FighterControl

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!

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.

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

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

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

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!

Probably because nobody on here has any idea! 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.

gamecock wrote:Probably because nobody on here has any idea! 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

page_verify wrote:

gamecock wrote:Probably because nobody on here has any idea! 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.

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

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.

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 )

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Thankyou, somebody finally understands the question!
I was hoping we may have an ex Tonka driver on here to help out.

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