Author Topic: The F-111k  (Read 717 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rickshaw

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10322
The F-111k
« on: December 10, 2019, 02:42:45 am »
Just came across, purely by chance, an indepth explanation of the RAAF's decision to purchase the F-111C Pig.   It includes details on Page 52 of the F-111K.   If you were using standard F-111A wings to represent the F-111K, it appears you're in error.  This work claims the F-111K was to be fitted operationally with longer F-111B or F-111C wings.   :thumbsup:
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

Offline sandiego89

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 2787
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2019, 07:22:06 am »
Thank you for sharing, I have been interested in the RAAF consideration of the B-47 and the Vigilante so this is a great source.
Dave "Sandiego89"
Chesapeake, Virginia, USA

Offline kitnut617

  • That's got his tum rumbling already just by the sound of it.
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 12462
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2019, 08:26:27 am »
I've read that somewhere else, probably in an Air-Britain article. The two that were started though, had the short wings. At least that's what the photos of the two show ----
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Offline Captain Canada

  • "but this time it's different. I was drunk when I agreed to it."
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 29813
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2019, 08:54:39 am »
Cool. Thanks for sharing that !
CANADA KICKS arse !!!!

Long Live the Commonwealth !!!
Vive les Canadiens !
Where's my beer ?

Offline rickshaw

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 10322
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2019, 05:57:21 pm »
I've read that somewhere else, probably in an Air-Britain article. The two that were started though, had the short wings. At least that's what the photos of the two show ----

Apparently the specification changed after the first two were started.  The longer wings allowed greater range/payload to be carried, which for the RAAF was essential (to reach southern China from Butterworth).  Even so, we nearly had the short wings as well and the lightweight landing gear, the heavier/longer gear was only chosen when it was realised that the RAAF's strips were too short for lightweight/shorter gear.

How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

Offline PR19_Kit

  • Closeted Take That fan
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 33783
  • Whiffing since the 70s
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #5 on: December 11, 2019, 12:12:36 am »
There's as many sides to the RAF F-111K's wing length issue as there are stars in the sky.....
Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Offline Devilfish

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2020, 01:17:40 am »
Building a K right now. I chose the short wing version, but I do have an FB in the stash too, should I decide to do another....


Hang on......They were meant to be fitted with Speys???

This article claims that two aircraft were finished and taken on by the USAF as FB-111s.  Firstly, the well known photo of the 2 K's being built, shows they have short wings. Secondly, they were TF-111s, meaning they were trainers, with dual controls, so I assume not fully operational? Third, I have read many times that they weren't completed, or taken on by the USAF, mainly because they were so different to their aircraft.

I'm not sure I take much out of that article as being fact....
« Last Edit: January 06, 2020, 03:14:29 am by Devilfish »

Offline kitnut617

  • That's got his tum rumbling already just by the sound of it.
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 12462
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2020, 06:17:32 am »
Building a K right now. I chose the short wing version, but I do have an FB in the stash too, should I decide to do another....


Hang on......They were meant to be fitted with Speys???

This article claims that two aircraft were finished and taken on by the USAF as FB-111s.  Firstly, the well known photo of the 2 K's being built, shows they have short wings. Secondly, they were TF-111s, meaning they were trainers, with dual controls, so I assume not fully operational? Third, I have read many times that they weren't completed, or taken on by the USAF, mainly because they were so different to their aircraft.

I'm not sure I take much out of that article as being fact....

In an Air-Britain Aeromilitaria  article, it showed a couple of photos of the K's where they had been moved to after the contract was cancelled and awaiting what was to happen to them. One was a TF-111, and both of them were in some sort of build state. One had one wing on it (short one), the other was just the fuselage. The article said that these two were broken up and parts that were compatible with the USAF FB-111 were taken and used on the regular USAF F-111 production line.  From what I can remember of the details in the article, things like the wing box (with the hinges) and the u/c assembly were of the re-enforced type and reused on the FB-111 production line.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2020, 06:23:31 am by kitnut617 »
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

Offline Devilfish

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 612
Re: The F-111k
« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2020, 01:02:31 am »
Building a K right now. I chose the short wing version, but I do have an FB in the stash too, should I decide to do another....


Hang on......They were meant to be fitted with Speys???

This article claims that two aircraft were finished and taken on by the USAF as FB-111s.  Firstly, the well known photo of the 2 K's being built, shows they have short wings. Secondly, they were TF-111s, meaning they were trainers, with dual controls, so I assume not fully operational? Third, I have read many times that they weren't completed, or taken on by the USAF, mainly because they were so different to their aircraft.


I'm not sure I take much out of that article as being fact....

In an Air-Britain Aeromilitaria  article, it showed a couple of photos of the K's where they had been moved to after the contract was cancelled and awaiting what was to happen to them. One was a TF-111, and both of them were in some sort of build state. One had one wing on it (short one), the other was just the fuselage. The article said that these two were broken up and parts that were compatible with the USAF FB-111 were taken and used on the regular USAF F-111 production line.  From what I can remember of the details in the article, things like the wing box (with the hinges) and the u/c assembly were of the re-enforced type and reused on the FB-111 production line.

A photo like that is on another thread on here, possibly my Merlin GR.3 thread. It can be clearly seen that the one with wings has short ones. I can't believe that the K was to have Speys, as the idea was to get them into service as quickly and cheaply as possible.
Well, I'm building my new one with short wings and TF-30s!