|
| The Convair F-102 Delta Dagger resulted from a 1950 USAF design competition for an integral all-weather interceptor weapon system. Combining the Hughes Falcon air-to-air missile, the delta wing platform first flown on the XF-92A, and the 4944kg thrust Pratt & Whitney J57-P-11 turbojet, the first of 10 YF-102s (52-7994/7995 and 53-1779/1786) flew at Edwards AFB, California, on 24 October 1953. The prototype was lost in a mishap nine days later, but tests with other YF-102 airframes revealed a disappointing truth: the type was sorely underpowered and incapable of level supersonic flight. Rarely had the Air Force invested so much in a system which performed so poorly.
Convair designers went back to the drawing board and the indented fuselage or 'area rule' configuration developed by NACA's Richard Whitcomb was hastily introduced in the much-altered YF-102A, which was assembled in a scant 117 days. The first of four YF-102As (53-1787/1790) flew at Edwards AFB on 20 December 1954, not merely with 'area rule' but with cambered wing, new canopy (except on 53-1788) and 5443kg thrust Pratt & Whitney J57-P-23. The new design was supersonic and met USAF expectations.
The production F-102A began to reach Air Defense Command squadrons in June 1955. The first two-seat TF-102A combat proficiency trainer (54-1351) flew at Edwards AFB 8 November 1955 and operated alongside F-102As in ADC service. Total Delta Dagger production was 873 airplanes.
The F-102B designation was briefly assigned to a new aircraft completed as the F-106. The little-known YF-102C (53-1806), a converted F-102A model, tested change in the internal fire control system, but these were not adopted.
A rakish, well-liked and easily-handling aircraft, popular out of proportion to its importance, the F-102A eventually served with 27 ADC and 23 ANG squadrons. Air Defense Command machines went through several modernisation programmes before being relegated to the ANG, the internal provision for rockets being eventually omitted. A few F-102As went to Greece and Turkey. A few camouflaged F-102As were deployed to South East Asia in 1964-6, and to trouble-plagued Korea in 1968 but, while they flew a few missions over North Vietnam, they are not thought to have actually been in combat.
The PQM-102A is a Sperry-converted airframe under the Pave Deuce programme for use as a fully manoeuvrable manned or unmanned target drone. About 30 have been converted. Numerous F-102A airframes have been saved, the 199th Fighter Interceptor Squadron of the Hawaii Air National Guard having retained no fewer than four non-flyable F-102As for display purposes after transitioning to the F-4C Phantom.
FACTS AND FIGURES © To make it supersonic, the
original YF-102 was
lengthened and given bulges
on the rear fuselage to
change the cross-section.
These protuberances were
known as 'Marilyns'. © The YF-102 was a
development of the XF-92
research aircraft, which was
originally to be the ramjet-powered
'return' component
of a large two-part composite
attack aircraft. © The canopy of the YF-102
had heavy framing more
akin to an early World War
II fighter. Convair were
probably worried about the
stress of supersonic flight on
large areas of Perspex.
 | A three-view drawing (1680 x 1223) |
| CREW | 1 |
| ENGINE | 1 x Pratt Whitney J57-P-23, 7802kg |
| WEIGHTS |
| Take-off weight | 14187 kg | 31277 lb |
| DIMENSIONS |
| Wingspan | 11.62 m | 38 ft 1 in |
| Length | 20.84 m | 68 ft 4 in |
| Height | 6.46 m | 21 ft 2 in |
| Wing area | 61.45 m2 | 661.44 sq ft |
| PERFORMANCE |
| Max. speed | 1328 km/h | 825 mph |
| Range | 2173 km | 1350 miles |
| ARMAMENT | air-to-air missiles |
| Diderick A. den Bakker, e-mail, 09.12.2009 17:35 Wanting to create a 1:33 paper model of this plane, I am trying to find sections of the fuselage. 3D views never give those. Can anyone help? reply | | Capt. Deadbug, e-mail, 06.12.2009 21:32 A lot of misinformation has been posted about the F102 on various other sites ... mainly by guys who never flew the aircraft and who have misinterpreted aircraft loss data. They have called the Deuce hard to fly because of the number of crashes incurred.
The F102 was a "pilot's airplane." It did lack power but no pilot ever turned down additional thrust. Handling was exceptional, and it could turn with (or out-turn) most everything flying at the time. The problem was with the airspeed you didn't have after the turn.
Back to the crash data. There were few pilot error crashes. Without question, most of the losses were attributed to design failures in two specific areas. First, the Sundstrand or "angle-drive" units which transferred power from the engine to all the accessories, such as generators and pumps, had a history of failure. When the Sundstrand failed the aircraft was left with no electrical power except that provided by a battery which never seemed to be there when needed, no engine ... and no flight control except that supplied by a Ram Air Turbine deployed and not too promising under 200 knots.
Rarely did a pilot get out even a radio call when the Sundstrand failed ... a mute aircraft with a complete flameout usually resulted in an ejection and a lost aircraft.
The other design which accounted for higher losses was a weakness in the engine bleed-air ducts and the placement of flight control hydraulics where 16th stage bleed air from "ruptured ducts" (sorry) blew directly onto the hydraulics. The result in this situation was boiling hydraulic fluid which caused loss of aircraft control and loss of the aircraft.
Aside from those built-in faults, the F102 had no nasty habits ... it was a very stable, forgiving aircraft limited by early 50's military aviation thinking.
I don't think anyone regrets flying the Deuce. reply | | Lt Gordon Gerstner, e-mail, 23.10.2009 01:42 I was a weapons controller on EC121D Ethan 03 1969. I vectored two F102s from Udorn AFB to intercept two Migs attacking our aircracft. Mission was succesfull and MIGS rtb at venn afb N. Vietnam. F102 joined us for fly by.
Anyone involved please reply. Thanks Again!!! reply | | paul scott, e-mail, 20.08.2009 17:35 Wow! So many USAF pilots /crew on here about the F-102 (Though as you say, specs are for the F-106, of which is a much better aircraft). Amazing deltas though for the US. The US government like a small misguided UK government put too much emphasis on thinking that missiles are /were the 'be all and end all'. Indeed, here in the UK, still fifty years on, RAF chiefs are spitting that our inept government of all things good and British in technology is dismissed in as much that the RAF squadrons' Eurofighter Typhoon will have its 27mm Mauser cannon omitted. Though the cannon can be bolted back on in a moment's notice, I remember how important in the air AND the ground a cannon is as back-up for strafing as a US F-16 pilot was stating when in Iraq.
But some people it seems don't learn - as Sydney Camm had said: 'Planes have four dimensions, Length, height, span and politics'. reply | |
| | Robert G. Stoeckel, e-mail, 01.06.2009 20:50 My father Capt. Charles (Curly)G. Stoeckel Flew these frames out of Paine AFB and TDY SEA in '65 /'66. Frame # 56-1318 USAF 64th FIS (Scorpions), at Clark AB, Philippines.
1 /31 /1967: Written off at Clark AB, Philippines reply | | Jock Williams Yogi 13, e-mail, 21.04.2009 15:33 I got a chance to fly the 102 dual when my CF100 had an engine fire and I had to "drop in" at the ANG unit in Pittsburgh.
The 102 dual was side-by-side seating -and as I remember it had difficulty going supersonic -but the single didn't have that problem.
The 102 was the first delta winged plane I ever flew and also the first afterburner-equipped, and I loved it! I later had the opportunity to fly virtually all the century series aircraft -but this was the first and I was grateful for the opportunity!
The CF100 that earned me the ride was quickly repaired but I will never forget that sleek grey dart -or the hospitality of the Air National Guard! reply | | rob combs, e-mail, 14.03.2009 22:38 my dad was a line chief for the usaf stationed at tyndall afb fl; and in 1956 he brought me to see their new airplanes...the F-102....it was a quantum leap over the f-89 and f-94. I had a blast being an air force brat! reply | | Patrick, e-mail, 23.12.2008 02:26 Comments by Max Kohnke concerning the Vietnam era and the Deuce are correct but much can be added. Eight 102's were listed as opperational losses by the 509th FIS and 64th FIS between 11 /64 and 1 /69. Additional combat losses were 1 by a MIG-21 on 2 /3 /66, 2 by ground fire over SVN, and 4 by ground attacks at DaNang. See Wayne Mutza's Book CONVAIR F-102 published by Schiffer Military History Books for more.
Mel is right, you have the wrong spec's for the F-102. reply | | Jeff, e-mail, 16.07.2008 02:33 The Air National Guard had these at Ellington AFB, TX, in the 1960s before they upgraded. Lt. George W Bush flew 102s with this unit. reply | | Max Kohnke, e-mail, 28.06.2008 01:08 I have seen several references to a F-102 being shot down by a MiG in Viet Nam on an escort mission for B-52s. There was a great deal of judgemental error by the brass in using a dedicated interecptor, optimized for radar intercepts against bombers as an escort fighter over enemy territory in clear weather. Virtually all of the F-102's advantages (all weather radar, speed & altitude) were lost while it's weaknesses (no guns or no rearward visibility) were exploited by the enemy. reply | | Roger Moore, e-mail, 14.06.2008 22:29 I flew the 102 for both the Hawaii and Conn. Ang from 1965 to 1968 and it was a delight to fly. I then flew the F100 for the DC ANG briefly in 1970 and in the pattern they felt the same but the 102 was vastly superior in ceiling and turn rate. The USAF offered me a 90 day tour in Vietnam in 1966 but I declined as the 102 was no rival for the MIG 21. reply | | Butch Owens, e-mail, 09.05.2008 05:53 I was a crew chief on the F-102A at Clark AFB, Phillipines, Tan Son Nhut AFB in Saigon, Vietnam and at Udorn and Don Muong, Thailand in 1965 and 1966. Also worked Dueces in the 51st OMS (16th) FIS at Naha AFB, Okinawa in 1961 and 1962. The Duece was a challenging aircraft but was loved by maintainers and pilots as well. reply | | Mel, e-mail, 30.04.2008 19:30 You have the F-106 spec's instead of the F-102 spec's. reply |
|
Do you have any comments?
|
| 
COMPANY
PROFILE
All the World's Rotorcraft
|
