Super F-111

If the F-111 is given a more prominent strike role, might the USAF add some basic ground attack capabilites to the F-15 fighter variants or build a multirole variant, or would that see more roles for the F-16?

Also, how would the FB-111H have fared as a medium bomber for SAC, filling in the gap between the more tactical FB-111 and the more strategic B-52, B-1, and B-2?

Well with more F-111s in service you could either have the ground attack role in the above aircraft diminished; or the F-15 could have evolved into a true multi-role fighter early on, so in service it becomes a true Phantom replacement and would be ordered in larger numbers at the expense of the F-16 possibly. Maybe the RF-15 and F-15G Wild Weasel are bought as a result of this.

With the FB-111H around there would be no B-1, it was in competition with it after all. Because it's cheaper more will be ordered and you could see it lasting up to today and into the near future with avionics upgrades and the like. B-52 remains a missile carrier and it's entirely possible that more B-2 are bought without the massive expenses from the B-1 tying it down.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Well with more F-111s in service you could either have the ground attack role in the above aircraft diminished; or the F-15 could have evolved into a true multi-role fighter early on, so in service it becomes a true Phantom replacement and would be ordered in larger numbers at the expense of the F-16 possibly. Maybe the RF-15 and F-15G Wild Weasel are bought as a result of this.

On the other hand though, if the F-111 is more successful there is less of a need for the F-15 to acquire ground attack capabilities. The USAF has never really given the F-15A/B and F-15C/D any real ground attack capabilities, in keeping with their role as fighters. The F-15E is more of a dedicated variant, and in USAF service the crews are trained heavily in strike and mostly told to escape from air combat.

With the FB-111H around there would be no B-1, it was in competition with it after all. Because it's cheaper more will be ordered and you could see it lasting up to today and into the near future with avionics upgrades and the like. B-52 remains a missile carrier and it's entirely possible that more B-2 are bought without the massive expenses from the B-1 tying it down.

The FB-111H was more of a medium bomber aircraft, rather than a strategic bomber. It didn't have the range to penetrate deep into Soviet airspace, or the capacity of carrying the larger weapons in the arsenal. There would still have been the need for an advanced strategic bomber.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Also, any chance the F-111 could be retrofitted with glove vanes or a similar system, as on the F-14? That could help smooth out flight at lower altitudes and reduce airframe strain.

f14-detail-glovevane-01l.jpg
 
The F14 glove vanes were unsuccessful in practice and disabled in the F 14A fleet and not fitted in new build F 14B&Ds.
 
Weren't they used for pitch control for the terrain following system? What are those called, and what do they do? They aren't quite a canard, and not quite glove vanes.

They are called a "rotating glove" and according to the F-111 Pilot's Flight Operating Manual have no other function than to allow full extension of the leading edge slats when the wings were swept forward.

From the side they look a bit less like a control surface than in the view above.

06-F-111G-ROTATING-GLOVE-&-INTAKE.jpg
 
Last edited:

Delta Force

Banned
Could the F-111 have been retrofitted with some kind of Ride Control System canards to reduce wing and fuselage strain, as on the NB-52E? The B-1B had something similar, but of course it was a new build aircraft.

6z4zu8.jpg
 

Delta Force

Banned
I'm interested in what the F-111 and EF-111 might have seen if their service had continued later on into the 1990s and 2000s, in terms of modernizations, and also in terms of how they would fare against the F-15E. Anyone have any ideas on what that might have been like?

Also, the B-1B has small canards, probably to smooth out turbulence and reduce hull and wing strain that would occur during low level flight. It seems the system can be integrated on supersonic aircraft, but would it be possible to retrofit ride control canards to the F-111? The reduced hull strain could give the fleet a longer life.

640px-B-1_wings_swept.jpg
 
I don't think fuselage fatigue was a major factor in the ending of F111 service, after all ours lasted until 2010. I think the cost of developing and then integrating aerodynamic dampers would be exorbitant given the benefits they would produce.
 

Delta Force

Banned
I don't think fuselage fatigue was a major factor in the ending of F111 service, after all ours lasted until 2010. I think the cost of developing and then integrating aerodynamic dampers would be exorbitant given the benefits they would produce.

I've heard that the F-111 was retired because they aged prematurely following their use in Desert Storm due to greater fuselage fatigue. They were the backbone of Coalition strike operations, and those few months apparently used up several years worth of peacetime flying time. That's if that is to be believed.
 
That would be right, the aircraft are lifed for a certain amount of flying hours, the RAAF Mirages had around 4000 hours when we disposed of them for example. Given 1.5 pilots per plane and 180-250 hours per annum needed to keep pilots at the top rating required by NATO your average F111 might expect to fly 300-400 hours per year, so a plane with a life of 10,000 hours could expect to serve for 25-30 years without a major structural life extension programme like the RAAF/RCAF Hornet centre barrel replacement. Air Forces manage airframe life to keep the fleet in good repair in peacetime, they may limit manoeuvring to below certain G limits in training for example and they don't fly much on weekends (indeed the RAAFies I know do fuck-all after 11am on a Friday).

Now in Desert Storm all of these limits are off. The planes might fly under exercise conditions for weeks/months leading up to the actual war itself, so harder, faster, longer and even on Friday afternoons, nights and weekends. Given an 80% availability rate maybe 4 days out of 5 for 6 months, or 144 flights and given the demands of training for war the flights might go to 4 hours in duration, so 570-600 hours during the buildup.

When the war comes, given the typical 90% availability rates achieved in wartime, an F111 might fly 9 days out of 10, so 38 out of 43 days. Given the very long endurance of an F111 the average flight might be 5 hours, so during the war itself the plane might fly 200 hours. What's more in wartime pilots can pull all the G they want to complete the missions and save their lives and aircraft, so these hours are hard hours.

So just that crude spitballing it's easy to see that Desert Storm could knock 3 years off the life of the F111F fleet.
 
The RAF has run into the same problems, the Victor tanker fleets hours were hammered in the Falklands which meant they needed to be thinking about replacing them a lot sooner than expected...but they had a lot of time to work something out. The OSD was likely to be late 90's-early 00's until the Gulf War which ate up all those hours at a ridiculous rate.

Again the cost of extending the lifespan would have been excessive, and of course the "peace dividend" meant there was less need for the same number of RAF tankers as the aircraft they serviced were being cut.

A lot of Airforces have found the same issue with their C130 transport fleets which have chewed through their fatigue hours at a fair clip thanks to the "War on TERROR" tm.
 
Last edited:
On the other hand though, if the F-111 is more successful there is less of a need for the F-15 to acquire ground attack capabilities. The USAF has never really given the F-15A/B and F-15C/D any real ground attack capabilities, in keeping with their role as fighters. The F-15E is more of a dedicated variant, and in USAF service the crews are trained heavily in strike and mostly told to escape from air combat.

In all seriousness, the idea of multi-role capability built into the F-15 from the start is pretty close to ASB. In the early days of the program, people walking into the program office at Wright Patterson Air Force Base were greeted by a huge banner that read, "NOT A POUND FOR AIR TO GROUND."

Two overriding factors went into the development of the F-15 Eagle - taking every lesson ever learned in air-to-air combat and molding them into one airframe. By and large the designers succeeded with the exception of one issue, the thing is huge. The other was that it was in some was a reaction to the jack of all trades, master of none reputation that the F-4 gained (with some justification).

The F-15 was designed for air-to-air combat. Its pilots trained for air-to-air combat. Nothing else. The fact that a multi-role variant later came from the basic design simply shows what an outstanding aircraft it is.
 

Delta Force

Banned
That would be right, the aircraft are lifed for a certain amount of flying hours, the RAAF Mirages had around 4000 hours when we disposed of them for example. Given 1.5 pilots per plane and 180-250 hours per annum needed to keep pilots at the top rating required by NATO your average F111 might expect to fly 300-400 hours per year, so a plane with a life of 10,000 hours could expect to serve for 25-30 years without a major structural life extension programme like the RAAF/RCAF Hornet centre barrel replacement. Air Forces manage airframe life to keep the fleet in good repair in peacetime, they may limit manoeuvring to below certain G limits in training for example and they don't fly much on weekends (indeed the RAAFies I know do fuck-all after 11am on a Friday).

Now in Desert Storm all of these limits are off. The planes might fly under exercise conditions for weeks/months leading up to the actual war itself, so harder, faster, longer and even on Friday afternoons, nights and weekends. Given an 80% availability rate maybe 4 days out of 5 for 6 months, or 144 flights and given the demands of training for war the flights might go to 4 hours in duration, so 570-600 hours during the buildup.

When the war comes, given the typical 90% availability rates achieved in wartime, an F111 might fly 9 days out of 10, so 38 out of 43 days. Given the very long endurance of an F111 the average flight might be 5 hours, so during the war itself the plane might fly 200 hours. What's more in wartime pilots can pull all the G they want to complete the missions and save their lives and aircraft, so these hours are hard hours.

So just that crude spitballing it's easy to see that Desert Storm could knock 3 years off the life of the F111F fleet.

It probably took off more than that, since the hours put on would be harder too.

On the other hand though, if the F-111 is more successful there is less of a need for the F-15 to acquire ground attack capabilities. The USAF has never really given the F-15A/B and F-15C/D any real ground attack capabilities, in keeping with their role as fighters. The F-15E is more of a dedicated variant, and in USAF service the crews are trained heavily in strike and mostly told to escape from air combat.

In all seriousness, the idea of multi-role capability built into the F-15 from the start is pretty close to ASB. In the early days of the program, people walking into the program office at Wright Patterson Air Force Base were greeted by a huge banner that read, "NOT A POUND FOR AIR TO GROUND."

Two overriding factors went into the development of the F-15 Eagle - taking every lesson ever learned in air-to-air combat and molding them into one airframe. By and large the designers succeeded with the exception of one issue, the thing is huge. The other was that it was in some was a reaction to the jack of all trades, master of none reputation that the F-4 gained (with some justification).

The F-15 was designed for air-to-air combat. Its pilots trained for air-to-air combat. Nothing else. The fact that a multi-role variant later came from the basic design simply shows what an outstanding aircraft it is.

What would a modernized F-111 look like though, and what would its eventual replacement be?

Also, why was the F-15 made large enough to be such a potent strike fighter in the first place? It only needs a strong radar, powerful engine, and a few missiles, so it's quite overengineered being able to lift the payload that it can.
 
It probably took off more than that, since the hours put on would be harder too.



What would a modernized F-111 look like though, and what would its eventual replacement be?

Also, why was the F-15 made large enough to be such a potent strike fighter in the first place? It only needs a strong radar, powerful engine, and a few missiles, so it's quite overengineered being able to lift the payload that it can.

I think a modernized F-111 would look like an F-111F only better. Part of the problem with the F-111 was that when it was first fielded it pushed the limits of current technology so obviously there were a lot of bugs. Once the bugs got ironed out and PGMs matured, it became a bad ass deep strike platform.

WRT the F-15's design. Recommend you read this. It's written by a guy who flew fighters in the 70s and 80s and is informative but easy to read:

http://www.afhso.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-100929-043.pdf
 
Top