U.S. AIR FORCE TACTICAL WEAPONS EFFECTS TESTS F-105 THUNDERCHIEF & F-100, F84F, F-104 JETS 52314

[@eastender74]

I’ve been to many of an air show and yet none of them had these jets. The sound they make when flying over is like no other. To see these jets fly and even simulate combat would be awesome!

[@dkoz8321]

My family members participated in these weapons tests. They were true professionals and contributed all that they could to see the successful completion. True patriots. Lots of stories. I am so proud of them. They were the test dummy mannequins.

[@bensmitt7088]

My family members participated in killing Chinese communists in Korea.

[@paogene1288]

Brush. Haha😂

[@hotlanta35]

🕯️

[@Revivethefallen]

That was some of the best footage I've seen! I love the impact of the 20 mm that was fantastic!

[@johnabney3530]

This was one of the best USAF films! My dad last flew the A-10 but he flew the F-100 in Viet Nam. He would’ve loved this film, thank you for posting. See you at Beer Call!🍻

[@rynes.rai7er993]

The coolest LOOKING planes of the jet age were from the time of the making of this film. It didn't hurt that they were all shiny and silver, like flying, aggressive looking swords through the sky.

[@michaelthomas7178]

I remember these test range 52 gate was 1 mile east of our community of Seminole Niceville Fla. Part of Eglin AFB. we became accustomed to hearing bombs and mini guns with night time flares and practice missions.

[@phayzyre1052]

I can say with 100% certainty that these tests were done at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida

[@jukeboxhero1649]

I was just going to comment that same thing. Or that test range out in the Ocala National Forest.

[@lostinpa-dadenduro7555]

Just 9 years after this film was made, the A-10 prototypes had their first flights. The program leading up to the A-10 started in 1966. Program participants were required to read the biography of famous WWII German ground attack pilot Hans-Ulrich Rudel.

[@punman5392]

The A-10 would replace all these planes in this role too. 1 plane doing the job of several

[@LRRPFco52]

@@punman5392 None of these aircraft were designed to perform like this, so they were evaluating & validating their A2G/A2S strike capabilities and weapons for different strike mission sets. The F-4, F-111, & A-7 would also go on to perform these tasks. The F-16 replaced the F-4 & A-7 with these roles as a primary focus. The A-10 was developed for an entirely new role, to escort mass formations of Army Airmobile forces in helicopters being threatened by more armored chassis AAA platforms that the A-1 Skyraider had a hard time busting. The A-7D was perfectly capable of destroying these TGTs but was too fast for visual ID re-attack according to the constraints of the concept, so they wanted a heavier aircraft that could fly slow enough to re-attack within visual range, using AGM-65 missiles and a larger cannon with DU projectiles if missiles were expended.

[@LRRPFco52]

@Walter Alter Each Century series aircraft had a different mission. F-100 was the first supersonic fighter. F-101A Voodoo was meant to be a bomber escort for SAC, but once bombers exceeded its mission radius, they made the F-101B interceptor, and later RF-101 tactical photo recon bird. F-102A was supposed to be a better interceptor for bombers coming over the top, but didn't hit the speed they needed. F-104 was Kelly Johnson's answer to feedback from Korean War F-86 pilots, making a mach 2 interceptor with superior climb rate. F-105 was designed to be a supersonic tactical nuke strike fighter. F-106A was the maturation of the F-102A for Air Defense Command, could easily fly Mach 2 even with wing tanks. F-111 was a low level deep penetration/strike platform with terrain following radar so it could fly under threat radar coverage, while carrying both conventional or nuclear payloads.

[@nowthatsjustducky]

@@punman5392 The A-10 says, "Communism is not the answer. That is the question. The answer is BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTT!!!" Yeah, I know. I shouldn't anthropomorphize our aircraft. They hate that.

[@markstengel7680]

Love the Century Series jets, all marvels of military aviation and were so cool looking. Man in the missile F-104 was ultra fast. The F-104 was in film "The Right Stuff" Chuck Yeager flew to the aircraft's limits stalling the engine with Yeager parachuted to the ground and F-104 Starfighter crashed blew up and smoke with Yeager walking towards help. These were big in 60s with the plastic model hobby crowd and many hung from monofilamint in boy's bedrooms accross America. Great Presentation 3rd gen jets Century Series. 🇺🇸💜periscope films...

[@Shipfixer]

The napalm makes an even more spectacular show with added with phosphorus, which was used extensively later on. Instant LIKE!!!

[@John_Redcorn_]

Hotter than the surface of the sun

[@Misha-dr9rh]

Nothing quite like the smell of burnt civilians.

[@robothunter1035]

This is the same crap that happens to me every time I go camping.

[@jokewl91]

stop parking your RVmig where the reconnaissance planes can see it

[@robothunter1035]

@@jokewl91 Okay, that's funny!

[@richardmontana5864]

When you want to "soften up a target"nothing beats the Republic F-105D Thunder chief with 16 750lb bombs.I you've got the time, we've got the beer.

[@houseofsolomon2440]

The sidewinder off the f104 was awesome 👹

[@texasfathead]

It's nice to see somebody knows what they're talking about

[@robsmotos9899]

The f105 gun sound it so awesome to hear

[@jon00tz]

Admit it if you could watch this stuff 24/7 !!??

[@derekheuring2984]

Great example of GPES starting at 18:18. Both GPES (Ground Proximity Extraction System} and LAPES (Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System) were employed at Khe Sahn but GPES ceased being used soon after the Vietnam War.

[@hughgordon6435]

Would love to see the bloopers/ outtake reel?

[@RANDOMNATION907]

That was awesome. I love these tests reels.

[@tonyelliott7734]

The commentary is absolutely golden...

[@Thunder_6278]

The century series, the coolest planes of all time. I wish the color can be restored.

[@cargo4441]

Nothing says were here to party like a f105 loaded with 16 750 lbs bombs.

[@CheapSushi]

Kinda crazy to think it carried more than the B-17G.

[@Billhatestheinternet]

Or a tactical nuke in its bomb bay (its original intended purpose). It was as long as a B-17, could carry as much, but had the wingspan of a gnat. Most are not aware that it flew with the Thunderbirds, until they realized that it's piss poor maneuverability was the reason they lost multiple aircraft in under 6 months. The thud was replaced by its predecessor, having not even flown an entire season. This whole test looks like they knew they were going to Vietnam, and were intending to use this bird the whole time.

[@gosquidgo1]

@@Billhatestheinternet that’s not correct though. The F-100 never really was that manuverable. The F-105 could do in dry thrust what the F-100 did in afterburner. The F-105 was dropped after 6 shows because of a structural failure on the #2 aircraft as he was breaking for landing. The team switched back to the F-100 to continue the season until they figured out what caused the accident and then decided to keep flying the F-100 until they switched to the F-4 Phantom.

[@richardmontana5864]

Just one F-105D Thunder chief loaded with 16 750lb. bombs .The "soften up specialist".End of story. .

[@richardmontana5864]

Thunderbird F-105B (57=5801) that broke up on May 9th 1964 was involved in a in-flight refueling accident because of severe turbulence and was not repaired to factory specs on the back fuselage spine right behind the cockpit. This was probably the cause of myshap.F=105B handled just as good or better that F-100C,D and were well liked by the Thunderbird pilots.I think they got rid of them to soon.F-105's were the best looking and certainly the loudest Thunderbird so far seen and heard.

[@meganrunions7117]

This is my favorite film. Love from Kentucky

[@heyitsvos]

13:15 glad the test equipment could vouch for the heat damage

[@DaMerlin2008]

4:08 BRRRRRRRRRTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT

[@gibsondrummer]

Those beautiful F-86’s sabres and super sabres ! and f-80 lockheed lightenings !

[@banmadabon]

I got a soft spot for the f104

[@uppercut70]

Napalm is one hellava drug

[@peterstuivesant2137]

hi.good old footage that still makes sense.!.

[@Red-rl1xx]

Awesome! All kinds of cool planes delivering all kinds of destruction! I've got models of a number of these planes. The F100, F104, and F105. You can see videos of some of them on my channel.

[@2uiator325]

They accidentally took out an F-100 and F-105 during these tests...for good or bad, we would never take those kind of risks today. While the USAF has largely moved away from unguided weapons today, I’m fairly sure the Chinese still have these capabilities. The CSAF ought to show these films to the other services’ chiefs the next time discussions commence on funding the USAF’s air superiority capabilities, terrifying to think what ground troops would face if subjected to this type of attack.

[@williamtippins3651]

The Army has several layers of anti-aircraft assets to protect themselves from aircraft and/or missiles. Overflying a target to unload on it is death nowadays. The much admired A-10 will be dead meat on a modern Battlefield against a near peer enemy .

[@alastair9894]

I've been waiting for this for yonks, ta.

[@tempestvideos9834]

15:22 bomb engulfs USAF jet being flown and used.

[@parrot849]

5:52 We had Bull-pup missiles available in our ordnance bunkers for deploying on the squadron of P3B Orion Maritime Patrol Aircraft to which I was assigned in very early 70’s. I don’t recall ever having to arm the planes in any real time emergencies (only training exercises) with the missiles while I was with the squadron....

[@jamesanderton344]

Didn’t know they were used with P3s....were they intended to attack ships?

[@parrot849]

@@jamesanderton344 - yes, that was a long time ago for me, but I believe they would’ve been employed to interdict priority enemy merchant shipping, and other “soft” enemy maritime targets; Enemy electronic intelligence-gathering listening vessels, forward deployed submarine surface support vessels, etc.

[@jamesanderton344]

@@parrot849 I guess that makes sense....I’ve seen pictures of Soviet fishing boats....amazing how many antennas they needed on a boat that’s steaming up and down the east coast trawling for cod......

[@bobcaruso1368]

What no CBU? 16 750# bombs on a Thud...now that's a fun afternoon!

[@joestevens1368]

The Thuds hauled the iron downtown in 67'!

[@jfan4reva]

Thuds were inadvertently some of the first stealth jets. ATCs were losing radar contact with them on landing approaches until they put radar reflectors on the nose gear. The wing root air intakes also helped. Made them good candidates for use as Wild Weasels in Vietnam. No where near as stealthy as F-117s, etc. but good for their time.

[@edwardpedley7582]

Did not know the gattling gun was installed on aircraft back in the 1960' s.

[@johnthompson7420]

F104 was the first to have it.

[@rlikemoney]

That brrrtttt sounded familiar lol

[@likydsplit8483]

Testing landing a C-130 on soft clay...whatever the pilot was being paid, it wasn’t enough.

[@pirobot668beta]

Amazing! An F-104 in stable flight, launching weapons without a flat spin! We live in the age of Wonders!

[@MasterChief773]

Were they know for flat spinning on weapon launch?

[@gresvig2507]

Don't know about that specifically, but it wouldn't surprise me. They were insanely fast and flew bonkers high, but their control surfaces could go all wierd from all kinds of stuff. Think there were major design issues with the tail, and uneven weight could destabilize them. The German air force I think had like 1/3 of theirs crash, and Chuck Yeager had a modified one go peculiar on him at like 120k feet or something and spin half a gazillion times before hitting the ground. Still think they're awesome, though.

[@gosquidgo1]

@@gresvig2507 the Germans had high losses initially due to poor training. Once they fixed their training program the F-104 losses decreased significantly. Other air forces had few issues with the F-104.

[@edsn5351]

The US Air Force does movies better than more directors actions movies.

[@drlong08]

I can say that napalm vs. fabric tent bases, no matter what size, will go up in flames.

[@Rutherford_Inchworm_III]

15:19 - oops

[@dukeford8893]

Filmed at Eglin AFB in Florida.

[@kimisdaman]

The maintenance tent area was unfortunately hosting an elementary school field trip, during the 20mm strafing run . . .

[@156dave]

Nothing like the smell of burning flesh in the morning

[@ljubomirculibrk4097]

15:25 Low level bombing is a bit tricky if somthing goes wrong

[@ubahfly5409]

Thankfully they never used any of this stuff in real life, somebody coulda really gotten hurt.

[@enriquepadilla4154]

they used all of it, in great quantity, a few years later in vietnam, they also lost like 4000 aircraft, because flying so close to targets is kind of dangerous when mannequins actually fire back

[@LRRPFco52]

@@enriquepadilla4154 Flying strike routes that were handed over to the North Vietnamese each night by LBJ proved to be dangerous, especially when they let the SA-2 SAM sites be installed without allowing F-105D pilots to strike them. Treason

[@1bishw]

@@LRRPFco52 There may have been just a touch of sarcasm in the original comment.

[@jamesbugbee6812]

May Webster's update definition of 'detail'; also here is much dog-hate. Chopping that Husky was simply grotesque.

[@rags417]

And then the F-105 was used in Vietnam against a real enemy that was shooting back and suffered such horrendous casualties that it became the only aircraft in USAF history to be withdrawn from service due to losses.

[@garyyoung4074]

WHAT? F-105's were used to the end of the conflict flying the most dangerous missions of any aircraft in theater! "Takin it downtown" against the most heavily defended airspace of that conflict. Yes, many "Thuds" were lost, but not because of a deficiency in the airplane. Flying a mission it was not designed for, 105's put more bombs on target than anything else over there. (except maybe B-52's). Pilots all LOVED them. Easily supersonic even carrying 10-16 tons of ordinance with a "stick feel" later emmulated in the F-15. Wild Weasel 2 seaters basically played "chicken" with SAM missles coming right at them so to lock on to the radar van. F-105's were AWESOME my friend and it's a testament to how rugged they were that so many damaged ones still brought pilot back to fight another day.

[@rags417]

@@garyyoung4074 I don't doubt that they were a good plane and well loved by its pilots and crew but the fact remains that the F-105 is still the only plane withdrawn from USAF service due to losses. Read the Wiki.

[@garyyoung4074]

I'm a pilot surrounded by pilots. Sorry, but we don't need to read "wiki". The Thud 13:09 did the job assigned to them and the wild weasles flew till the end of the conflict. Phantoms took over close air support as thier numbers grew. 105's were withdrawn and retired soon after due to high flight hrs and the advent of newer aircraft. Again, not because plane was poor and the result was a high loss rate. Which the way you worded it is how you're being interpreted. Your wiki is only wiki

[@rags417]

@@garyyoung4074 Son of pilot who served in WWII and brother to two more pilots, sorry but the Thud was not fit for purpose. It was designed as a low level nuclear bomber using lofting attacks, not straight up penetrations at medium level. It failed at the role that it was forced to do which doesn't mean that it was a bad at its designed role, but even in its designed role it was replaced by the much better Aardvark. As a declassified report by the USAF noted - "The F-105 did not fare well in combat. The Thunder chief served as a fighter-bomber but was limited by its avionics designed for nu-clear, not conventional, missions. Ironically, the bomb bay was used to carry a fuel tank, not bombs. At low level it was the fastest air-craft of the war, but was at a disadvantage in air- to- air combat because of its lack of maneuverability.7 More than half (397) of the 753 F- 105Ds and Fs built were lost in the war. Over all, the F- 105 had the high est loss rate of any US aircraft operating in Southeast Asia and over North Vietnam.8 Why such heavy losses? The political restrictions certainly played a role, allowing the North Vietnamese to build up and ad just their defenses. An other factor was that the tactics that had been developed for a short nuclear war proved costly and inappropriate in a long conventional air campaign fought against extensive ground-based air defenses. The introduction of surface- to- air missiles (SAM) made matters even worse for the airmen. A third factor was the aircraft itself." In short - it may have been good in its designed role but in Vietnam its performance lousy.

[@jctripplesticks]

As this video shows, the Mannequin War of 66 was a swift victory for the US. We'd have won Vietnam if they were all mannequins...

[@mattmarzula]

We wouldn't be where we are had it not been for the stone age...

[@jasonharding96]

Where’s our napalm war thunder

[@davidboysel4509]

Why did the narrator mention that it was the type of aircraft used in Vietnam when we weren't officially anything other than observing in training the South Vietnamese military in 1963 when this film was supposedly made

[@LRRPFco52]

Did he? Got a time stamp? I missed that.

[@zipz4777]

B-26 Invader, U.S. light bomber from WWII, used by France in Vietnam in the 1950's, until the French were defeated in 1954. They were acquired from the U.S. Timestamp 12:21

[@LRRPFco52]

@@zipz4777 Thanks. I watched the whole thing and missed that, but specifically remember the F-104s after it.

[@Nebris]

We were still using F-84's in 1963??

[@schoolssection]

RF-84Fs as late as 1971

[@richardmontana5864]

It's cool to see those F-84F's napalm bombing those F-86D's. After the "Cuban Missle Crisis" the USAF took the F-84F's and RF=84F's out of the mothballs and put them back in the active airforce.But all F=86's including the "H" model stayed in the mothballs.

[@user-Hetzer]

Забавно, что всё это не помогло во Вьетнаме...🤔

[@rogerloess2379]

Dang

[@assassinlexx1993]

Soldiers with stinger missiles would have nailed those low flying jets.

[@jaxsmith1744]

Wow. A high altitude interceptor with very little loiter time is a ground attack aircraft ? The USAF really was grasping at the point of a sword to not drown.....

[@richardvernon317]

F-104 was actually very good at the mission that it was intended for as ground attack in the European theater at that time was lobbing a Nuclear weapon at a Soviet tank column. That was NATO's War plan up to 1968 and the F-104 was a very stable weapons platform down at low level due to its high wing loading.

[@anonym3017]

@@richardvernon317 very stabled weapons platform low down... Yeah bullshit. it wasn't which is why it got the nickname widowmaker/lawndart. The thing was designed as a high altitude interceptor and that was the only job it was good at.

[@MasterChief773]

@@anonym3017 It got the name widow maker primarily from the luftwaffe and crashing on landing. Military Aviation History made a good video about it. I do agree though, very dangerous jet.

[@anonym3017]

@@MasterChief773 and crashing while being used as a low flying bomber, and crashing because they lost control during dogfights, running out of runway due to a heavy bomb load, etc, etc. It was a great high altitude, fast response interceptor. And that's it.

[@damianlynch5977]

Using F-104’s in ground attacks, what a waste, the poor pilot must have thinking what I have done to deserve this!!!

[@ramonnoodles7840]

104Cs over vietnam performed very well at strike missions though… hardly a waste

[@david9783]

Hey the anti-aircraft missiles should have smoked the Sabers way before they had a chance to bomb the missile site! I would know; I was a Nike - Hercules missile crewman.

[@parrot849]

Ahh Colonel...? Which weapon is best employed to destroy those pesky school buses? 5:17

[@Supervillainmc]

This footage was declassified in the early 1990s

[@ashermil]

Kaboom!

[@Jawzzy]

Whoever decided to strap bombs and rockets to the F-104, should be flogged for an eternity.

[@skipcampbell4226]

Looks like what the Air Force used in Vietnam.

[@Sion_Revan]

Snake and nape inbound, heads down!

[@88997799]

It will kill…. Pass… 👍

[@braised44]

Anyone think about air pollution back then?

[@ericfermin8347]

@2:42 and @3:38 Eject, eject, eject..... damnit, the guy didn't get out. Senseless waste of life. You can even see his helmet and his attempt to open the canopy. The rest of the video is equally shocking. @5:23 the Air Force practicing to shoot school busses full of children @7:34 showing decapitated bodies is deplorable @7:55 gleefully showing their bodies burned @8:27

[@ericfermin8347]

@Yuck Foutube What? Never mind, I withdrawal my earlier comment. Very embarassing.

[@MasterChief773]

@Yuck Foutube Bro, he’s making a joke

[@LRRPFco52]

@@MasterChief773 The QF-80 Target drones were remotely controlled during these tests. We've been using RC fighters as TGT drones for generations now. Current target drones are QF-16Cs.

[@MasterChief773]

@@LRRPFco52 Thanks for the info. I was just saying the original comment was a joke pretending that we did not use rc planes. Someone else in this thread didn’t pick up on that. Also, have you heard of the rc f6f hellcat that couldn’t be shot down? I’m sure you have, but if you haven’t, you should look it up. It’s quite the story

[@jaminova_1969]

"Next stop Vietnam!"

[@jamesedmister9922]

A10's grandfather!

[@gibsondrummer]

This is training for what we were going to be doing in Vietnam , though they were shooting back

[@TheP3NGU1N]

MERICA

[@roadwolf2]

F104 go brrrrtttttttt

[@johnthompson7420]

w0w, according to this our guys never miss!

[@antibulletdodger101]

You obviously didn´t watch to the end.

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

Brb, lemme find an Industrial album before we start the video...

[@emilmckellar4932]

So they built a big playground that can't shoot back and fired high calibre, napalm, missiles and more at it and was elated it caused damage. Wow they shot down a level flying constant speed drone, amazing!

[@ohmyglobohmyglob]

Evil minds that plot destruction Sorcerer of death's construction

[@mainemade300]

All these tests were not under combat conditions witchwe all now are way different, Attaching that copper was like pushing a fat kid off his bike ,to easy

[@myriaddsystems]

Fat lot of good it did them

[@ceciljohnrhodes4987]

Thud.

[@mikearmstrong8483]

The People's Democratic Republic of Mannequin has never been very good at placing their high value targets anywhere other than out in the open.

[@johnnyhawkins43]

DON'T MESS WITH THE US!

[@danbanks7930]

Ahhh...tax dollars....up in smoke

[@Astroman769]

War thunder

[@allgood6760]

I would hate to be on the receiving end.. war is necessary 🤔

[@nelutu6506]

We are so good to destroying things,to build not so good...

[@randalldunkley1042]

What did they think would happen to the targets? Even with no opposition two aircraft were shot down. Colossal waste of tax payer money.

[@MsJackcool69]

It would be an even bigger waste if they found out they don't work on the day they were needed for real.

[@jusb1066]

And still a bunch of women farmers in Vietnam kicked your asses