F-0582 F-102A The MG-10 System
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Hughes Aircraft Film showing the F-102A Weapon Control System.
From the archives of the San Diego Air and Space Museum www.sandiegoair... Please do not use for commercial purposes without permission
I flew the F-102 in Alaska from 1962-1964. The MG-10 system was the most advanced intercept system in the world at that time. We did not use the Data Link mode. We added significant ECCM measures which were very advanced for their day. We added one of the first infrared search and track systems which helped with locating and tracking low altitude targets. What we didn't know was that the F-102 could outmaneuver the F-100 and was a better air to air fighter than the F-100. I flew the F-100 in Vietnam, and I preferred the F-102 -- although the F-100 had guns and bombs.
Did the F-106 use the D/L ? How did the IRST with the -102 work, please ?
Yes, the F-106 used data link extensively. See my video about the SAGE system. The IRST infrared search and track system in the F-102 and F-106 was a cooled seeker head which scanned left and right, and we could move it search up and down. It would give a "blip" when it saw something. The cooled seeker meant that it tended to avoid things like natural background heat sources, but the sun is a great source of infrared energy and sun reflections on clouds produced strong infrared signals. The moon also produced an infrared target. There was no indication of how far away the target was, just the angle to the target. With the angle, you could turn toward it and go fast and you'll probably catch it. You could slave your radar to the infrared, so the radar beam would be right on the target and you could get a radar return. Radar would then give you range to the target. This was effective against electronic countermeasures, which would foul up the radar in various ways. With the IR lock-on, the radar would look directly at the target and ignore lots of ECM, and would "burn through" the ECM as you got closer. With the radar giving range information, you had a very good probability of kill. If your radar was not working, you could fire your IR missiles without radar range. I did that personally on a live fire once, but was closer than I thought to the target -- the small drone looked very small, and when I fired the IR missile blew up the drone and I was too close, and had to fly right through the fireball. Fortunately, no big pieces hit my plane - I had only a few scratches on my paint.
- Could the IR Missile seekers be slaved to it ?- Why was the Falcon that unreliable ?
Yes, the IR missile seekers were slaved to the IRSTS or to the radar, as chosen by the pilot. Reports of unreliability of the Falcon are wrong. The F-4 did not have the MG-10 or the MA-1 systems to control the Falcons, so the problem was with the F-4, not with the missile!
And where was the switch for it ?
Deiter - Yes, the F-86 could out-turn the F-106 below about .9 Mach, especially below 30,000 feet. At high altitude and speeds above .9 Mach, the F-106 would dominate. In a continuous turn the F-106 much more powerful engine would maintain the F-106 speed better than the F-86, which would lose energy and slow down. The F-106 had much more power and could "disengage " or run away at any time. These same comments apply to the MiG-15. "Never turn with a MIG". The F-106 should disengage, fly out of sight of the MiG, and come back using radar and missiles.
I went to school on the MG-10 system at Lowry AFB Co. Then worked on the system for 9 years in the AF and then in the ANG of South Dakota and Texas. It was a complex analog based system' I still remember doing computer checks out in the snow, on the ramp, at Goose Bay Labrador. The electronic boxes all had a number (computer was the 046 unit). 017 unit was the antenna dish. How I can remember that after 60 years is beyond me!
I went to the same school in 1956 and then to Youngstown Municiple Airport. We had F-86Ds until our Deuces were delivered. Unfortunately the Air Force was moving senior Sergeants into our career field because they figured they would stay in. We had almost no opportunity for promotion. We were given a choice of going to Thule in Greenland or an early out. They lost 97% of our shop. We had good times. Did you ever find a big enough screwdriver to work the upper electronics bay?
If it takes 16 seconds to get missile ready to fire that would not work very well in a dogfight with a fighter. This was all oriented to shooting down bombers
That and it's primary missile armament being the AIM-4 which has its fair share of reliability issues.
OK, here goes a memory test from a 77-year-old that also went to school at Lowry AFB , in 1966, then worked on the system until discharge in 1970: 002, power supply. Remember changing it in a TF-102? 003, sync. 006 & 007: Don't remember what they were called, but they were in the missile bay, and there was a pair of them for each for missile. 011, the huge unit that held the magnetron. It was fun holding it up to get it installed! 060, scope. Anyone else test a new IR seeker head walking in front with a lit cigarette?
I have been trying to find out more about these second gen radar systems. Mostly what did the operators actually see, how did they use them? It's hard to find much about it. You hear them talking about them seeing blips or using them to target ground targets, but what does that look like?
So the F102 from what history has taught me is that it wasn't a capable interceptor but the IR made it a combat aircraft that should be taken seriously under supersonic or trans sonic conditions..I wonder what a turn n burn engagement with a Mig21 or Maybe a Mig17 would be like against the F102 delta dagger...?
The MA-1 system yet, please !
The MA1 system followed the F-102 MG-10 system. The MA-1 system was the new Digital based system that came in the F-106. I worked 9 years on the MG-10 on F-102's but never had the chance to move on to the F-106 MA-1 digital system. Must have been a neat system!