F-111 Aardvark | America's all-weather attack aircraft
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- The F-111 Aardvark was an all-weather attack aircraft, capable of low-level penetration of enemy defenses to deliver ordnance on the target. It was also the first production aircraft to feature variable-sweep wings (also known as swing wings). After a troubled development, the F-111 entered service with the United States Airforce in 1967. It flew in Vietnam, Operation El Dorado Canyon, and the first Gulf War before its retirement in 1998. The F-111 continued to fly with the Royal Australian Air Force until 2010, where the aircraft was dubbed 'the pig'.
In this episode of Duxford in Depth, IWM Curator Emily Charles looks at the development, design, and service history of the F-111 Aardvark. She explores what the aircraft represented during its service, an example of the Military-Industrial Complex that Dwight D Eisenhower warned against and as a symbol of American's interventionalist role in the post-Cold War world. She also looks at the service history of this particular F-111 which flew in the Gulf War as part of the 20th Tactical Fighter Wing before arriving at IWM Duxford in 1993.
Interested in a closer look? Visit IWM Duxford: bit.ly/visit-du...
Subscribe to IWM's RUclips channel for new Duxford in Depth videos every month.
James Rosenquist's F-111: www.moma.org/c...
Explore these stories with a visit to an IWM site: www.iwm.org.uk
Follow IWM on social media:
Twitter: / i_w_m
Instagram: / imperialwarmuseums
Facebook: / iwm.london
Thanks for watching! As always, let us know what vehicles you want us to cover next?
If you can, cover the Lightning F6
A video on captured enemy equipment in British service could be very interesting. While at Duxford I saw Monty's caravan (captured from Axis forces) and an Argentine mobile field kitchen. Captured enemy trucks and workshops were a mixed blessing--improved mobility and maintenance support with built-in logistics issues. As an American soldier I did a lot of work with command posts--moving them around, setting them up, operating them, packing them for movement. Mobile systems were easier to pack up and move than were portable systems.
That was great to see I lived at Boscombe Down where these aircraft would be based every few years and some of them were used in Libya from Boscombe Down. Thank you for the video thumbs up and shared.
The biggest weakness of this plane was the TF30 engine, which the F14 was also saddled with, until replaced by GE engines. What killed the F111 in US service was the introduction of pulse doppler radars, with look down/shoot down capability. It was only a matter of time before the Soviets fielded similar systems, as this rendered low-level high speed missions ineffective.
@@jager6863 Thank you and thumbs up. :)
May all pilot's landings be "professionally uneventful"; gotta love a laconic turn of phrase.
"Every takeoff is optional.
Every landing is mandatory. "
That is indeed laconic. May I make your comment more explicit? Unfortunately, there will always be things that break. You need the pilot for those situations when something goes wrong. Your pilot needs to have the attitude that he/she will fight to the death to save the plane and passengers should something go wrong.
Unfotrunately there are numerous airliners that have crashed with trivial damage that a western pilot would have saved.
“Temporarily Disorientated.”
@@Spastic69 'Geographically embarrassed'
Thanks bro
No mention of the F-111's service in Vietnam. 4,000 sorties flown and just 6 aircraft lost raids against the formidable North Vietnamese air defences in 1972. The low loss rate was attributable to the aircraft's Terrain Following Rader, which enabled it to fly at low level under the enemy radar screen at night and take out air defences in advance of the B-52's - something else that wasn't mentioned.
Very interesting about F111 in Vietnam service . I had no idea. Thank you Paul Higgins . Qld Aus
@@ianando9459 Thanks Ian. One of the pilots shot down was a guy called Bob Sponybarger and I met him a decade later when he was based at RAF Lakenheath where my Dad was serving with the RAF at the time. Lakenheath was where the other UK based F-111 wing was located from 1977 to 1992 and they flew the more capable F version of the aircraft than the E's at Upper Heyford. They were interesting times!
Actually, 2 different times the A model went to SE Asia. The first time, there were 3 losses in just a matter of days. Found out that there were several structural defects that caused total loss of the AC during combat. The aircraft were recalled, and the defect corrected. When they returned in 71 or 72, then you have the history you recounted. The reason the F-111 had such success in Vietnam was not necessarily the TFR, but the one pass, one hit ability. Aircraft up to that time had to have a FAC, or at least a flyover to pinpoint the coordinates of the target, then a return trip to drop their bomb. The F-111 could identify the target inbound, mark it with the bombing system, and drop the bomb, without going around.
@@paulhiggins8662 I was stationed at Lakenheath from 82-85. Worked in Red section.
@@harrystone8847 Thank you so much Harry for taking the time.. One of the benefits of this medium is one has immediate access to grass roots good data. You have a wonderful rest of the year. Hopefully our steady reduction in freedoms so readily accepted by the inane public will be a ' it to will pass moment '.
Former Marine, Gulf war vet,....as communication and fire coordination expert (CAS) radio operator when I had F111 or A4 "in my back pocket" I felt invincible, and hoped targets would present themselves. Day/night, all weather, moving slow enough to have a quit chat with wizzo, and enough payload to come back around if needed. Outstanding aircraft.
It's always easy when they don't shoot back... the hubris can really build...
@@martindavis9930
I agree. I never claimed I had it rough though.
I'm thankful I was spared Iraq and Afghanistan. I never consider myself a combat vet in the sense those guys are.
I pray Ukraine can be resolved without our people getting involved. We've not engaged a more capable adversary in a long, long time.
My memory of the F111 will be as a kid on my BMX in the 80's cycling from our farm up to the Upper Heyford base and watching the incredible American pilots flying extremely low through the hill's, and on the odd occasion I would get a wing waddle after waving. I have Incredibly fond memories of the aircraft and the pilots that flew them, just can't believe the difference today after visiting my family a short time ago you'd be hard pressed to think a base on that scale had even existed.
I lived on the flight path to UH and remember the night of the Libya bombing
We used them in Australia, the RAAF loved them
I worked on them at Upper Heyford. Blue Section (have blue tail bullets) Fighting Fifty Fifth 88-90 coolest story about the base… the supply tent still had the sign hanging for the circus in the James Bond Movie Octopussy.
@@ScottStratton1 Fantastic Scott great getting in touch with people that actually worked on the base
As an Aussie we all held a special place in our national pride for the F111. We loved them.
No National sporting event worth its salt was complete without an F111 carrying out a dump and burn.
And after all, they just looked so cool.
Sorely missed from our skies
I had to do a torch, the US term for dump and burn, when in combat. The left engine had seized and we’d just come off top off from the tanker. In order to land quickly we had to dump fuel. To do that quickly single engine we sent into max afterburner on the right engine. That lit the dumping fuel as well. We turned south for Kuwait. Being single ship we needed a chase so an F-16 rejoined on us. The pilot had never seen a torch before and thought we were on fire. We calmly said no big deal we were just torching. We landed safely in Kuwait.
Long live the Mighty Pig we miss seeing her in our Aussie Skies
Were these ever once stationed in Butterworth, Penang?
@@Joshua_N-A Highly likely at times, I know the Hornets were
@@Joshua_N-A Yep. They deployed regularly to Butterworth regularly during the 80s and 90s.
@@Booyaka9000 I don't belive they were ever "stationed " there, but the did deploy quite often for exercises, the same as the FA18.
I was with 492 SQN in the 80's and 90's and the P3 (C and W) Orion was the only perminant RAAF aircraft there at that time, all told I did 13 deployments for a total of 2 years, loved Butterworth.
@@PopulismIsForBottomFeeders Do you remember the dates you were in Butterworth?
13 trips were awesome, but I missed out of being posted there by one week :-(
I was a cross trained in Elect and Instruments and got promoted to SGT, I didn't want to take as I wanted to stay on the tools, anyway I had been on 492SQN for about nine years and my FLTSGT at the time said that I was overdue to be rotated out, but if I accepted the promotion, he could guaranty at least another year, so I took it.
One-week later a cross trained Avionic CPL position came up in Butterworth, still salty
As a Crew Chief at RAF Upper Heyford I "crewed" this very aircraft numerous times; I was in the 79th Fighter Squadron, Bravo Flight, 86-88
Augie!! What up? Remember 68-032? Crewed by Mark, Mark and Deb? This is Ssgt Mark! Those were good times my friend! A lot of our blood, sweat and tears (sometime literally ) went into maintaining those great birds!!
Is this SSgt Mark Hay?
@@davidaughinbaugh8643 👍🏼 It is!!
How the hell are you Mark! Man, it's been 33 years since we were at Upper Haystack! What have you been doing with yourself and what are you up to these days?
I retired from the Air Force in 2007 after 21 years and have been working in General Aviation, small airlines and government contracts as an aircraft mechanic on all sorts of different assets and am currently working for Northrop Grumman.
I have lived in Las Vegas since I retired.
I was at Udder Hatred from 80 to 83. Miss the Aardvark
Outstanding presentation on the F-111E. I was at upper Heyford as a crew chief from 1973-1977 in yellow A and C flights. The last bird I Crewed was 68-043. I miss the airplane and those great times. The F-111 could be a demanding mistress to the maintainer. Thank you for preserving 68-120. It is an important part of American aviation history.
From one to another thank you for your service to our country.
Former army 15 Tango Air Crew chief UH-60 Black hawk.
@@robertgutheridge9672 Thank you for your service as well sir! My wife is a Navy brat born at GITMO her brother and brother in law were interservice transfers to Army. Her favorite aircraft is the AH- 60
@@rickeymitchell8620 my step dad is a retired major so makes me a army brat.
And you can probably figure out what my favorite helo is.
Strangely in Honolulu there's an RAAF F-111 in the museum there lol
I was a crew chief in the 79th FS as well. 1988-1991.
The Libya attack was ineffective and a sign of the start of the US as the world's policeman? Seriously? This is absolutely not true! It was effective because you never heard from Qadaffi again. Plus, status as "world's policeman" has been a topic of hot debate long before that event, and is going on to this day. I'm not sure where you got your information, but it wasn't from reality.
Maybe the Libyan attack wasn't that significant materially, but it wasn't that long afterwards that Qaddafi decided that maybe being a troublemaker wasn't such a good idea, after all. It was only luck that he wasn't killed in the attack, which targeted his palace, in addition to military equipment.
Very enjoyable. I love these 60s era aircraft...big massive engines, blinding speed and incredibly gorgeous design.
Seriously. This aircraft is sexy. I also think that almost every car made in the 60s was sexy.
60's to 70's are the peak era of aircraft design IMO.
Can you imagine in 20~ years we went from planes effected by high speed compression we didn't even know existed to planes like this.
They could do one sit pilot like mig 23 or mig 27
And a noise you never forget😭
I was fortunate to have visited Duxford around the turn of the century and enjoyed the American Air Museum as well as the Land Warfare exhibit. The connection to the movie "Battle of Britain" was something I learned while visiting Duxford.
Erm, I think you might have got a bit mixed up saying it could fly a Mach 2.5 a low level.
I’ve flown it at 1.4 Mach and 300 feet AGL. That was because the targeting pod was extended. The F model, the version with the targeting pod, could go faster. I also flew the EF-111 which had less powerful engines. The fastest I was in it was 1.75 Mach. We were still accelerating but crossed into Saudi and the rules said no super sonic flight so we had to slow down.
Not at all. It was a Cadillac in the sky. The F-15 could not keep up with the F-111 below 1000 feet. Too much turbulence.
@@harrystone8847 at the time I was flying the 111 it had the 2nd highest wing loading in the US inventory. Only the B-52 was higher. The F-15E had a lower wing loading so wasn’t as smooth. I flew the F-15E as well and it was quite nice even at low level.
Actually it could
@@willisix2554 No it couldn’t. It maxed out at about Mach 1.3 at low level, it could only achieve over Mach 2 at high altitudes.
One of the biggest users of the F111 was the RAAF. It's sad to see it retired now.
I will always admire the way pilots get the most out of their planes, even the ones with complicated stories like the F 111. Special salute to the officers who sacrificed their lives in 93 to save the civilians on the ground on that fateful accident.
That was the hardest funeral I ever attended. RAFUH 20th CRS '91 - '93
She made it sound like it was the f111 featured in this video.... surely not?
It’s funny seeing something as large as the Aardvark being intended as a “fighter”, especially as a naval aircraft.
The naval version was 68 feet long 5 feet shorter than the USAF strike version and only 1 foot longer than the YF-23 which lost to the F-22. The USSR SU-27 is only 2 feet shorter than the USAF's strike version as well and the SU-34 is longer and a full tonne heavier when both are empty.
The F-111 like the F-117 got the fighter designation because USAF look down on anything not a fighter or a bomber when both should have had the A designation in USAF service.
While the USN used plenty of A designation aircraft the USAF only had two the A-7 adopted in the Vietnam war due to the loss rates the F-100 and F-105 were seeing in the fighter bomber role and the A-10.
@@Ushio01 the su 34 is a strike aircraft and isn’t really a fighter
@@Justin-zi5io So it's an F-111 equivalent.
But some of the tech for the F 111. Was used by grumm F-14 that was the fleet defense fighter ( and 1 or the best aircraft ever built?
@@Ushio01 f-15e equivalent
I worked on the TFR, ARS, nav and bomb computer system, doppler and hud systems on the F-111As, EF-111s and FB-111As. I was stationed at RAF Upper Heyford in England from '82 to '85. I worked on that plane you have there.
Those aircraft flew thousands of sorties in the Vietnam War with only about 6 losses. Not a bad record for being in a war scenario.
I was an avionics tech and later a crew chief on the F-111 for most of my 25yr career in the Air Force. With two tours at Upper Heyford, I spent many a night working on that very aircraft. She was designed in the days before the term "user friendly" was coined. So yes... she weren't easy to maintain. Still, given the chance I'd love to spend one more day wrenching on her.
Thanks for serving faithfully. I remember them during my time in the USAF at Mountain Home A. F. B, in Idaho. Sadly, our wing commander, Col. Ernest Coleman, ejected and suffered paralysis on impact. I remember saluting him on that day before he flew that flight. The aircraft was impressive, and those who flew and worked on them were equally impressive.
The F-111 is may favorite plane. I was stationed in the USAF at RAF Upper Heyford where they had Aardvarks on Victor alert.
From 1986 to 1989 I was a hydraulic mechanic on the a model F-111 at Mountain Home Air Force Base Idaho yellow section
Excellent video, and excellent job by the presenter Emily, I found her to be very engaging. Well done Emily, not only a fantastic curator, but a gifted orator and presenter as well.
"Mach 2.5 at low level"... erm, OK, sure...
Really love these museum aircraft focused videos. Really interesting getting more insight into what is on display and its history.
I was in High School ROTC in Bossier City, LA and we had a field trip to Carswell AFB in Fort Worth to visit the F-111 manufacturer. It seems like just a few years ago but this was in 1972 so it has been almost 50 years ago. That was a very interesting field trip!
Small point, the aircraft may be capable of Mach 2.5 but that would have been short distance ‘sprint’ speed at very high altitudes! At low level it’s absolute maximum speed would have been around Mach 1. The low altitude speed record is Mach 1.3 in a very modified aircraft over hot desert air, artificially raising its density altitude.
F model clean 1.4 on the deck. 3.2 at altitude.
Basically agree though it would go way beyond M1.0 on the deck. Probably M1.3 in the C model was realistic.
Why do they not get a technically competent person to check their script? they are talking on behalf of the museum.
Not true. I worked on those airframes for over 20 years. They were fast on the deck. Very aerodynamic.
@@harrystone8847 long legs too. 32,500 pounds of internal fuel. Just stay away from ab.
I worked as an Electronic Warfare technician on the FB-111 when it first entered the USAF. It was a very technically advanced aircraft at the time and I have great memories of watching it take-off with full afterburners in the night.
Still my favorite aircraft to have worked on in the Air Force. Including this example, from my time at Upper Heyford 1991-94.
That military industrial complex has a lot of blood on its hands.
I'd disagree with your comment on the Libyan Airstrike. Landing several laser guided bombs next to your bedroom, in retaliation for the killing of US Troops, seems to have made Ghadafi less likely to cause trouble. That seems to be the case, looking back at it.
When it has to be delivered overnight F-111's fly low and fast, " Ask any Libiyian. " Also the F-111, " Central Heating for the Warsaw Pact. "
for those interested, the FB111 or carrier variant was obviously cancelled. Many airforce aircraft including the f16, f15, f22 and f35 have tailhooks because they are used for emergency landings. not leftover designs from carrier varients.
I am thoroughly impressed by how knowledgeable the narrator was, marvelous job at explaining everything and not forgetting the big picture whilst masterfully explaining the key point as well. Well done, you have earned a new sub. All the best.
Very professional yes but it never flew at mach 2.5 in terrain following mode and it deserved mention of it's work in Vietnam.
I thought her narration was tainted with a sprinkling of Left Wing nonsense. The attack against Gaddafi is alleged to have caused him considerable personal loss & heartbreak. It might have made him and other despots think twice before attacking civilian targets.
I'm not sure what the critique of the military industrial complex has to do with the F-111, or why an aspirational, productive middle class associated with consumerism is somehow negative?
@@sierrawhiskey5155 If you thought that, then you should definitely see a psychologist about your impending schizophrenia...
@@Booyaka9000 Stop talking gibberish you Leftist simpleton
Still can't grasp the concept of irony, eh @@sierrawhiskey5155? Have you tried asking an adult, or your court appointed mental health carer...? Maybe take the crayons out of your mouth when you do, you know, if you want to be taken seriously.
Every single aircraft program you highlight is an example of Eisenhower's warning against the military-industrial complex? 🤔 Huh.
I was a crew chief on the fb11a, I always thought they were a sleek airframe. They weren't b52's but, with srams & b69's it was a terrifying aircraft!
You mean FB-111A
Rumors are that Australia is planning to re-employ these and cancel their F-35 order. Just kidding, but that would be a good idea.
When I see an F-111, I'm just reminded of the failure of the TSR-2 program thanks to cost cutting and bureaucracy. Can't believe we opted for the Aardvark then cancelled that aswell.
The American F-111 was just as responsible for the demise of the TSR2 as the American Bomarc missile system was for the demise of the Canadian CF105 Arrow. American jealousy and interference at its worst!
Capt. Jerry Lindh, 55th Fighter Squadron pilot, and Maj. David “Mike” McGuire, 55th navigator - brave dudes & proud Americans. After death in many peoples minds they became honorary English men for their actions that day.
Australian F-111 pilot, " letting the jet fly itself at 600 knots, 250 feet of the ground in complete darkness is as scared as I've ever been.. ".
Lot of trust to put in that computer!
That wasn't the only time US pilots risked their lives to avoid British civilian casualties during a flight emergency. It happened again with an aircrew from RAF (USAF) Lakenheath in North Norfolk, the crew piling their aircraft into a wheatfield to avoid houses. Nobody died that time, and the population of those villages have never forgotten it; their warm gratitude towards the US airmen and women continues to this day.
I remember that. Was stationed there when it happened.
@@jodonnell64 As I remember it, the aircraft was on fire as it came down because I know some burning fuel landed on the roof of at least one cottage in a village. Those aircrew stayed with it until the very last moment to ensure it hit a field and not a house. It's hard to express the gratitude for that.
That has been my consistent experience of USAF personnel over here during my life; unwavering professionalism and respect for Britain. The respect flows the other way as a result.
🇬🇧 🇺🇸
Once this superb aircraft had it's initial 'teething' issues remedied it literally took the world of air-combat by Storm: inc: Desert Storm. A lethal platform. A true legend of the Military Aircraft Hall of Fame. Seeing it at Duxford was a privilege. Duxford is THE place to go in the British Isles if one is an avid enthusiast, pilot or historian. The fee to enter Duxford is peanuts, compared to the myriad things that you will enjoy there. I never realised that Concorde was so small, or the Lightning so brutally awesome!
Don't forget Libya. I worked at the GD/FTW plant home of the F-111 designing ECM systems for a few years on the EF-111 program. The factory guys got a patch made and around the rim it said Libya Urban Renewal Program.
I remember seeing some of these features as part of the ADF expo tour as part of the Bicentennial here in Australia. Also saw the “new” Steyr AUG at the time.
As an Aussie, seeing F-111 fuel dump into the afterburners at air shows was an absolute treat :D
Tying the development and deployment of the F-111 to the (American) military-industrial complex and foreign interventions seemed a bit gratuitous to me. Even if the Aardvark has never flown, the sprawl at the Pentagon would have continued unabated.
If you want to make a critical video of the defense industry and defense spending, I wouldn't use the F-111 program as an example.
Nothing around today or on the boards that can match its capabilities. Speed, range, payload, etc.
I remember standing on the harbour wall at Crail in Fife and watching two of these moving low and fast across the North Sea, probably heading for Leuchars. An awe inspiring sight. 😀
There’s a video of these smashing up a building by flying over a lil too close
@@tasmanmcmillan1777 link please...!
In about 1979, I was stood on the top of Traprain Law, near Haddington in East Lothian. One of these beauties came at me from the South and almost scraped me off the top of the Law. I’ll never forget the experience. What an amazing aircraft.
@@JohnSmith-rr1oc they will never be able to be fully replaced
'
come on american company can make many more better F-111 airplanes...
same as B-1 / F-14 airplanes
Many of the aircraft mechanical ground crews have passed away from cancers due to maintenance issues cleaning the fuel tanks on the F111 Pigs something that should be remembered to all who serve in our armed forces.. Thankyou..RAAF..RAF. USAF....
Back in a day when we didn't take crap from anyone
the very first "riverfire" event in Brisbane Australia saw two of these birds 'jousting' in such a fashion that it reminded me of two "Battle Star Galactica" style Vipers as they twisted and turned with their afterburners quite literally on fire
Harold Wilson junked the TSR-2 in favour of the F111. This pretty much destroyed our military aviation capacity at the time. The F111 was an inferior airplane. A piece of deliberate vandalism.
No aircraft can fly Mach 2.5 at low level
the attack on Libya wasn't meant to destroy thigs it was meant to scare them, it wasn't ineffective.
Agreed that the Libya mission wasn't ineffective. Granted the remarks made on the video were done by ones that have no idea what they are talking about. I don't know your knowledge of that time period, but the bombing did happen when Gaddafi was getting extremely confrontational with the US regarding military encounters. I don't think that scaring them was the plan, but to destroy some capabilities they had. We are probably seeing the same line regarding the end result of the strike. Gaddafi's young some being killed as a result of the strike shut him up, and we never really heard anything out of him for about the following 25 years. It was one less lunatic to really worry about. Really the only thing after that was the F14's shooting down the 2 Migs in '89. I doubt scaring them was any intent, but it did do one hell of a job.
In order to accurately evaluate a weapon, ask those who suffered it’s attacks. During the Vietnam war, the opponents of the F111 was known as “whispering death”.
*to the opponents of the F111, it was known as…
No, all these what the enemy called allied aircraft stories are made up nonsense, usually from some reptile journalist in a safe place.
best aircraft ever built, more than 6000 missions in narm giving it the best kill rate of any aircraft, and ds 1990 they killed all there targets and then took out targets meant for a10's , in ds 1990 the 1-11 killed more thanks than the a10, the RAAF had the 1-11 C, it had MFD's and an amazing weapons loadout, it was the best darn aircraft we ever got, their was a plan to bring em back but we got the super hornet instead cause then we could land on aircraft carriers and it was cheaper and quicker.
Did you ever work out why it was necessary to bury them under the rubbish dump at Swanbank.
Terrible thing to do to such an awesome plane.
@@mikenewman4078 Asbestos in bonded panels. Killed a lot of F111 mechanics.
@@yakidin63 Where'd you get that info? I worked on them for over 20 years, never heard anything about asbestos. The panels were aluminum honeycomb bonded to aluminum panels.
In 1986, the use of these planes against Libya was from bases in the UK. The French denied the USA, the use of their airspace to flyover as the shortest rout to Libya. SOoooo these planes had to fly down the gulf of Biscay, around Spain and Portugal, then turning east into the Mediterranean, to attack Libya. At the conclusion of the mission, the rout was so long and arduous, that the crews were exhausted. They literally had to be pulled from their cockpits.
I miss *THAT* pig... I used to load it on occasion when I was at RAF Upper Heyford (88-90). 77th AMU Load Crew Member (Worked with SSgt Chris Judd, and with SSgt Michael Winn as their #3 man)
8:39 all USAF aircraft have a hook in order to engage emergency arresting gear.
Tactical Fighter aircraft do, but not the other types.
It's true the F-111 was greatly admired not just by Australian flight crews, but also by the general public (especially in Queensland), who were very reluctant to witness its retirement from service. I understand that the withdraw from US naval service was due to the undercarriage not being robust enough to withstand the repeated on-deck landings.
From my memories of the time when i was about 10 so not going to say they are perfect but this was the first time that the US government tried to force the UASF and the USN to use basically the same aircraft and the USN wanted no part of it as they were after their own ideal aircraft. The B model USN version was rejected by the USN more on size and their theory that it would be a crap fighter. This is funny to me when you think though in Aussie service it was in a primary role of ground attack and bomber it was also considered an OK fighter. Add to this the USN ended up with the f14 tomcat which is almost the same size as the F111B and has sweep wings another point the USN didnt like about the F111. Its biggest problem was it was at its time of development cutting edge design and like all radical new designs had many problems because no one had tried to make something like it before. I also remember when the different political parties here in Australia were trying to justify the time delays and to fight to dump the whole idea one thing that came out was the development accident rate of the F11 being much less than the accident rate during development of the F4 Phantom and some other then equally well liked aircraft. I agree little is made of the action the US F111's saw in Vietnam which did prove the whole concept it was designed for but then the shock and destruction dropped from the B52 was just so much more photographically devastating to watch the B52's took a lot of the limelight similar to how little was shown of USN attacks from Carriers to many it was like the USN was just covering their fleets with air power not pulling a huge amount of the air war weight.
@@beckster181 I was an F111 Instrument and autopilot tech and instructor from 1971 to 1980. I think you did a good job explaining the reasons for the F111 design. I was amazed how well the it was designed for us maintainers. It was fairly difficult to foul things up. I have been disappointed that the USN did not accept it too. It would have saved a huge amount of money in development and operating cost. I think there were two main reasons that they didn't. First they didn't want a trend to get started that civilians and politicians pick their equipment and secondly they (top military brass) want to pick the manufacturer because many expect a cushie high paid job with them when they retire. The USN was in bed with Grumman. Many of their retired buddies were already there. This probably happens with nearly all military equipment suppliers. It happened with the one I worked for some. I didn't get a job with General Dynamics but I would've liked to. I became a tech rep for military helos after 10 years in the USAF.
Beautiful plane, used against Libya & Iraq.
One of my favourite aircraft. I saw them fly many times at the Mildenhall air Fete & checked this one out at Duxford a few times. Ingenious ejection system.
No matter what anyone says I love the F-111.
Security Policeman, Upper Heyford 1986-1990. During one Alert I was posted on a secured Hardened Aircraft Shelter (HAS) which housed a nuclear loaded F-111. The aircrew came and requested entry but there was a mistake on their entry credentials so I refused entry to them. The pilot was getting heated demanding to be allowed entry. He yelled at me "that is MY jet inside there". My response; I went to port arms with my M-16 rifle and said "Sir, that might be YOUR jet, But its Parked Inside MY Shelter!"
When I was stationed at Lakenheath, I was doing a "simulated" nuke loadout (with an actual nuke) during one of our many wargame exercises (I was a weapons loader). Anyway, we had just finished pulling the bomb off the plane and securing it on the trailer, put the ropes up around the trailer, and was climbing the ladder to the cockpit to remove the safety wire and seals from the arming panel, when the next thing I hear is "EVERYBODY OUT! FACE DOWN ON THE GROUND!" and the sound of a .50 on top of a PK being readied. Turns out, the aircraft crew chief forgot that the load crew had to declare the HAS open before he could walk in, violating the No Lone Zone rule (actually stepped OVER the rope across the front of the shelter). If he had waited 10 more seconds for me to get the arming panel taken care of, it would have been fine. As it was, I spent the next half-hour face-down on freezing concrete, along with my other two load team members, the crew chief (who got reamed pretty badly), and a couple of other maintenance folks.
@@jodonnell64 Oops.
Man Jets are so much more than just, cool looking, super speeding and ultra confusing. They have so much cool facts about them. Gotta say this is one DOPE video
If I remember correctly the Soviets where very concerned about this aircraft, for good reason they had nothing that compared or could defend against it, I think it was retired to early , it was a good fighter bomber that got the attention of are enemy's and did it's job very well whatever that may have been.
The F111 were written into the SALT TREATIES
awesome machine, there is some good on board footage of low level flight with intercom around Scotland on the tube, thank you enjoyed that, the individual's stories add so much. Very well done keep them coming.
Mach 2.5 at low level ...I don't think so
A nod to Sir Barnes Wallis for the 'variable geometry' wing. The usual thing is that the British didn't want the idea so he took it to the States and upon his return said with regret to his assistant "I believe I've over-sold the idea."
One of my favourites. In the mid 1970s my Grandad in Brackley got to know a US Airman who arranged to take my brother and I aged about 15 into the base at Upper Heyford. We went into one of the hangars to see an F-111E. I was allowed to sit in the left hand seat for about 10 mins while he pointed out the controls etc. I remember that there were black shutters that could be moved to cover the windshield if dropping nuclear weapons to shield the crew from the flash! The aircraft seemed rather large and scary at the time…. We often used to see them flying over the village. Exciting times. 🥴. I must come and visit Duxford soon!
I spent over 3 years in the USAF working on F-111 and EF-111 Aircraft at Cannon AFB in New Mexico. I worked on them in all 5 Squadrons. Then we retired them and most went to the Boneyard but at least one of them is in a Museum in Dayton Ohio. I really miss the Aardvark. Of all the various aircraft I worked on in my 20 years, it was my favorite.
Did you know Tracey Donahoo by chance?
Ineffective?Gadaffi's daughter was killed in the 1986 attack.
If “all weather” is the only way you can describe this amazing aircraft in your title, you aren’t giving it justice
It can also fly on Saturdays and Sundays unlike those "work week jets."
There is a video on youtube that shows a RAAF F-111 doing an emergency landing after it lost a main gear wheel on take off using the arrester hook system for a wheels up landing that ended up with the aircraft receiving so little damage that it was fixed and put back into flight service a few months later. This aircraft was one of a kind and other than the USAF the RAAF were the only other airforce to fly them. They were the stars of the show where ever they went and their dump and burn was their signature show stopper, this was where they would dump fuel from the tanks between the 2 engines and then light it off as they would fly either straight and level or in the early days go from low and slow to full after burners and turn into a ballistic climb where all you would see was the flame of the fuel till it was shut off and then the to engines in full after burner disappearing into the heavens. For the full effect of this show look at any Brisbane River fire event before they were retired.
The relevant aircraft was I understand NEVER repaired
@@kenjackson5685 The incident occurred so late in the F-111 RAAF service it was not worth repairing only to scrap soon after.
ruclips.net/video/RzU7aANAXck/видео.html
6:41 the word is ineffective not uneffective.
Excellent video as always and always fun to see a face I remember, Emily supervised my work experience with the AAM back in November 2014.
I’ve always loved the looks of the FB-111, it’s so beautiful that the only think better than the FB-111 with it’s wings forward is the same craft with it’s wings swept back
I think it looks much better then f-14
Video seemed somehow 'choppy'. Didn't flow...
Beautiful aircraft and remember them very well flying over my childhood home! Forgot to mention how controversial the aircraft was as it killed off the TSR2 and was very versatile from F-111A to EF-111A.
As a kid, I would watch these planes get so low to the water, they would leave a wake.
My father was a fisherman and would often see them do this. As they approached the shore they would pull up, the heat from the engines would be felt as they climb up above the tree line. He used to joke that they were so low, you could see the facial hair on the pilots who forgot to shave that day. 😆
RAAF base was only a ten minute flight from where he used to fish, so we would see them many times a week.
I can vividly remember seeing an Aardvark, that departed RAF Valley late one winter afternoon, power overhead at about 500 ft then, about five miles away, punch low-level straight into a dark, forboding wall of cloud that was blanketing Snowdonia. There one second, vanished the next...
and the SPECTACULAR RESULT was the foundations for COMPLETE DOMINATION BY THE FANATICS OF IRAK, LYBIA AND ALL THE WAY TO AFGHANISTAN !
BRAV-O !
Your political take on this is absurd. (Ie: Invoking a rightly said American Presidential Statement but targeting it incorrectly.) I am Canadian. Grandad flew as a Wing Commander in both WWs. ) You should have stuck to facts about the Aardvark. To compare this aircraft to either a Tomcat or Tornado is ludicrous. There was nothing like this mach 2.5+ swing wing fighter bomber that terrorized all who came in its path. If lucky, on afterburners, F14 and Tornado MAY have mustered. 2.2 mach. I have watched that F111 fly. London Ontario Canada. I have watched a Tomcat. I have watched a Tornado.. The Aardvark would chew each of them up in 12 seconds flat. Yes. Even now. The only machine that might come close to fighting her today at supersonic would be an F22 Raptor. The Vark could Out-speed, out-gun, out-bomb anything. The Pig has imho never been equalled.
It was NOT the RAF's Tornado. The MRCA Tornado was a joint venture between Italy, Germany and the UK, led by MBB from Germany. You seriously make people doubt the correctness of everything you state here, when you mess up the details.
FWIW: IF I have my history correct -- meaning what I _remember_ 😊 -- the Libya raid WAS successful:
It sent a message _LOUD AND CLEAR._
Sorry to be churlish but at 6:42 “it was The discovered that the attack had been entirely UNEFFECTIVE”! That’s clumsy grammar although we all know what is meant, it would have been preferable to use ‘INEFFECTIVE’.
The story of the incredible sacrifice made by the two aircrew who crashed rather than eject is tragically poignant.
Look around for the RAAF doco "Pigs Can Fly" it's so Aussie. 🤣
The F-111 Dump n Burn shows through the Brisbane CBD were legendary!
I've been buzzed by one at full tilt in the middle of nowhere and remember it clears as the day 40 years later. What a thing!
I will never forget the Libyian raid. My brother was in the US Air force and stationed at RAF Mildenhall ( SAC) next to Lakenheath who had the F-111's. He called in the night and told us that he didn't know what was going on but planes were taking off and that he loved us and was put on high alert. As a family we thought it was ww3!! I was 14 at the time and also assumed the worst. Well, we woke up the next morning to watch the news and discovered that it was a Libyian raid and not ww3. That was living in the cold war folks. We were always 30 minutes away from MAD 24/7. But some how I still believe life was better back then despite the mindset of inevitable global destruction hanging over us. To us it wasn't if rather when it would happen. But the F-111 would serve in the Gulf and soon replaced afterwards by Strike Eagles F-15'e's. Thanks for the trip down cold war lane, brings back memories even if unpleasant.
Imagine try to sell anyone a fighter aircraft, the size of an Airbus A320.
Swings Wings...thanks Barnes Wallis.
Imagine the level of Hubris to think the F111 was a technological marvel worthy of sending to space as a greeting to aliens.
Mach 2.5 @ Low Level... That would really be something!!! Must of been made of 100% titanium....😉😆
ممكن نستطيع نحول طائرة سوفيتيه mig 23 3d إلي اجنحة تغلق بكامل ومعاها محركين ولونها مثل الصاعقة
I remember seeing a whole squadron at low level in early 80's in Northern Newfoundland. They came in low from the Ocean. They were practicing for the attack on Khadaffi at the time. 8 since found this out by doing some History research. Seen many USA Military Planes as a Kid in NFLD, Nfld had US bases, but this F-111 story is Special. I witnessed History that was top Secret in the day.
The Aardvark! You just have to love it, it's so odd and beautiful! "Ethel the Aardvark was hopping down the street..." (Monty Python's Bookshop sketch)
2:00 can land on a sod field in 3000ft but can’t land on 4000ft of hard runway at Duxford? 😂
Great vid anyway, I’ll never forget watching an RAAF F-111 do a dump and burn at whenuapai in the 1980s!
Excellent presentation on my favorite bird! But, just a tid-bit, all US fighter aircraft are equipped with tail hooks for emergency recovery. Meant for use on the ground, in a long rollout scenario. The hooks would never withstand a carrier recovery. As it's not built that way.
We visited Upper Heyford in the late 80's. F1-11 pilot told us what a fiasco the Libya bombing was. He said the 1-11 called FB, fighter bomber, to make them feel like fighter pilots. We went to the crew bar, on the walls plaques of each aircraft, some upside. We asked why, they replied those are the one's we lost.
FYI due to the F-111's escape module any addition, subtraction or movement of equipment within the escape module would shift the CG so our Arrows (aeronautical engineers) would have to do some nifty calculations to ensure the CG was still within acceptable limits. 😎
It was NEVER designed to be a 'fighter', it was labelled a 'fighter bomber' as the air force version and a 'fleet defence interceptor' for the Navy version purely for marketing reasons and to get funding from the US government. The B was never an 'air superiority' fighter either, it was a long range fleet protection 'Interceptor' designed to stand off at long range and take out Soviet bombers before they got into range of the fleet. I have personally seen three F-111 arrested landings, all emergency landings, four of the RAAFs major airfields have a permanent airfield arrested landing system installed known as the BAK-12 Arresting system.
I got to spend time at Nellis air force base in New Mexico right after the Dessert Storm. The other squadron of American F-111's were stationed there. I was given a tour of the F-111 trainer on the base as well as the hangers. I have a surplus set of "chinese underwear"(walking sleeping bag) and a survival mummy bag for the F-111 cockpit. They are still in the bags as once you remove them from the bags you will never get them back into the bags. They are form fitted to wedge into the cockpit airframe.
Over budget and under performing sums up the F-111. It's success is due to the Pilots and their training. Navy needed congressional hearings to not accept it. Sorry US Air Force... You did super well with what you were given at the time. MacNamerra didn't give poop one because the contract was signed.
Ah the F-111, the aircraft that became the prototype for so many subsequent US armed forces projects - overly complicated, overly expensive, overly late into service and nearly completely useless in the role for which it was designed. No one in their right mind should have seen this as an Air Superiority Fighter for the US Navy for instance, given both its size and weight in relation to carrier service (still, at least the US Navy got the superb F-14 Tomcat as a result). Despite that, it became a superb fighter-bomber in the traditional style - more bomber than fighter of course. It served with distinction but still remains the weirdest choice ever for the Royal Australian Air Force, which never really needed an aircraft of this nature - and would have been better served by more of the F-4 Phantoms they leased whilst awaiting the very long delayed delivery of the F-111Cs.
Bad commentary: the F111 was not designed as a fighter both for the Airforce and the Navy. As mentioned it was designed to perform an Airforce tactical mission and naval fleet air superiority mission. There were initially two different versions for that; the F111a and F111b. The b-version was declined by the Navy and that resulted in the development of the interceptor/fighter F14 Tomcat. But most of all it was not designed for flying at Mach 2.5 at low levels.