F-102 & F-106 - The American Deltas - Long Format - All Episodes

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Support me on Subscribestar www.subscribestar.com/millennium-7-history-technology Support me on Patreon www.patreon.com/Millennium7

[@aristeidislykas7163]

Minute 17:00 So if we use forward -swept wings this kind of drag is lessened?

[@aristeidislykas7163]

Minute 57:00 Did you mean "Devil's Tower"? I could find no info on F-106s stored at Devil's Tower or Devil;s Mountain.

[@rahmansetiawan6052]

you forget the best variant, convair f2y sea dart 😯

[@dougelick8397]

The F-106 is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful aircraft ever built.

[@andreabindolini7452]

Also the only aircraft that I find far more attractive in the two-seat version that in the single-seat.

[@bjjace1]

And that in thrashed the Avrow Arrow

[@dougalachi]

B-57 wants to know your location.

[@Karl-Benny]

@@andreabindolini7452 No the SAAB DRAKEN

[@guaporeturns9472]

@@dougalachijoke..right?

[@richarddeveas4537]

I grew uo around the F-102 and F-106. My father was in the ANG. I remember more than once going out on the tarmac to help recover the drogue from the F-102 and F-106 shortly after landing. When I mean short I mean running out after the jets past and released the chutes. Upon reaching the chutes you could still feel the hot jet wash while recoverying the chutes!

[@TheFalconJetDriver]

No you did not go to the tarmac! Tarmac is a mixture of tar and macadam agregate. This will not support the weight of heavy airplanes! You went out on a ramp or Apron made of concrete or a runway! You have fallen prey to moron tv news reporters! The word tarmac is not even found in the FAA glossary!

[@SeedOfElijah]

Saw both when I lived next to Langley when I was 11.Those practiced alot of touch and go's and to me they were mysterious machines, awesome vision and noise, with parachute at landing to top off. Hercules did T&G's too!

[@white0devil0]

I've already seen these videos but Imma get in here and give it a thumbs up anyway.

[@vickydroid]

Usually watch videos piecemeal as I work or do chores in the week, today after Sunday breakfast prep for my wife, I sat down to re-watch these in one lovely dose. Being able to concentrate on the screen was helpful, I love your visual demo of the area rule with airflow vectors, you changed a notion in my head to an image...thanks best way to learn.

[@KernowekTim]

This channel just keeps on getting better and better! Great up-beat info, presented with enthusiasm!

[@eurybaric]

Man there is so much information in here on so many different subjects from aerodynamics to history and military doctrines it's crazy!! Thank you for making such high quality videos!

[@kathrynck]

Really great video! Convair deserved to be a more successful aerospace company. Such innovative designs. I always liked the 106, elegant & interesting capabilities for it's time. Little known detail... it had a shockingly small radar cross section. I am convinced this was not an accident. If you look at other designs proposed by Convair and Lockheed in the late 50's and early 60's, it's extremely obvious that "stealth" was on their minds, well ahead of Ufimtsev's published work. I strongly suspect Ufimtsev's work was 'mostly' not 'new' info out at Groom Lake.

[@dougelick8397]

In a way, they were successful. Convair became General Dynamics, which gave us the venerable F-16

[@Karl-Benny]

Not so Special Since Sweden Manage to Manufacture a Mach2 Double delta Jetfighter in 1955

[@ThomasTalbotMD]

Great history - The F106 has always been my favorite. Great explanation of the area rule.

[@panchiolarranaga1616]

Awesome, this is my first experience with one of your posts, the F-102 and the F-106 being one of my fav planes, I've been a scale model builder since childhood and these were iconic planes of the 60's and 70's txs for posting

[@P90F55]

That is a far better plane then I realized. I'm glad I got to see them as a kid. I never knew about the SAGE system.

[@Alexanbreizh]

Just writing to the attention of this sutpid KZbin algorithm : " This is an awesome channel, please make it famous!" ... or at least show it in the trending section. oh, and by the way; "Hi from France."

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thank you very much! Let me know if the algorithm replies to your message! 😉

[@eckhal2]

Worked avionics on the Deuce 66-67 Keflavik NAS, Iceland 57th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. Over 100 intercepts of Russian bombers. We were busy! 🗽🇺🇸

[@corvanphoenix]

I'm glad you survived Red Storm Rising mate! 😂

[@j.muckafignotti4226]

Nicely done, that was nothing but good. I watched a pair of -106’s come barreling out of that little air force base in Marin County one day. Word of the moment, shittin’ and gittin’! Burners were lit and they were going somewhere out over the pacific in a big wampum hurry. The noise was glorious!

[@hungryanimal5112]

Glad to have found this gem of channel! Cheers!

[@mal15102]

Really enjoyed both aircraft. The deuce was my first fighter. It was, as compared with today's fighters, a piece of junk, and I loved it! The Six was a giant leap forward. I flew it for some 3000 hrs. Less forgiving than the 102 but far better performance. I had the honor of lunch with Dick Whitcomb on several occasions in a retirement home in Hampton Virginia. This was slightly before his death but my stories of flying the Deuce and the Six and, I admit my being a bit star struck at meeting him, seemed to bring him great pleasure. His area rule was artificially acquired with air filled additions at the aft end of the fuselage of the 102. The Six was area ruled from the beginning. It was so slick that it would go supersonic with external tanks in a 10 degree dive IN IDLE POWER. I won quite a few bets when checking out F4 pilots by demonstrating this in the B model. Functional check flights almost always went Mach 2. The 106 would roll faster than anything, I expect, ever. It was something of a parlor trick without much use as you had to use full aileron (elevon) and full opposite rudder while unloaded.... less than 1G. I digress. This is absolutely the best review of the 102 and 106 ever. The only additions I would make is that the Deuce was effective in a frontal attack, it could carry a nuclear missile, and the rockets were used in the beam. The 106 was indeed used with the Sage system but the pilot was totally responsible for attacking the target. Sage could not operate the fire control or do an escape maneuver. Incidentally I flew the last operational F 106 sortie delivering a B model to Palmdale where it would be used to chase B 1 weapons release.

[@lindeleasley]

An outstanding video! I had the honor and pleasure to work on the MA-1 system of the F-106 in the 49th FIS at Griffiss AFB. The best eight years of my life.

[@bobgehrls8538]

I was in MA-1 mockup at K.I. Sawyer. My specialties were 080 scope and 241 antenna resolver fix. It was do cool to be part of this!

[@MikeJohn-tb1yp]

The design certainly won over the European aerospace community with the a great series of delta wings till this day. Conviar was purchased by Raytheon I believe. I miss when there was 20 companies. I miss North American, I miss the plant at willow run. I wish we made fighters and bombers here in Michigan and Ohio again.

[@1joshjosh1]

This really was a good documentary

[@kwatt-engineer796]

Love your channel, Your knowledge is encyclopedic!

[@Ni999]

Outstanding compilation, perfect for sharing. 👍

[@theq4602]

Oh my god yay a video on my favorite aircraft! Time to learn!

[@agsystems8220]

Casually looking through the specs on wikipedia as watching this. Me: "Jesus that is a low wing loading!" M7: "It turned out to be a surprisingly good dogfighter"

[@guaporeturns9472]

Remember hearing or reading a 102 pilot talking about when his squadron transitioned to 106s they gave the 102s to a National Guard unit and on several occasions had a chance to mock fight them in air to air. Said the 106 was faster and all around better for the role of interceptor but when dogfighting the 102 he was always looking at a 102 nose pointed at him and could never get on the tail of the 102… it had a much better turning radius .

[@corvanphoenix]

​@guaporeturns9472 I'm not inferring anything about the current issue. However, the first thought to come to my mind was - so would a WWII piston engined fighter! 😂 I think I'd much rather be in an F-102 than a P-51 myself, were I to ever face an F-106. 😅

[@donscheid97]

A bit of history FYI, the 102 was stationed at the base in Anchorage AK and the Soviets would typically let themselves be intercepted only to hit the throttles again and the 102 could not keep up. When the 106 entered service to replace the 102, it was not parked separately but alternated on the flightline so the USSR would not easily notice the change from satellite photos. when they had enough, the first few intercepts happened as normal, except after the Soviet plane pulled away, the 106 would then catch up and do the same. The Soviet pilots soon quit that game. Our pilots in F-4s learned the 106 was more maneuverable and hard to beat at high altitude.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

as the old saying goes... to see what the 1946 luftwaffe might have looked like .. check out the 1947 usaf.. ;)

[@LRRPFco52]

There were some programs that were more advanced in parallel, but independent from the German aerospace research. Jack Northrop's flying wings are just one example. The British also had the first jet engine design, and early US jet engines enjoyed technical sharing with the British. German AeroEs definitely had an influence on designs moving into the future, but there was also natural aerospace scientific development and progress being made with the US industrial and scientific base, regardless of whether Germans would be involved or not.

[@LRRPFco52]

@daniel raleigh The British of the 1930s-1940s were a multi-ethnic mix of Celts, Romans, Anglo-Saxons, Norsemen, and Normans. It would be overly-simplistiic to blanket them as Germans, although I agree with you that there has been both a Scandinavian and central European Germanic influence. What that has to do with jet engine development is escaping me, and seems to be beyond the scope of this video/discussion (99% Scandinavian/British Isles checking in, with 1% German/Swiss).

[@jeremybrowand5941]

I always had a soft spot for the century series fighters. Always good to see this sort of content.

[@siquq]

Fascinating! These videos are well researched.

[@Paughco]

Totally in depth, man. You are doing a great job. Thank you for your outstanding videos. The F-106 was possibly the best of the Century Series fighters (although the 105 is my personal favorite).

[@justforever96]

Fifty years from the Curtiss to the F-106. And 50 from the F-15 to the F-35.

[@spackle9999]

And in 50 years we'll be lucky to get a Curtiss in the air...

[@Karl-Benny]

The SAAB Draken accidentally went Mach 1 on first flight while climbing American experts must have said why cant we do that

[@justinsmith1828]

Was MA-1 Electronics Tech on the F106A/B from 1971-80. The F106 was NOT capable of fully automatic attack. The pilot had to select the weapon to be used, arm it on the weapons control panel and commit to firing by pulling a trigger on the stick. Also, although SAGE could provide targeting info and steer the aircraft to the targeting area, the pilot had to manually find and lock onto the target either using the radar or infrared systems.

[@JNelson_]

Hey do you know if there are any public docs that describe the MA-1 in detail? I would assume the T.O. 1F-106A-29, would be a good overview but I've yet to find that anywhere publically.

[@sequoyah59]

Enjoyed the video and technical approach. Beautiful airplane.

[@silentone11111111]

Enjoying this back catalog stuff. Great work ❤

[@AtPeacePiece]

It amazes me that you are able to narrate in English when it isn't your primary language. Having attempted narration, I know how difficult it is in my native tongue. Impressive. Not to mention all the editing and research involved in these videos

[@speedy97979]

My Dad was a crew chief on all of the century fighters and the F-4 from 62 to 84 he worked on all the fighters.

[@billballbuster7186]

Great Interceptor Fighters built by Convair. They were advanced bomber destroyers in the early years of the cold war, though the Soviets never built large numbers of strategic bombers.

[@billinsa9752]

Good and informative presentation, thank.

[@user-kw5qv6zl5e]

Great research on this Thank you

[@iamscoutstfu]

Can we all take a moment to appreciate how badass a name for a pilot "Jeager" is?

[@avus-kw2f213]

This channel is great I only found it this week : ( KZbin is broken I should’ve found this channel along time ago because it is so good

[@ethanroberts4672]

F-106 was one of my favorite fighter jets. The air guard had the Dagger then the Dart.

[@sorryociffer]

The F-106B was/is such a SEXY aircraft…. Those lines….

[@1joshjosh1]

And I have that big giant book Oxford companion to military history. Me and M7 are practically brothers

[@ioogy]

It's amazing that in all of this fantastic information, there isn't a mention of the F-106 still holding the record for the fastest single engine fighter aircraft! Unless i missed it lol

[@bjjace1]

Now, this is a great video. I can't believe I missed it earlier.

[@maximilliancunningham6091]

The late Chuck Myers, a test pilot, and of the later LWF Mafia fame, set an unofficial worlds speed record in the F-106. Shortly afterwards Joe Rogers of the USAF set the "official" absolute speed record, and for single engine aircraft, that still stands today, Clean lines, the 106 could really haul, and the engine exhaust looks like a rocket engine.

[@dijonstreak]

Awesome dude...!! learned helluva lot...very detailed and meticulously presented..a 5STAR job buddy. !!

[@LRRPFco52]

We used to see F-106As about 2-3 times per week sometimes, doing chase plane work for the B-1B test program at Edwards AFB in the early-mid 1980s. Very cool airplane. This video was highly informative. George W. Bush flew F-102As in the Texas ANG, and his unit actually rotated people and planes to Vietnam, but you had to have high flight hours as a pilot. He and a buddy of his volunteered to go, but were turned down due to their low hours as new pilots.

[@corvanphoenix]

Seeing the Falcon in your video was great! I can't help but wonder if the AGM-65 Maverick is based on it, as the fin configuration is passingly similar.

[@tsman2709]

Absolutely love your channel, glad that I discovered it looking for info about the F-106!!!

[@timper4326]

With upgrades to engines and avionics they could still be flying today. The delta wing configuration is coming back

[@thebajabobusa]

You should chronicle the B-58 Hustler.

[@tommotto4643]

Thanks!

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

Thank you so much!

[@ioannisgrammatikos1630]

Excellent video. You might care to note that one (and possibly two) Turkish F102 was shot down over the Aegean by Greek F5s in July ‘74. This is a well known incident in Greek airforce circles although you’ll hear the opposite story, too, ie the Greek F5s falling victim to F102.

[@tesmith47]

the SAGE system was in the ADC /Air Defense Command which I was in in 1968 750 radar sqdn

[@justforever96]

FYI, in the US I believe NACA is more commonly pronounced with a hard A, like "attack" or "crack". It's 'nah-kah"

[@practicalshooter6517]

My God, so much great information. Thanks a lot

[@darkalman]

Really want you to do a video on the Avro Arrow and debunk many of the myths as well as talk about its innovations and how good it really was

[@dukeford]

Like any other cancelled airplane, it's impossible to know if it was any good or not.

[@philliplopez8745]

Bravo !

[@muttleyjones2]

This guy actually started off in the UK after the war but he was tempted to go to the USA because of the resources being put into rockets and aircraft. You can't blame him I guess, the UK was experiencing a period called "post-war austerity" and the USA had "post-war prosperity", lol.

[@NormReitzel]

Only McNamera would use supersonic interceptors to bomb campfires at night.

[@aerialview3933]

Love your content!

[@Robert_Kawalec]

Love your videos !

[@Karl-Benny]

How did Sweden Manage to Manufacture a Mach2 Double delta Jetfighter in 1955

[@dukeford]

They didn't. The Draken didn't achieve M2 until 1960.

[@tyronehamilton588]

I love your show!

[@couchfighter]

this is great! thanks

[@patrickmcgee9910]

Oh no I see and F-106 video clip in your F-102 Vietnam discussion at 34:30. Had to mention that :)

[@tesmith47]

from the top angle the delta series looks like the B58 hustler

[@stevec7596]

Nice video, but you failed to mention the speed record that the 106 still holds today.

[@billbright1755]

Buzz fixed 102 with big tail swap.

[@takaharatanaka8818]

Awesome video!

[@MeatVision]

Looks so Mirage that hurts

[@AlphaWhiskey_Haryo]

I can finally made the 6's papercraft 💪

[@johngisbourne7197]

top notch !

[@user-nj9mh7ly2n]

Love he content! Language is a little bit confusing at times (slightly annoying), but i would gladly suffer through it again. :)

[@user-nj9mh7ly2n]

OH! I've heard about the transsonic area rule, but not really understood it. Great simplification! Seems this channel's what i'm gonna watch this week!

[@dickybirdcch]

The B, like the F35, frequent retrofits?

[@HungPham-hm9yk]

Amazing video but please try to improve your mic

[@kakavdedatakavunuk8516]

I am fond of your videos, but according to you, I learned that Mr. Lipisch was stupid enough to think that DM-1 will reach the speed of sound? Actually, the flying triangle DM-1 was just a towed/or catapult launched glider to prove the viability of delta wing configuration with max. speed of 400 - 450 kph. It was planned to develop this glider into the ramjet P-13 point defense fighter, (with probably over-optimistic supersonic capabilities), later in the war. And one more thing, Lipisch stole the idea from Frenchman Mr. Maurice Payen.

[@jackriley5974]

1960 - Itazuke

[@johncasteel1780]

23:50: "New Soviet bomber"? The TU-4 is a reverse engineered copy of a stolen B-29.

[@Karl-Benny]

How is it That Sweden made a better Mach two first cobra capable delta wing Interceptor than The US at the same time and was not retired until 2005

[@dukeford]

They didn't. The Draken didn't achieve Mach 2 until 1960.

[@michelbrown1060]

Did you know that between the F102 and the F106, canadian AV.Roe had a weekend of discussion at NACA because canadian Scientific contested the ability of the C-105 Arrow to pass beyond the wall of sound in control. . 3 longs days of outer edge of knowledge of supersonic flight discussion. . . In the end, NACA said that Supersonic Flight was , at the moment, more of an ART then a Science. . And A.V.ROE seem to have a very interresting and promising solution to supersonic controled flight. . . North American was there and the Arrow theory was aplied to the 102 , but since the changes made for a completely longer fuselage, it became the F-106 Delta Dagger. . Then The Arrow took to the air, broke all speed and climbing records just to be SCRAPPED totally. shortly after. . . . There are a few excellent books about the Arrow , and one written by Jim Floyd, chief engeneer to the project. . .Most interresting ; ) From Canadian Airplane Heritage

[@dukeford]

Lol. The Arrow never set any records, and both the F-102 and F-106 were flying while the Arrow was still on the drawing board. Arrow fanboys are pretty delusional.

[@guttormurthorfinnsson8758]

MORE TOP TV THANKS.

[@iranash1797]

Do a dedicated video on sage it is super cool

[@ericneilson1198]

B-58 beats this plane in beauty and asthetics, But not by much. Imo

[@gregoryfuller1136]

Genious?

[@xiter8868]

Ci puoi postare il link al brano che inizia a 21:00 pf?

[@kakavdedatakavunuk8516]

North American proposal look better to me than F-102, especially one with the chin-mounted intake (like Crusader)

[@halfpintcustoms3428]

What about the f104 star fighter? Live the channel bye the way.

[@trekmasterflex7476]

F-106 is sexy

[@paulgush]

Where is our presenter's accent from?

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I am Italian

[@justforever96]

Thats a somewhat misleading explanation of the Area Rule (Whitcomb's Rule). It isnt that a wasp waist magically makes an object faster. The idea is that the LOWEST drag comes from a nice, smooth, thin object like a cigar, pointed at the ends and somewhat swelling in the middle. BUT whatever shape the object actually IS, as long as the total cross section of any given slice of the body approximates the same area as found on the cooresponding slice of the cigar shape, the general drag characteristics are the same. Thus you want a plane that is pointy at both ends and slightly swollen in the middle...BUT you must include the wings in your cross section. Since the wings add so much area, it is necessary to remove some area from the fuselage to maintain that nice smooth progression of overall area. So a wasp waist doesn't make an object faster, it only allows the total cross sectional area of a plane with wings to come as close to Whitcomb's Ideal Body as it can,

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I agree, but I believe it is explained exactly in this way in the video. Was it not clear?

[@agsystems8220]

That's an explanation of what the area rule is. It is a heuristic that tells you that you will get problems, but it doesn't tell you specifics. Personally I was extremely interested in the specific explanation of how those problems develop, and pictures to justify the truth of it.

[@qc_ploum-zoum2]

Can you do a video about the CF-105 arrow? There is a lot of videos about it, but no one seems to know what there are talking about. So i don’t know if it was really the best for its time or it was highly overrated.

[@sagmilling]

I think it was a great airframe & engine idea that was too expensive and armaments too primitive for the job. Consider that the Arrow is about the same size as a Mig 25 and would have carried more primitive weapons. The CF100 would be a more interesting video - it was the definitive "anti-delta " of the 1950s. Sabres by day, Clunks by night.

[@palashchoudhury5565]

History of USAF vs USSR

[@MrFarnanonical]

I hate delta-wing fighters, not because they're bad or anything, I just don't like the way they look. The Eurofighter, Rafale, and the Gripen all look silly to me. Don't get me wrong, they're really good airplanes but pretty ugly too. The Legacy Hornet is aesthetically my favorite.

[@ronaldtartaglia4459]

18 ads? Unwatchable

[@Millennium7HistoryTech]

I am very sorry, I just activate the ads and YT decides where and how many to show. I have basically no control other than setting the time when they appear; but if the break will contain 5 ads or it is skipped entirely, I have no control.

[@nickc6882]

You can eliminate all ads by paying for KZbin. It’s about $15 a month.

[@Stormrider-Flight]

skip to the end of the video and hit the "play again" button (circle arrows). Voila, no more ads ;) Don't tell yt.

[@adampodlewski5140]

*the less known failed artist

[@WilliamOPearce]

What happened to the "Century Series" was simple. They were designed and fielded to defend against and destroy massed Soviet bomber attacks. Except the Soviets decided the combination of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and Nuclear weapons. Could do the same job of massed bomber fleets. At 1/100 of the cost while not sending people into battle. Which was a seriously major social factor after the Russians lost 50 million plus in WW2. So the Soviets never built the tens of thousands of bombers. Instead build hundreds of ICBM's instead. But America never figured out that no small fact out until the USSR imploded. So a long string of fighter-interceptors were built, for a military threat the USSR never did build. Making the entire strategic problem, lost to history.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

I wouldn't say lost more like renewed as the only way an enemy could invade the US is by air/space and currently, only the south is properly defended.

[@koc988]

No we the US found it out which I'd the reason why the US built smaller and smaller numbers of interceptors and sac was dissolved in form of their own ICBMs

[@WilliamOPearce]

@@koc988 To this day, The entire idea of nuclear weapons being useful in warfare. Has been turned out to be totally wrong. Not a single nuclear weapon has been fired from one nation against another. Since WW2 and each of those attacks. Were just test demonstrations to see if they would work. What has been ignored for the last 80 years. The whole point of Warfare is to take, hold and utilize the possessions of a foreign nation or peoples. Armed robbery writ very large ! Blowing it all up in a nuclear fireball. Makes warfare useless in its intended goals and desired results. Thus nobody has bothered to do so. And most likely never will.

[@salty4496]

:)