Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military From: lag@uafhp.uark.edu (Adrian Griffis) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: F111 Summary: The F-111 is only a DOG in a Dog Fight. Message-ID: <1990Sep2.060734.2520@cbnews.att.com> Date: 2 Sep 90 06:07:34 GMT References: <1990Aug23.014440.1382@cbnews.att.com> Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: College of Engineering, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Lines: 29 Approved: military@att.att.com From: lag@uafhp.uark.edu (Adrian Griffis) In article <1990Aug23.014440.1382@cbnews.att.com>, Scott.Johnson@p0.f7.n391.z1.fidonet.org (Scott Johnson) writes: > > The F-111b was a DOG, don't let anybody tell you different. Its > trans/super sonic manuverability was so bad they were worried if you > could turn it at all. This was an attack aircraft, and trying to make > it a fighter was the biggest mistake Mr. Macnamara (sp?) ever made. > If I remember correctly, The Great Book of Modern Warplanes says that in a little over 4000 F-111 missions in Vietnam, only 6 F-111's were lost to enemy fire. Granted, the plane is big and clumsy in air combat, and there were embarasing accidents early in it's history, but not many aircraft have a record like that. To shoot a plane down, you have to find it first, and it is NOT easy to find an aircraft flying 200 feet off the ground in nice weather, much less nasty weather. Even a B-1 is hard to find when it's terrain following. Unless I'm mistaken, the F-111 that was shot down over Libya was an EF-111, and was probably downed by a missle that could "home on jamming". There's nothing like emitting jamming signals to call attention to yourself. The other F-111's did not need the EF-111 to complete their mission and get back out. I think there's little doubt that F-111's are better off staying out of dog fights, but they are well suited for doing exactly that. They have their nich and they seem to perform very well in it. -L. Adrian Griffis (lag@uafhp.uark.edu)