Analysis of F-8 Crusader success over North Vietnam

[outlaw162]

Here's an interesting, maybe definitive and certainly somewhat redeeming read if you haven't seen it.

Lots of comments about kill ratios for USAF, USN and VPAF aircraft at various points in the war. May have already been posted somewhere here.

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/The+Red+ ... 0135843063

Now if they'll only give Kilgus credit for the first kill (not probable) of the air war in his F-100D, as the VPAF seems to confirm, the world will be right.

[basher54321]

Are the Red Baron volumes after Aug 67 still classified?

Authors have been referencing the later volume sets for about 20 years (including Clashes 1997) so whatever data is available has been used constantly in sources like Osprey etc and likely needs a FOI request.

8 gun jams on the F-105 the rest were other equipment failures and 3 are labelled switchology!

[marauder2048]

I actually found the article above grossly inferior to the work that Weaver did for the
Journal of Aeronautical history. At least Weaver mentions the F-8's IRST.

https://www.aerosociety.com/media/8037/an-examination-of-the-f-8-crusader-through-archival-sources.pdf

[madrat]

Did the F-8 ever do DACT with British Lightning jets? I always thought that would have been a better match than Fishbed. And, yes, early models did have two 30mm cannon mounted internal.

[aaam]

One advantage the F-8 had was that its crews for the most part only trained for fighter missions, so they became very proficient since they didn't have to also train for and practice ground attack.

Of course we must remember the F-8's appalling safety record. !,261 were built, 1,106 were either lost or suffered major mishaps (combat losses were only 87 of that total) The French had a loss rate of 64%. For a period of 13 years except for one month, there was at least one ejection from an F-8 every month!

[basher54321]

Dogfighting MiGs in Vietnam with the F-8 - Interview with Navy Cross Recipient Phil Vampatella

[Gums]

Salute!

Good poop, from all the sources.

Still, myths and legends persist like the Viper is short-legged. Truth is..... when you put crap on all the wing stations and load it to max gross, it burns a lot of gas, but less than what a fairly clean Hornet does! In A2A config, we easily ran the Eagles outta gas with them using the big centerline and us using the much smaller centerline. We had less maneuvering restrictions, too.

One thing about the F-8 IRSTS and radar at the end of its service was development of SEAM - Sidewinder Expanded Acquisition Mode. i.e. slave the seeker to radar or other sensor. The ADC birds I flew early slaved the AIM-4D seeker to the tgt just before launch and the thing also had a cooled seeker before the 'winder. So this was a great advancment for the 'winder used by the tactical folks and Navy. I am not sure about the Eagle or Tomcat, but the Viper had it and greatly improved kill Pk. I think the Sea Harrier could slave it, as well, but not sure if that was another legend frfom the Falklands.

The way it worked was getting the signals from the seeker and then "boogering" them by applyng a bias and sending them back. So the boresight of the seeker was now where you wanted it! A side effect was you could see where the seeker was looking in the HUD. If it was in the TD box and was chirping, you could shoot with high Pk. The older 'winders like the E and P could be uncaged once getting a good tone and you could pull lead before shooting. But this slaving capability was a quantum leap in capability and for new tactics.

Gums sends...

P.S. A British dude that runs a You Tube channel about military aviaiton history interviewed several weeks ago when I was still in Colorado. He is doing a video about the A-10 and looking at some myths and legends. Due to my comments here, another F-16 net member referred him to me. Here's his site:
https://www.youtube.com/c/MilitaryAviationHistory

[basher54321]

P.S. A British dude that runs a You Tube channel about military aviaiton history interviewed several weeks ago when I was still in Colorado. He is doing a video about the A-10 and looking at some myths and legends. Due to my comments here, another F-16 net member referred him to me. Here's his site:
https://www.youtube.com/c/MilitaryAviationHistory

So you are going to feature in a new video at some point?

[spazsinbad]

Hair RAISING TALES of Crusader mishaps in VFP-62 (I guess other squadrons have sites): http://vfp62.com/mishaps.html

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... C_Cuba.jpg [Leeward Point AirField]
NEW 4 page PDF attached has story about cruddy night short field arrest going haywire off cliff Guantanamo Bay 1962.
Cliff Drop Photo is a US Navy Photo courtesy Bruce Nason

F8U-2 Crusader VF-132 Landing Crash Guantanamo 1962
date unk John Holm

“...[April 1962 USS Constellation] Bob Loomis collapsed his right main mount one night and boltered, which led to his being ordered to bingo to Leeward and effect a short field arrestment. I remember being in the ready room and commenting to anybody who was there that somebody better make sure he gets the word to land east west to get a decent straightaway and so that if he's pulled off the runway he'll have plenty of unobstructed space available. Guess what! The duty officer ordered him to make his approach west to east. [ https://military-history.fandom.com/wik ... oint_Field ] The result was he engaged the gear OK, shut down the engine, and the drag from the right side took him off the runway right about at the 3000' mark, where there's only about 60' of space between the runway and the cliff. He blew the canopy, the a/c went over the side and stayed upright. When all the crashing stopped, he said there was silence and darkness. He looked over the side before he attempted to egress and could see white water below him. Crash crew arrived and got some light on him and his surroundings, and he realized he was about 20' or more above the rocks. He crawled back on the fuselage to where he could egress via the tail section with help from the crash personnel. The Ops duty officer stated that he didn't want an a/c sliding off the runway and endangering planes parked on the ramp to the north of the taxiway. It didn't make any sense to me then and it still doesn't. You'd have to keep the power on to slide that far. Google the Leeward runway and you'll see what I mean. That night Bob was quoted as saying he'd invented a new name for a Happy Hour drink, the "2N on the Rocks".

Source: http://vfp62.com/mishaps.html

[spazsinbad]

NATOPS Supplement for the F-8E/D Crusader (has all the performance figures/graphs one could wish).

NAVAIR 01-45HHD-1A Flight Manual for the Vought F-8D/E Crusader aircraft, dated 1 December 1966
http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/20 ... anual.html

PDF: https://www.docdroid.com/QAzUxbI/vought ... arlier-pdf (21Mb)

[Gums]

Salute!

Thanks for the link to the flight manual. I am surprised at the approach speeds compared with it's attack version I flew - A-7.

Also do not understand why not as many 'winder kills as the F-4 got later in the war. I flew with the AIM-9E when we went up north in '72, and practiced with the training thing. It was very easy to select and we could even uncage the seeker and "pull lead" on the bandit if the dweeb stayed in a turn.

Gums sends..

[spazsinbad]

Yes the approach speeds were high, making a carrier approach that much more difficult. The French Navy were able to add a few things to make slower approach speeds in their carrier version. I'll look for the maximum carrier landing weight to see what the max. carrier approach speed. Don't know about 'Winders for the F-8, perhaps an older version was used?

"...The F-8 Crusader is the only aircraft to have used the AIM-9C which is a radar-guided variant of the Sidewinder. When the Crusader retired, these missiles were converted to the AGM-122 Sidearm anti-radiation missiles used by United States attack helicopters against enemy radars....
&
...The French Crusaders were based on the F-8E, but were modified in order to allow operations from the small French carriers, with the maximum angle of incidence of the aircraft's wing increased from five to seven degrees and blown flaps fitted...." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vought_F- ... y%20radars.

"...The AIM-9C Sidewinder, sometimes referred to as the "radar Sidewinder," was built specifically for the F-8 Crusader in the early 1960s. The missile was the same as the AIM-9D in many ways, but instead of an infrared seeker it utilized a semi-active radar homing (SARH) seeker that could engage targets "painted" by the F-8's radar. The main advantage of using SARH over infrared guidance was that the missiles could be used to make head-on "face shots" on enemy aircraft, something the Sidewinders of that era could not do. Instead they would require the F-8 to maneuver to the rear aspect of its target in order for the infrared seeker to acquire the enemy aircraft's hot exhaust. Radar guided Sidewinders could also be more easily employed in all weather environments and at night. About 1,000 AIM-9Cs were built but the concept was short lived due to limitations of the F-8's radar and fire control system...." https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/1 ... ing-scheme

F-8H & F-8J NATOPS 01 May 1974 https://www.filefactory.com/file/1a2l6c ... Manual.pdf (44Mb)

[Gums]

Salute!

Best thing about the Crusader and the AIM-9 was "SEAM" - "Sidewinder Expanded Acquision Mode". So when I showed up at my small company outside the gate at Eglin, the old farts explained to me how it worked.

Hell! I had flown the Viper for four years and took it for granted that our system could slave the seeker to the radar with no big problems. I then learned how we did it.

Gums sends..

[spazsinbad]

From F-8H & F-8J NATOPS 01 May 1974 https://www.filefactory.com/file/1a2l6c ... Manual.pdf (44Mb)

[basher54321]

Salute!
Also do not understand why not as many 'winder kills as the F-4 got later in the war. I flew with the AIM-9E when we went up north in '72, and practiced with the training thing. It was very easy to select and we could even uncage the seeker and "pull lead" on the bandit if the dweeb stayed in a turn.

Gums sends..

All F-8 claims in Rolling Thunder were with the AIM-9D variant (16) and 3 were with Guns.

In the second half there was one maneuver kill claimed - but generally the F-8s were not given the opportunity over the F-4s from what I have seen.

The AIM-9D did not have SEAM but had a high G launch limit and was cooled. The G was basically a D model with SEAM that Navy F-4s used in 1972.

The C was seldom used and all but given up on by the USN by 68. There is an engagement in Red Baron in 1967 where the one C that was being carried was tried Vs a MiG-17, but could not lock on due to ground clutter.