Discussion:
Fastest rate of climb?
(too old to reply)
t***@gmail.com
2015-06-27 15:49:39 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The B1 English Electric Lightning holds this record look on YouTube and compare to su 27 and the F15 and you judge for yourself.
2***@gmail.com
2017-08-10 09:40:53 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
I notice the Seppo aircaft are all stripped down variants as well as Ivans. The English Electric Lightenings rate of climb was something like 50.000 ft/min unmodified, The septics wont like that and of course will come up with some bullshit story to make them look better so they can stroke their own egos.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Daryl
2017-08-10 16:54:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
I notice the Seppo aircaft are all stripped down variants as well as Ivans. The English Electric Lightenings rate of climb was something like 50.000 ft/min unmodified, The septics wont like that and of course will come up with some bullshit story to make them look better so they can stroke their own egos.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
What killed the Electric Lightning? The F-104 and the over estimation
of a Lightnings performance. Even the F-104 couldn't reach 50k a minute
climb. The best a production model 104 could do was 48K while the
Lightning barely broke 20K.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Jim Wilkins
2017-08-10 19:53:55 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Daryl
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the
English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
I notice the Seppo aircaft are all stripped down variants as well
as Ivans. The English Electric Lightenings rate of climb was
something like 50.000 ft/min unmodified, The septics wont like
that and of course will come up with some bullshit story to make
them look better so they can stroke their own egos.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
What killed the Electric Lightning? The F-104 and the over
estimation of a Lightnings performance. Even the F-104 couldn't
reach 50k a minute climb. The best a production model 104 could do
was 48K while the Lightning barely broke 20K.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Lightning
"The Lightning's optimum climb profile required the use of
afterburners during takeoff. Immediately after takeoff, the nose would
be lowered for rapid acceleration to 430 knots (800 km/h) IAS before
initiating a climb, stabilising at 450 knots (830 km/h). This would
yield a constant climb rate of approximately 20,000 ft/min (100 m/s)."

"A Lightning flying at optimum climb profile would reach 36,000 ft
(11,000 m) in under three minutes."
Keith Willshaw
2017-08-10 20:36:46 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Daryl
What killed the Electric Lightning? The F-104 and the over estimation
of a Lightnings performance. Even the F-104 couldn't reach 50k a minute
climb. The best a production model 104 could do was 48K while the
Lightning barely broke 20K.
You have misunderstood a few things here.

1) The lightning was never expected to achieve 50 thousand feet per
minute. The spec (ER 103) called for a max combat altitude of 35
thousand feet and a mach number of 1.5. The Lightning handily exceeded
that with a ceiling of 50,000 ft and Mach 2.0

2) It was designed specifically as a high altitude missile armed
interceptor that in wartime could reach soviet nuclear bombers before
they got within weapons range of V Bomber bases. It stayed in service
until the late 1980's and the F-104 never entered service with the RAF.
The aircraft that replaced it in the intercept role were the Phantom
FGR.2 and Tornado F3.

In service it was intended to be complemented by the Gloster Javelin in
the medium to long distance all weather intercept role, the nearest US
aircraft would be the F-102. In retrospect the RN Sea Vixen would have
been a better choice being faster and more stable. In the event the
improvement in performance of later marks of Lightning saw the Javelin
withdrawn from service in 1965.

Note that in 1962 a Lightning successfully intercepted a U-2 at 65,000
ft and in 1984 a Lightning managed to reach 88,000 ft in a ballistic climb

Exercises in Germany showed the he F-104 and Lightning to have broadly
comparable climb rates of 20k per minute. Neither could achieve anything
like 40 k per minute. Optimum time for an operational Lightning to reach
36,000 ft was 3 minutes. It could get there quicker but only under full
afterburner which basically meant declaring a fuel emergency.

YF-104 time to climb records set in 1958 are as follows, these aircraft
were specially prepared an not service aircraft

3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 41.85 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 58.41 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 81.14 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 99.90 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 131.1 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 222.99 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 266.03 seconds

The F-104 did have rather better range than the Lightning and the F-15
was of course superior to both.

The F15 Streak Eagle set the following records

3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 27.57 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 39.33 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 48.86 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 59.38 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 77.02 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 122.94 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 161.02 seconds


KeithW
Jim Wilkins
2017-08-10 21:32:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Daryl
What killed the Electric Lightning? The F-104 and the over
estimation of a Lightnings performance. Even the F-104 couldn't
reach 50k a minute climb. The best a production model 104 could do
was 48K while the Lightning barely broke 20K.
You have misunderstood a few things here.
1) The lightning was never expected to achieve 50 thousand feet per
minute. The spec (ER 103) called for a max combat altitude of 35
thousand feet and a mach number of 1.5. The Lightning handily
exceeded that with a ceiling of 50,000 ft and Mach 2.0
2) It was designed specifically as a high altitude missile armed
interceptor that in wartime could reach soviet nuclear bombers
before they got within weapons range of V Bomber bases. It stayed in
service until the late 1980's and the F-104 never entered service
with the RAF. The aircraft that replaced it in the intercept role
were the Phantom FGR.2 and Tornado F3.
In service it was intended to be complemented by the Gloster Javelin
in the medium to long distance all weather intercept role, the
nearest US aircraft would be the F-102. In retrospect the RN Sea
Vixen would have been a better choice being faster and more stable.
In the event the improvement in performance of later marks of
Lightning saw the Javelin withdrawn from service in 1965.
Note that in 1962 a Lightning successfully intercepted a U-2 at
65,000 ft and in 1984 a Lightning managed to reach 88,000 ft in a
ballistic climb
Exercises in Germany showed the he F-104 and Lightning to have
broadly comparable climb rates of 20k per minute. Neither could
achieve anything like 40 k per minute. Optimum time for an
operational Lightning to reach 36,000 ft was 3 minutes. It could get
there quicker but only under full afterburner which basically meant
declaring a fuel emergency.
YF-104 time to climb records set in 1958 are as follows, these
aircraft were specially prepared an not service aircraft
3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 41.85 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 58.41 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 81.14 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 99.90 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 131.1 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 222.99 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 266.03 seconds
The F-104 did have rather better range than the Lightning and the
F-15 was of course superior to both.
The F15 Streak Eagle set the following records
3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 27.57 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 39.33 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 48.86 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 59.38 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 77.02 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 122.94 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 161.02 seconds
KeithW
The USA located radars across northern Canada to provide Distant Early
Warning. Was Britain able to arrange anything comparable?
-jsw
Keith Willshaw
2017-08-12 15:53:22 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim Wilkins
The USA located radars across northern Canada to provide Distant Early
Warning. Was Britain able to arrange anything comparable?
-jsw
Yes indeed, in fact the RAF Fylingdales Early Warning station feeds
staright into NORAD and is part of BMEWS along with Thule Air Base,
Greenland and Clear Air Force Station, Alaska. A US Liason officer is
permanently stationed at Fylingdales. The structure for all this was set
up under the terms of the UK/USA agreement which mandates cooperation in
signals intelligence between Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United
Kingdom, and the United States. Allegedly it was one of the few
locations outside the USA connected into the Stone Ghost network.
Jim Wilkins
2017-08-10 21:58:38 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Keith Willshaw
Post by Daryl
What killed the Electric Lightning? The F-104 and the over
estimation of a Lightnings performance. Even the F-104 couldn't
reach 50k a minute climb. The best a production model 104 could do
was 48K while the Lightning barely broke 20K.
You have misunderstood a few things here.
1) The lightning was never expected to achieve 50 thousand feet per
minute. The spec (ER 103) called for a max combat altitude of 35
thousand feet and a mach number of 1.5. The Lightning handily
exceeded that with a ceiling of 50,000 ft and Mach 2.0
2) It was designed specifically as a high altitude missile armed
interceptor that in wartime could reach soviet nuclear bombers
before they got within weapons range of V Bomber bases. It stayed in
service until the late 1980's and the F-104 never entered service
with the RAF. The aircraft that replaced it in the intercept role
were the Phantom FGR.2 and Tornado F3.
In service it was intended to be complemented by the Gloster Javelin
in the medium to long distance all weather intercept role, the
nearest US aircraft would be the F-102. In retrospect the RN Sea
Vixen would have been a better choice being faster and more stable.
In the event the improvement in performance of later marks of
Lightning saw the Javelin withdrawn from service in 1965.
Note that in 1962 a Lightning successfully intercepted a U-2 at
65,000 ft and in 1984 a Lightning managed to reach 88,000 ft in a
ballistic climb
Exercises in Germany showed the he F-104 and Lightning to have
broadly comparable climb rates of 20k per minute. Neither could
achieve anything like 40 k per minute. Optimum time for an
operational Lightning to reach 36,000 ft was 3 minutes. It could get
there quicker but only under full afterburner which basically meant
declaring a fuel emergency.
YF-104 time to climb records set in 1958 are as follows, these
aircraft were specially prepared an not service aircraft
3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 41.85 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 58.41 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 81.14 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 99.90 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 131.1 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 222.99 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 266.03 seconds
The F-104 did have rather better range than the Lightning and the
F-15 was of course superior to both.
The F15 Streak Eagle set the following records
3,000 metres (9,800 ft) in 27.57 seconds
6,000 metres (19,700 ft) in 39.33 seconds
9,000 metres (29,500 ft) in 48.86 seconds
12,000 metres (39,400 ft) in 59.38 seconds
15,000 metres (49,200 ft) in 77.02 seconds
20,000 metres (65,600 ft) in 122.94 seconds
25,000 metres (82,000 ft) in 161.02 seconds
KeithW
The times to altitude for the Space Shuttle were almost identical to
the F15's up to 12,000 meters.
Greg Hennessy
2017-08-15 10:36:52 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:36:46 +0100, Keith Willshaw
Post by Keith Willshaw
The F-104 did have rather better range than the Lightning and the F-15
was of course superior to both.
Speaking of the F-104

Came across this in a search last week.

https://obittree.com/obituary/us/colorado/greeley/adamson-funeral--cremation-services/walter-bjorneby/2662433/

Wherever he is, hope there is a J79-19 on full chat getting him there.


G
--
?¡aah, los gringos otra vez!?
Peter Stickney
2017-08-30 04:47:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Greg Hennessy
On Thu, 10 Aug 2017 21:36:46 +0100, Keith Willshaw
Post by Keith Willshaw
The F-104 did have rather better range than the Lightning and the F-15
was of course superior to both.
Speaking of the F-104
Came across this in a search last week.
https://obittree.com/obituary/us/colorado/greeley/adamson-funeral--
cremation-services/walter-bjorneby/2662433/
Post by Greg Hennessy
Wherever he is, hope there is a J79-19 on full chat getting him there.
Blast and Damn!
God Speed, Walt!

--
Pete Stickney
“A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures.” ― Daniel Webster
5***@gmail.com
2017-11-27 17:50:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
what about some of those migs trying the mach Loop?
j***@gmail.com
2018-02-24 07:09:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
My understanding gained from reading over the years is that there were no cold war aircraft on either side of the Iron Curtain that could beat the EEL in speed or altitude. This aircraft was capable of going supersonic in dry power in a standard climb out. I knew a Lightning pilot who told me that they would fly them to 90,000ft and then dive on unsuspecting U2s at 70-80,000ft!

It is also well known that the Lightning was the only fighter to intercept Concord over the North Sea at Mach 2.23 at 57,000ft. Other aircraft to try this were F104, F4, F14, F15, F16 and Mirage III. Although some of these aircraft are better performed on paper, in reality all fell short of the Lightning when it came down to intercepting a target.

I also know that trials were done with the Lightning against the F104 in time to altitude and the Lightning won them all except the run from sea level where they were equal. It was a considerable fighter and matches many fighters in the air today and beats some into the bargain. It certainly has the right to be talked about in the same breath as the fighters of today. English Electric were blocked from further development of this aircraft by their government, so it could well have been improved into a substantially better weapons system.

I understand that no official time to altitude work was done with the EEL, but anecdotally, it would fly to 9,000m in under 60 seconds and was known to reach 36,0000ft in 90 seconds from breaks off in full combat trim. A pilot who flew both the F4 and Lightning was asked to compare the two. He said that the F4 had a (for the time)wonderful weapons system, but performance wise, the F4 was like a Mack Truck whilst the Lightning was a Ferrari.

Regards

John Dighton (***@hotmail.com)
Daryl
2018-02-24 12:59:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by j***@gmail.com
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
My understanding gained from reading over the years is that there were no cold war aircraft on either side of the Iron Curtain that could beat the EEL in speed or altitude. This aircraft was capable of going supersonic in dry power in a standard climb out. I knew a Lightning pilot who told me that they would fly them to 90,000ft and then dive on unsuspecting U2s at 70-80,000ft!
It is also well known that the Lightning was the only fighter to intercept Concord over the North Sea at Mach 2.23 at 57,000ft. Other aircraft to try this were F104, F4, F14, F15, F16 and Mirage III. Although some of these aircraft are better performed on paper, in reality all fell short of the Lightning when it came down to intercepting a target.
I also know that trials were done with the Lightning against the F104 in time to altitude and the Lightning won them all except the run from sea level where they were equal. It was a considerable fighter and matches many fighters in the air today and beats some into the bargain. It certainly has the right to be talked about in the same breath as the fighters of today. English Electric were blocked from further development of this aircraft by their government, so it could well have been improved into a substantially better weapons system.
I understand that no official time to altitude work was done with the EEL, but anecdotally, it would fly to 9,000m in under 60 seconds and was known to reach 36,0000ft in 90 seconds from breaks off in full combat trim. A pilot who flew both the F4 and Lightning was asked to compare the two. He said that the F4 had a (for the time)wonderful weapons system, but performance wise, the F4 was like a Mack Truck whilst the Lightning was a Ferrari.
Regards
I keep hearing this but I doubt it. It was claimed that it had a 40k
climb rate with a Mach 2.3+ speed and could climb without afterburner
and maintain speed and a lot of other wonderful things. But truth be
told, it's thrust to weight ratio with afterburner was only .78 with a
zoom ceiling of 70K. Meaning there is no way in hell it could intercept
a U-2 at altitude. But the critiques are all over the place on this
bird so I have no idea what is correct or what isn't. I do know that it
lost out to some pretty good birds across the board including the F-104,
F-4 and Tornado in various Air Forces. I think what really hurt it was
it's range. It didn't have any. Even the 104 had better range.

So grain of salt on this one.




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com
Jim Wilkins
2018-02-24 15:37:02 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
What aircraft has the fastest rate of climb? Where does the English
Electric Lightning feature historically?
Best regards, Ken Doerr
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
My understanding gained from reading over the years is that there were
no cold war aircraft on either side of the Iron Curtain that could
beat the EEL in speed or altitude. This aircraft was capable of going
supersonic in dry power in a standard climb out. I knew a Lightning
pilot who told me that they would fly them to 90,000ft and then dive
on unsuspecting U2s at 70-80,000ft!

It is also well known that the Lightning was the only fighter to
intercept Concord over the North Sea at Mach 2.23 at 57,000ft. Other
aircraft to try this were F104, F4, F14, F15, F16 and Mirage III.
Although some of these aircraft are better performed on paper, in
reality all fell short of the Lightning when it came down to
intercepting a target.

I also know that trials were done with the Lightning against the F104
in time to altitude and the Lightning won them all except the run from
sea level where they were equal. It was a considerable fighter and
matches many fighters in the air today and beats some into the
bargain. It certainly has the right to be talked about in the same
breath as the fighters of today. English Electric were blocked from
further development of this aircraft by their government, so it could
well have been improved into a substantially better weapons system.

I understand that no official time to altitude work was done with the
EEL, but anecdotally, it would fly to 9,000m in under 60 seconds and
was known to reach 36,0000ft in 90 seconds from breaks off in full
combat trim. A pilot who flew both the F4 and Lightning was asked to
compare the two. He said that the F4 had a (for the time)wonderful
weapons system, but performance wise, the F4 was like a Mack Truck
whilst the Lightning was a Ferrari.

Regards

John Dighton (***@hotmail.com)
==============================================
The Wiki doesn't support your claims:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Lightning
"A Lightning flying at optimum climb profile would reach 36,000 ft
(11,000 m) in under three minutes."

Rumor gives the SR-71 a top speed of Mach 5.
Keith Willshaw
2018-02-28 13:24:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Jim Wilkins
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Lightning
"A Lightning flying at optimum climb profile would reach 36,000 ft
(11,000 m) in under three minutes."
Rumor gives the SR-71 a top speed of Mach 5.
A lot depends on the mark of Lightning.

The F3 had the best performance being fitted with higher rated engines
but its fuel consumption was so high that you practically had to declare
bingo fuel on reaching max altitude. Given that it was specifically
designed to be able to intercept and shoot down first wave Soviet
Nuclear bombers before they could reach the V-Bomber bases this was
considered acceptable. In a hot war it was unlikely there would be any
base to return too. Their job as to buy time for the Valiants, Victor
and Vulcans to get out of the blast radius. Welcome to the reality of
the cold war.

At what was then RAF Middleton St George in the early 60's you could see
Lightnings and the Javelins operating in support of the Victors and
Vulcans operating as it was one of the designated V Force dispersal
sites. The Javelin FAW was being phased out in favour of the lightning
F2 and F3. Once the Polaris boats took over the deterrence role the base
was closed and became Teesside Airport

In the 1960's it was the only UK based fighter that could reliably
intercept US's. In 1984 Mark Hale and Brian Carroll were both able to
intercept U2's at 66,000 ft and carried out zoom climbs to well over
85,000 ft.

The F-6 had more fuel on board than the F3 so had better range and
weapons but the extra weight meant that performance was down a little
from the F3.

The first fighter that had a clear advantage in the climb was the F-15C
which given that it was a much later design was unsurprising. The F-104
was considered to be about the equal of the Lightning F3. They regularly
flew exercises in the against the West German F-104's and USAF F-4's.
The F-4 had much better legs and a heavier missile load than the
Lightning which is why the RAF adopted the F4K's ordered by the RN when
the old Ark Royal was scrapped. This was so successful that a further
120 aircraft were ordered. By this time the ability to carry a big radar
and a mixed armament of Radar and Optically guided missiles with a long
loiter time was more important than climb rate. The Lightning was a good
aircraft but the mission had changed.

The SR-71 was clearly superior. in terms of level flight as would have
been the XB-70.


KeithW
Jim Wilkins
2018-02-28 14:11:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
.... By this time the ability to carry a big radar and a mixed
armament of Radar and Optically guided missiles with a long loiter
time was more important than climb rate. The Lightning was a good
aircraft but the mission had changed.
The SR-71 was clearly superior. in terms of level flight as would
have been the XB-70.
KeithW
The changing mission caused the US to discard the Mach 3+ F-108 too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_XF-108_Rapier
The TSR-2 and Avro Arrow weren't the only victims.

The YF-12A Mach 3 interceptor survived as the SR-71.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_YF-12

Loading...