Did you know that registration to Fighter Control is completely free and brings you lots of added features? Find out more....

Silly Tonka question

A forum for discussing all things related to MILITARY AVIATION including Military Aviation news. No off-topic discussions here please.
User avatar
beefsteak
Posts: 3035
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:27 pm

Silly Tonka question

Post by beefsteak » Sat Mar 18, 2017 11:00 am

I've just been watching some film of the Tonkas going through Lossie, swept wings, pushing the magic mach 1 and spread at about 200 mph and it got me thinking. What is the time scale from flying with spread wings at say 200 mph to first mach 1 and then to 'full chat'?
Like I said, silly question that has popped into my head!
:P
Jim Bowen, on "Bullseye" :- In which state of the U.S.A. is Dallas, Texas ??

arch
Posts: 565
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:23 am

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by arch » Sat Mar 18, 2017 1:05 pm

Tonkas can't do mach1 they had the ramps in the intakes wired at a certain angle (cant remember what).

it is also to do with altituide speed is relevant to that.

ie concorde doing mach2 at 40000 ft the ground speed would be a lot slower.

PA200
Posts: 75
Joined: Sun Jun 23, 2013 3:44 pm
Location: Deepest Darkest Lincolnshire

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by PA200 » Sat Mar 18, 2017 2:04 pm

Actually if the Jet was clean she could in theory go supersonic, the Ramps when they were operational didn't start moving until she hit M1.3. However the LRMTS fairing on the RH side would cause the engine to flame out before then hence the strake in the intake. Ramp position was also controlled by AOA not just airspeed.

Regards
It don't mean a thing if the wings don't swing!!


Miracles I can do...the impossible takes a little longer!

User avatar
Viper28
Posts: 557
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:02 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Viper28 » Sat Mar 18, 2017 3:51 pm

The variable inlet ramps were wield as a cost saving measure a few years back, however she can still hit Mach 1.2 to 1.4 at height. No hope low level

page_verify
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by page_verify » Sat Mar 18, 2017 5:36 pm

GR4 or F3? The F-3 is still one of the fastest aircraft?

User avatar
beefsteak
Posts: 3035
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:27 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by beefsteak » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:18 pm

Tornados not capable of Mach 1?
Funny , I'm sure they were capable of Mach 2, I have them as being capable of 2,338 km/h!!
Anyway, no body has actually answered my question!
Jim Bowen, on "Bullseye" :- In which state of the U.S.A. is Dallas, Texas ??

User avatar
gamecock
Posts: 616
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 5:27 pm
Location: KSA

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by gamecock » Sat Mar 18, 2017 6:31 pm

Probably because nobody on here has any idea! :D Sounds like a question for PPrune.

Anyway there's not a lot of point looking at Top Trump-style max speed numbers as most of the stores carried are limited to subsonic speeds. I think the F3 was the fastest at sea level at the time, no idea if anything's beaten it since.

page_verify
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by page_verify » Sat Mar 18, 2017 7:14 pm

gamecock wrote:Probably because nobody on here has any idea! :D Sounds like a question for PPrune.
Indeed, that's how I know the F3 is the fastest at low level (faster than F-15s, F-111s, B-1s etc) and very competitive at higher levels.

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-102450.html

Agent K
Posts: 827
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:50 am
Location: Nearby RAF Henlow, Bedfordshire

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Agent K » Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:42 pm

page_verify wrote:
gamecock wrote:Probably because nobody on here has any idea! :D Sounds like a question for PPrune.
Indeed, that's how I know the F3 is the fastest at low level (faster than F-15s, F-111s, B-1s etc) and very competitive at higher levels.

http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-102450.html
Not sure comparing an F3 to a B1, i.e. a fighter to a strategic bomber is really proving anything? I'm led to believe also that the F3 was less than competitive at higher levels.

page_verify
Posts: 1180
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:19 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by page_verify » Sat Mar 18, 2017 8:51 pm

Pure low level speed, the B-1B was also meant to be capable of supersonic speeds a low level.

Agent K
Posts: 827
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:50 am
Location: Nearby RAF Henlow, Bedfordshire

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Agent K » Sun Mar 19, 2017 8:01 am

page_verify wrote:Pure low level speed, the B-1B was also meant to be capable of supersonic speeds a low level.
I stand to be corrected but I thought the B1B was subsonic at low levels, only supersonic (just) at higher altitude. The B1A which never reached production was proposed to be faster.

User avatar
Gary
Posts: 36457
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 4:51 pm
Location: South Lincolnshire

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Gary » Sun Mar 19, 2017 9:40 am

The BAe pilots would routinely take the Tornados over the North sea for supersonic runs on their post maintenance shakedown flights. I'm guessing always in clean loadout. Not heard that happen for a year or so with the winding down.

An old but good thread on Pprune about the subject of the GR4 being supersonic http://www.pprune.org/archive/index.php/t-249417.html (11 years old now :O )

Stroudy
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:35 pm
Location: Fairford Town

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Stroudy » Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:07 am

On a tour of CBY last year a 41 sqd pilot told us he took a GR4 to M1.6, once, with tanks, and never again, as it was trying to shake itself to pieces. So sounds like its still capable of mid range M1, but you wouldn't want to do it often.

Sparts99
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:02 pm
Location: London/Kent

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Sparts99 » Sun Mar 19, 2017 11:52 am

I've just read 'Testing Tornado:Cold War Naval Fighter Pilot To BAe Chief Test Pilot'. I'm sure the answer is in there, I can't recall it though, when I go for the second read I'll post up if the info is there. He does talk at length about maneuverability and performance at the different wing sweeps and speeds and compares the GR/F versions.
In this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig.

Sparts99
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:02 pm
Location: London/Kent

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Sparts99 » Tue Mar 21, 2017 9:27 am

I had a quick flick through, no timings but in testing they took the IDS P-08 prototype to M1.8 at least at altitude. They did quite a few 4 hour test flights down the Irish sea with Victor tanker support checking VNE at various configurations.
In this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig.

Stroudy
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2011 4:35 pm
Location: Fairford Town

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Stroudy » Tue Mar 21, 2017 1:12 pm

So the old stated max speed in lots of books and on the plaque infront of GR1's at airshows in the 80's, saying M2.2, was a load of old guff to fool the Ruskies :lol:

Sparts99
Posts: 2239
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 8:02 pm
Location: London/Kent

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Sparts99 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 9:37 am

Maybe possible at the right height, clean, and with tanker support? I'd say certainly not operationally, but there are others on here that know a lot more than me. In the book I mention above David Eagles says there was very little that could catch an F3 at low level.
In this world there's two kinds of people, my friend. Those with loaded guns, and those who dig. You dig.

User avatar
Ghostrider01
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2014 12:16 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Ghostrider01 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:10 pm

There's been some good technical answers to the original question but, looking at it again with the question rephrased, it was not about speed but about how long would it take for the aircraft to accelerate from 200mph (or knots) to M.1 at the same time as transitioning to a fully swept configuration.

I've had a quick bash around the web for an answer to no avail but the answer, like many above, will be variable depending on many factors such as climate, AC weight and configuration, altitude, if you've got a SAM heading your way etc.

User avatar
beefsteak
Posts: 3035
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 6:27 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by beefsteak » Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:23 pm

Thankyou, somebody finally understands the question!
I was hoping we may have an ex Tonka driver on here to help out.
Jim Bowen, on "Bullseye" :- In which state of the U.S.A. is Dallas, Texas ??

User avatar
Ghostrider01
Posts: 108
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2014 12:16 pm

Re: Silly Tonka question

Post by Ghostrider01 » Wed Mar 22, 2017 1:17 pm

Alas beefsteak that is not me ... I'd love to have been a pilot of anything (especially fast jets) but I chose to miss school way to often when I had the chance to be educated :(

Post Reply

Return to “The Fighter Control Mess”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: blakey, Finty, Gerard117, HBHM, TARGET, thevulcan and 80 guests