented on a US plane. Russians have developed the levcon, a "canard" body plending on the SU57. Levcon have the same goal as the canard on the rafale or gripen to control vortex, (not the EF), as the name stays for Leading Edge Vortex CONtroller, it actes as canards+apex. All of this reaming stealth. So basically it's a question of timing.

[@KATAERO1]

@Gort I see! However, the wing of the F-16 or Mig-29 is basically a delta wing, isn't it?

[@KATAERO1]

@@jeanvaljean9293 I see! And how do I find out more information about the F-18 SH?

[@jeanvaljean9293]

@@KATAERO1 google is your friend ;) if you don't find anything, give yours questions I'll try to answer as best as possible.

[@KATAERO1]

@@jeanvaljean9293 Thank you in advance, my friend!

[@jimharris5616]

Wrong info on the gun.

[@sarveshdahiya6645]

#1 TO COMMENT sir says whatever you see here is not easy to find anywhere on youtube let me make your job easy defence decode guy amit r kashap literally gives very deep and detailed knowledge anyone can ever imagine nearly a scientist level i have no reason to promote him beside he belongs to my country but before you watch him be sure to learn hindi 😂😂😂😂😂

[@thetreblerebel]

The F106 had a longer combat radius than the F4

[@dennissmith6783]

but the F4 could carry a bunch of bombs

[@thehillbillygamer2183]

They have 106 should have been sent to Vietnam as a dog fighter because the phantom sucked the phantom 2 it was a sucky dogfighter was a s***** dog fighter if they could have sent that 106 over there that would have been the Lord think of it in Korea

[@philliplow5379]

Get rid of the metric! This is not5 a forum for social engineering.