F-105 Thunderchief

[bies]

Great aircraft. I've heard an interview with the Thud pilot, he said early variants - before they started to add additional draggy elements (dog ears) to the airframe - were exceptionally fast at low altitude. He stated he saw Mach 1,5 before recovering from the shallow bomb dive.

 

[upyr1]

59 minutes ago, mkellytx said:

Keep in mind the office within USAF, the history guys probably won't know how to get to the technical data, which isn't to say there aren't places to research.  Air Force Material Command has a technical document library, so does Edwards AFB, Maxwell AFB & Tinker AFB deal with Technical Orders, so they may have archives.  There's also Defense Technical Information Center which has a decent online search function.  There are also some organizations/societies that could be helpful, namely the Red River Rats and the Society of Wild Weasels.  The data needed probably still exists, it's just a matter of resources and time to find and collect them.  Museums and CAF are another resource that might exist as well.  I know for a fact that the CAF has a F-105D in Midland, I saw it every week when I traveled.

The radar was built by North American, so technical data may be much easier to come by.  Not to mention it was similar to many other radars also built for other aircraft in the 50's and 60's.  The basic modes like ground mapping, terrain avoidance, beacon, etc. should be doable.  As for the FCS, ISTR seeing some basics for the lead computing functionality in one of the documents.  Bomb modes, mostly Dive Toss and LABS were SIOP. so not really that applicable to conventional which was mostly manually depressed recital, the drop tables from the dash 34-1 would do a lot...

The question that bears asking is if there is someone/an organization that has the time a resources with the expectation of a reasonable return on investment?

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17Udw8h10lDxMK4sYvkmcnNSuAuX2qGea?usp=sharing

Here is a link to a list I got from the Smithsonian.

[Manhorne]

I would think there has to be enough data out there to do the 105..They were flown into the mid-1980's so I am sure if you dig all the data needed can be found. It just takes the effort to look.Which may be time consuming but I think you would be surprised what can be found sometimes when you start digging.

Edited December 11, 2021 by Manhorne

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Manhorne said:

I would think there has to be enough data out there to do the 105..They were flown into the mid-1980's so I am sure if you dig all the data needed can be found. It just takes the effort to look.Which may be time consuming but I think you would be surprised what can be found sometimes when you start digging.

 

A good  place to start would be

https://groups.google.com/g/f-105

Which is a Google group about the Thud. That's where I started the search that lead me to the Smithsonian. I think we could start with a community mod.

[Rudel_chw]

40 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I think we could start with a community mod.

 

VSN already has made a Mod for the Thud:

 

 

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

VSN already has made a Mod for the Thud:

 

 

I know about that one, I am talking about something similar to the A-4. 

[Silver_Dragon]

2 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

I know about that one, I am talking about something similar to the A-4. 

The F-105 has a diferent beast with a A-4, more complex and many subsistems.

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, Silver_Dragon said:

The F-105 has a diferent beast with a A-4, more complex and many subsistems.

I know that, but if possible it would be nice to have a better community mod if we can't have an official one.

[upyr1]

On 12/11/2021 at 2:31 PM, Manhorne said:

I would think there has to be enough data out there to do the 105..They were flown into the mid-1980's so I am sure if you dig all the data needed can be found. It just takes the effort to look.Which may be time consuming but I think you would be surprised what can be found sometimes when you start digging.

 

As a test I have emailed the smithsonian to see what their list for the F-100 looks like I figure most of the documents should be extant. I know the flight manuals exist and some tech orders as well

[Tank50us]

21 hours ago, upyr1 said:

As a test I have emailed the smithsonian to see what their list for the F-100 looks like I figure most of the documents should be extant. I know the flight manuals exist and some tech orders as well

don't you mean teh F-105? Or do you actually mean the Super Saber?

[upyr1]

16 minutes ago, Tank50us said:

don't you mean teh F-105? Or do you actually mean the Super Saber?

I mean the F-100 Super Sabre. I already emailed them about the f-105 they have some flight manuals and tech orders.

Nothing about flight data or radar I posted the f-105 catalog here https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17Udw8h10lDxMK4sYvkmcnNSuAuX2qGea?usp=sharing

I am trying to compare their catalog for other contemporary aircraft. If we get a larger library with them then we can assume that the data is missing 

 

[Rudel_chw]

50 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

If we get a larger library

 

I have these manuals about the F-105, in case they are useful for your project:

 

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ai6cuX3YQI26iKZlI6mCG4t8CzIxoQ?e=RUZi6n

 

[upyr1]

42 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

I have these manuals about the F-105, in case they are useful for your project:

 

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ai6cuX3YQI26iKZlI6mCG4t8CzIxoQ?e=RUZi6n

 

Except for some drawings and tech orders this is all the Smithsonian has as well. So unless something is here it is either lost or has to be recreated.

[mkellytx]

On 12/12/2021 at 3:34 PM, upyr1 said:

As a test I have emailed the smithsonian to see what their list for the F-100 looks like I figure most of the documents should be extant. I know the flight manuals exist and some tech orders as well

The Hun should be within the realm of the possible, regardless of what the museum has.. The fire control system is basically the same as the late model Sabers.  Additionally, there are civilian operated F-100F's still out there.  Might require some money, not to mention NAA was assimilated by the Boeing...

Understandably most of the pull is for the D model Thud, as it carried the bulk of the load for Rolling Thunder, but since you mentioned the Hung what kind of interest would there be for a B model Thud?  The functionality of the fire control system would be essentially the same as the Hun or Saber, the engine and aero would be high performance Thud but without the additional 1,500-2,000 extra pounds of the D model.  It would be a real hotrod with pretty straight forward systems and most of the documents needed is out there open source.

[upyr1]

1 hour ago, mkellytx said:

The Hun should be within the realm of the possible, regardless of what the museum has.. The fire control system is basically the same as the late model Sabers.  Additionally, there are civilian operated F-100F's still out there.  Might require some money, not to mention NAA was assimilated by the Boeing...

1 hour ago, mkellytx said:

Understandably most of the pull is for the D model Thud, as it carried the bulk of the load for Rolling Thunder, but since you mentioned the Hung what kind of interest would there be for a B model Thud?  The functionality of the fire control system would be essentially the same as the Hun or Saber, the engine and aero would be high performance Thud but without the additional 1,500-2,000 extra pounds of the D model.  It would be a real hotrod with pretty straight forward systems and most of the documents needed is out there open source.

The B model would be the easist in terms of avionics. While I would love to see or do the D or even the G I think the B might be the most realistic. The flight manual does mention how to operate the radar. 

[mkellytx]

47 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

The B model would be the easist in terms of avionics. While I would love to see or do the D or even the G I think the B might be the most realistic. The flight manual does mention how to operate the radar. 

Yes, the Dash One does describe the basics of the ground map and TA modes, but isn't much help for radar weapons releases.  Not that it really matters since that was mostly used for the, "Alone and unafraid," SIOP role, Ryan's Raiders aside.  Dive toss didn't become a thing for conventional weapons till the F-4, even then many Phantoms went old school up North and depressed the gunsight.

There's tons of pull for a real Weasel, but way to much focus on the more finished products, namely the -105G & F-4G.  Granted, a Viper with HTS does SEAD, but I think Budman, my old Vice Wing Commander, would beat me up if I called that a Weasel .  He was a Bear in one of the first flights south of Bagdad in '91.  

Before the G's the first real Weasel should be a Wild Weasel I, F-100F with the -25/26, no Shrikes, trying to stay ahead of the Thuds, with a Bear talking the pilot's eyes onto the target to deliver Zuni's marking the target for the Thud killers.  Next should be Wild Weasel III, the F-105F with the -25/26, -142 and the other nice toys in back, followed by the AGM-78's.  One advantage of the stepped development is that it would give time to build the logic for an AI Bear, at least on the -105 Weasels.  The F-4G with its Cheerios display maybe much easier logic, but much harder to get a hold of.  At least a lot of the workings of the -100/105 systems are described in great detail in First In, Last Out: Stories by the Wild Weasels.  It's a must read for anyone interested in Weaseling.

[upyr1]

8 hours ago, mkellytx said:

Yes, the Dash One does describe the basics of the ground map and TA modes, but isn't much help for radar weapons releases.  Not that it really matters since that was mostly used for the, "Alone and unafraid," SIOP role, Ryan's Raiders aside.  Dive toss didn't become a thing for conventional weapons till the F-4, even then many Phantoms went old school up North and depressed the gunsight.

There's tons of pull for a real Weasel, but way to much focus on the more finished products, namely the -105G & F-4G.  Granted, a Viper with HTS does SEAD, but I think Budman, my old Vice Wing Commander, would beat me up if I called that a Weasel .  He was a Bear in one of the first flights south of Bagdad in '91.  

Before the G's the first real Weasel should be a Wild Weasel I, F-100F with the -25/26, no Shrikes, trying to stay ahead of the Thuds, with a Bear talking the pilot's eyes onto the target to deliver Zuni's marking the target for the Thud killers.  Next should be Wild Weasel III, the F-105F with the -25/26, -142 and the other nice toys in back, followed by the AGM-78's.  One advantage of the stepped development is that it would give time to build the logic for an AI Bear, at least on the -105 Weasels.  The F-4G with its Cheerios display maybe much easier logic, but much harder to get a hold of.  At least a lot of the workings of the -100/105 systems are described in great detail in First In, Last Out: Stories by the Wild Weasels.  It's a must read for anyone interested in Weaseling.

I'm one of the folks who is interested in seeing a weasel in DCS. My dad was an EWO on an EB-66, he almost got the 105.  There were 3 weasels used in the Vietnam war, there was also the EF-4C which I believe used the same EW system as the 105G. I might be wrong but I will ask about that. Either way, it is important to figure out how much data we have available 

[Manhorne]

Back in 2010 the Collings Foundation was looking into wanting to restore a F-105 back to flying condition . From what I understand there was a lot of resistance from the Air Force and the Government in general against the effort so it never got past the initial planning phase. Since they were going to attempt it they may have a lot of the info people are seeking.

[upyr1]

57 minutes ago, Manhorne said:

Back in 2010 the Collings Foundation was looking into wanting to restore a F-105 back to flying condition . From what I understand there was a lot of resistance from the Air Force and the Government in general against the effort so it never got past the initial planning phase. Since they were going to attempt it they may have a lot of the info people are seeking.

I remember that. Restoring a Thud to flying condition will be different than building a module. The only documents which would overlap would be the flight manual. Those are extand in fact we had some posted in this thread.  I know they do contain some flight data but I don't believe we have enough for an EFM

On 12/13/2021 at 2:29 PM, Rudel_chw said:

I have these manuals about the F-105, in case they are useful for your project:

 

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ai6cuX3YQI26iKZlI6mCG4t8CzIxoQ?e=RUZi6n

Next there is the issue of the weapons systems and avionics espeically the radar and the EW system. The smithsonian has nothing they can reprint on the radar unless it is listed seperatly. It used a North American radar so perhaps Boeing or one of the Rockwells have the data

[Tank50us]

4 hours ago, Manhorne said:

Back in 2010 the Collings Foundation was looking into wanting to restore a F-105 back to flying condition . From what I understand there was a lot of resistance from the Air Force and the Government in general against the effort so it never got past the initial planning phase. Since they were going to attempt it they may have a lot of the info people are seeking.

I imagine part of the reason the US Government was throwing a fit was because the aircraft was nuclear capable, and didn't want anything 'useful' falling into the wrong hands. That said, anything anyone could glean from such an aircraft now is significantly out dated since modern Air Defenses are more than capable of dealing with a fast, low-level fighter bomber like the Thud

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Tank50us said:

I imagine part of the reason the US Government was throwing a fit was because the aircraft was nuclear capable, and didn't want anything 'useful' falling into the wrong hands. That said, anything anyone could glean from such an aircraft now is significantly out dated since modern Air Defenses are more than capable of dealing with a fast, low-level fighter bomber like the Thud

I am wondering if any of the salt or start treaties are at play here. Anyway the question is what can we do with a simple flight model. The F-105G I believe used the same ew suite as the EF-4c 

[Manhorne]

One thing I have noticed with the DCS community and seems to be a big issue why we do not have and will not get any 60's -70's era aircraft is that it seems that the majority just want WW2 planes or the more modern planes. Seems like there is only a small group of us that want the 2nd and third gen jets. Honestly I am burnt out on WW2 stuff and I am sick of all the modern stuff as well. Why we do not have an F-4 is beyond me and the F-8 and A-7 modules seem still no further along than they were 2 years ago. Its sad there is not more interest in the earlier jets. If there was more I feel we would have more of an effort to make them a reality...

Edited December 16, 2021 by Manhorne

[Rudel_chw]

4 hours ago, Manhorne said:

why we do not have and will not get any 60's -70's era aircraft

Actually, We do have the Mig-21, UH-1H, and the F-5E as paid Modules, plus the A-4E as community’s Module. Also, the Mirage F-1 seems to be nearing release.

[Manhorne]

5 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

Actually, We do have the Mig-21, UH-1H, and the F-5E as paid Modules, plus the A-4E as community’s Module. Also, the Mirage F-1 seems to be nearing release.

I am not into helicopters and of the 4 fixed wing that are present only the MiG-21 was a major player. The F-5E never was a big player outside of Third World Countries . Basically the same with the F-1. It was not a big player outside of the 3rd world and only saw service with France as the only Western country to use it which it did see combat in the late 80's into the 90's with them. I know there is a MiG-23 module in the works which would be a great addition but I would like to see more Western aircraft. The reality is with the F-105 ( after giving it much thought) we will never see it because its only combat was Vietnam and we will never get a Nam map for DCS. At least I do not see that happening in my life time.

[upyr1]

10 hours ago, Manhorne said:

One thing I have noticed with the DCS community and seems to be a big issue why we do not have and will not get any 60's -70's era aircraft is that it seems that the majority just want WW2 planes or the more modern planes. Seems like there is only a small group of us that want the 2nd and third gen jets. Honestly I am burnt out on WW2 stuff and I am sick of all the modern stuff as well. Why we do not have an F-4 is beyond me and the F-8 and A-7 modules seem still no further along than they were 2 years ago. Its sad there is not more interest in the earlier jets. If there was more I feel we would have more of an effort to make them a reality...

 

The 1950s are lacking as well.  I know I really want more cold war era fighters. As stated

5 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

Actually, We do have the Mig-21, UH-1H, and the F-5E as paid Modules, plus the A-4E as community’s Module. Also, the Mirage F-1 seems to be nearing release.

We also have the MiG-19 but we need more even if they are just AI.