Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

[MerlinV12]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

The new generation jet fighters fly with computers and are unstable buy design they need computer two make it easier for the pilot witout the onboard computer you can't fly a current jet fighter.

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

The new generation jet fighters fly with computers and are unstable buy design they need computer two make it easier for the pilot witout the onboard computer you can't fly a current jet fighter.

It depends on what jets you're talking about. The T-38s I fly were designed and built in the 60s and 70s. They were designed in the 50s by guys with slide rules, and the flight controls are completely hydro-mechanical.

The F-15, while having a fly-by-wire system, is completely able to fly with no computer help using it's hyrdo-mechanical flight control system.

The types of jets that are finding their way into civilian hands are very similar. Most of them have mechanical flight controls with hydraulic boost, or hydro-mechanical flight control systems.

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

naturally I thought is was really, really hard.

Well, I certainly didn't say it was "easy", but it is far from impossible. Again, it all has to do with training. Even with the Air Force's excellent basic pilot training, many pilots can still not make the cut at my level where we are teaching them to be fighter pilots, and still even more get cut when they are learning to fly the "big iron".

I do agree that jet flying is best left to the experts, but it doesn't take a super-human quality to become one. If you have the desire, your Uncle Sam can make it happen. Otherwise, it just takes a lot of $$$, time, and concentration.

[Pylon1_Mark]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

The F-15, while having a fly-by-wire system, is completely able to fly with no computer help using it's hyrdo-mechanical flight control system.

While I'm sure you would be able to take off, cruise, and land... are you saying that these aircarft could perform combat manuvers with no computer assistance? Everything that I've heard says that the aircraft were designed to be nutrally unstable in order to allow them (with the assistance of the flight computer) to perform extreme manuvers with a large margin of safety... as opposed to the soviet designed aircarft which were designed to fly without any computer assistance at all. Just curious

[Randy Haskin]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

While I'm sure you would be able to take off, cruise, and land... are you saying that these aircarft could perform combat manuvers with no computer assistance? Everything that I've heard says that the aircraft were designed to be nutrally unstable in order to allow them (with the assistance of the flight computer) to perform extreme manuvers with a large margin of safety

Well, I was under the impression that's what we were talking about here -- flying jets for "sport" or at airshows, and not any kind of tactical flying. Guys aren't out doing high-aspect BFM for airshow audiences, and even a guy rich enough to own a jet trainer or fighter isn't out doing this sort of thing on a lazy Saturday afternoon.

Yes, most current-generation fighters are designed to by dynamically unstable so they can pitch and roll faster than an airplane designed to be stable. Yes, most of them need some kind of flight control computer to translate pilot stick inputs into control surface movements that won't cause airplanes to go out of control (or "depart" as we put it). That does NOT mean that if the computer were dead that the airplane would simply go out of control. The Eagle flies just fine with the flight control computer off, but I would certainly not go knife-fight a MiG with it that way. The minute I started yanking the stick around, the "raw" flight control inputs, the airplane would start doing it's own thing.

Now, airplanes like the F-16 and F-18 (and the F-117, F-22, F-35, etc) which are pure fly-by-wire obviously need that computer to make the flight controls move. Some of them (F-117 especially!) _will_ go out of control if there isn't a computer running the show. Others won't.

Again, the bottom line on this one is that any jet that a non-military pilot can get his hands on currently (even up to the A-4s and MiGs that we're seeing) is NOT built that way.

[MerlinV12]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

Now back to the topic.
Any more info greenmayer's red baron??

[Curt]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

Everyone is allwase so greedy with there dream Jets !
Think lower & slower Give me an A-10 for my Personal ex military dream jet

It is Quiet has some performance at an almost afordable rate and you have that im uglyer than sin factor

need some work done ? compared to a 4th gen fighter it would be about as hard as getting yer 185 fixed up

The only problem ? Uncle Suger aint never going to let a hog loose for us comon folk

Hey Hacker you going to make Reno

Curt

[MerlinV12]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

How much weight can strip out of a jet fighter??

[AirDOGGe]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

How much weight can strip out of a jet fighter??

Depends on the which jet and what you want to do with it.

[Unregistered]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

That's not the tough stuff, though -- being able to handle emergencies at that speed are. The tough thing is being able to handle the partial-electrical-out instrument approach through the weather whne your approach speed is 170 knots.

Typical...
USAF "pilots" whining about a "complicated" approach through weather, when they've got an entire runway to land on. That scenario, to a trap on a pitching deck; THAT's "the tough stuff".

[Ron101502]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

Randy Haskin is absolutely correct about flying jets. I pre-date him by about a million yrs (I'm an old USAF F-4 guy), and although he mentioned the newer airplanes (F-14 and on) are easier to fly, they are probably harder to "fight" because of all the information available in the cockpit, the g loads that can be sustained, and the fact that some of those planes are single pilot. I know this only from "war stories" with my airline first officers who have flown both types, since they spent 20 yrs in the USAF before "retiring" to yank gear for me. Maybe Randy can give more first hand input.

Back to Greenamyer-I can't believe that nobody on this forum is a Checkered Flag Club member. Otherwise, you would have heard Bob Gillilland (check spelling) give ALMOST the whole story about the RF-104 speed attempt. Who is Bob Gilliland? Only Darryl's old boss and the original SR-71 test pilot. He was also listed as the "primary pilot" on the FAA paperwork and Darryl was the "backup" since Darryl was in trouble with the FAA back then. Mr. Gilliland "called in sick" so Darryl could fly, since this was entirely Darryl's program. Kelly Johnson said the airplane could never go that fast and was shocked that it did. The only thing I recall he said about the engine was they ran it hotter than normal. No mention of crashing on purpose. I heard the rumour that the engine was stolen from the Canadians but Bob had no comment. The fuselage was a tooling mockup that was never meant to fly but the only difference was that it was put together with something like pop rivets, and all they did was drill them out and replace them with the regular rivets and they had a totally stock fuselage. Don't know about the rest of the airplane.

Hopefully some other folks who heard Bob's talk can recall more and share it with us.

Ron Henning

[Unregistered]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

I thought that I read somewhere that the engine used on the RB-104 was "leased" from Israel. It was a hotter version of the same engine used in the a stock F-104. Does anyone know anything about that?

[MerlinV12]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

Any more amazing info on greenmayer red baron?
How much faster was the f104 red baron vs the military version??
I have found some info of it

> Darryl Greenamayer, ex SR-71 test pilot and former Reno racer (F8F
> Bearcat) used to have a privately owned F-104 which I think he flew out
> of Mohave. Unfortunately, I believe it was destroyed sometime around
> the early 1980's when, according to the newspaper, he had a hydraulic
> failure and couldn't get the landing gear down.
>
> Regarding Darrell's 104, it was called the "Red Barron". True he
> couldn't get the landing gear down. But the emergency retraction
> wouldn't work wither. His was a -G model and modified quite a bit,
> just to set the civilian speed record. Interesting video of it. Not
> much left after he got done with it.

Darryl's RB-104 flew for the first time in the fall of 1976. It was a
combination of pieces from every model of -104, so you can't really give
it a designator. It was largely built at Van Nuys, but the FAA wouldn't
let him fly it out, so he trucked it to Mojave and flew it there.

He first tried to break the FAI 3 km world (not civilian - WORLD) speed
record that fall, but one timing camera didn't work and the record was
disallowed. He came back the next fall and on October 24th he broke the
old F-4A Sageburner record by going 988.26 mph. This record still
stands. He next was going to break the FAI altitude record, which had
just been pushed up by a MiG-25. On his last test flight, in early
1978, the right gear wouldn't lock down. Running out of fuel, with the
sun going down, he was forced to punch out over the Edwards AFB bombing
range. The wreckage was hauled back to the Mojave boneyard and was
still there in 1987, when I stole some pieces of it. I have since heard
that it has been removed, probably to a junkyard.

Lockheed F104 RB Darryl Greenmayer
"Sageburner"
Wingspan 11.7m (38.4ft)
Length 17.7m (58.2ft)
Height 5.02m (16.5ft)
Weight Empty 13,785kg (30,328lb)

And some info of the plane held the record before greenmayer broke it.
The genesis of the F4H (F-4A) was an initiative by McDonnell Aircraft, starting in early 1953, to improve the F3H Demon that was being developed by the U. S. Navy as an all weather fighter at the time but which not have supersonic performance. McDonnell engineering and design efforts, under the management of Herman Barkley, led to a number of studies and proposals to upgrade the F3H by modifying the airframe, changing the engine and improving the weapons system. After a number of variants that were labeled as F3H "C", "E", "G", "H" and "J", the final version was submitted to the Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics (BUAER) in September of 1954. In October BUAER accepted the twin engine design, designated it as the AH-1 since it was intended as a multi-role aircraft and ordered two prototypes. In December of 1954, BUAER revised the multi-role design to accommodate two-crew and redesignated it the F4H-1.

In November of 1955, BUAER ordered a new design based on the F8U-1 Crusader from Chance Vought as the F8U-3 and in 1958 ordered a competitive fly-off between the Chance-Vought F8U-3 and the F4H-1. In late 1958, the F4H-1 was declared the winner of the competition and ordered into production. The original design was unstable at high Mach numbers and did not have acceptable low speed flying characteristics for carrier operations. McDonnell overcame the high Mach number problem by incorporating 23 degrees of anhedral for the horizontal tail and 12 degrees of dihedral in the outer wing panels, yielding greater stability at high mach numbers and installing variable geometry intakes to control airflow at high speeds. To address the low speed deficiency, the designers incorporated Boundary Layer Control (BLC) that used engine compressor air blown over the leading and trailing edge flaps.

With the final design set, the F4H-1, now called the Phantom II, was ordered into full production. Because of its exceptional performance the Bureau of Weapons (BUWEPS), successor to the BUAER, assigned several F4H-1s to attempt to set speed, altitude and time to climb records. For the most part, the high altitude record-breaking attempts were conducted in "Skyburner", while the low altitude records were conducted in "Sageburner". The attempts were spectacularly successful. "Skyburner" set records for speed and climb, including altitude, 98,557 ft., sustained altitude, 66,443 ft. and maximum speed over a closed 500-kilometer closed course, 1216.76-mph. Sageburner established the low altitude record.

There were two "Sageburners." The first one crashed from a combination of factors. The principal causes were the excessive sensitivity of the F4H-1 pitch control and pitch damping system and pilot error. Cdr. J. L. Felsman was killed when he caused a Pilot Induced Oscillation (PIO) which, combined with high speed and extremely high aerodynamic pressure caused the airframe to distort to such a degree that it disintegrated. The engines, which had been at full power, broke loose and, maintaining the relative separation they had in the aircraft, continued down range for several miles, streaming smoke and fuel vapor before crashing.

Following this tragic accident BUWEPS conducted an extensive review of the probable causes. The chief culprit was the pitch control system, particularly the pitch control damping system. Accordingly, several changes, which simplified the system and made it less sensitive, were incorporated. The changes were evaluated in a PIO simulator owned by North American Aviation in Columbus, Ohio. Since aircraft companies are invariably highly reluctant to share knowledge with each other, transferring the F4H-1 flight control data from McDonnell to North American proved a daunting task but was done under supervision of the BUWEPS. Lt. Huntington Hardisty, who later retired from the Navy as an Admiral, conducted the simulator PIO tests and declared himself satisfied that the F4H-1 could be flown safely in the low level speed run to establish a new record and in service. Lt. Hardisty and his Radar Intercept Officer (RIO), Lt. Earl H. DeEsch succeeded in flying "Sageburner" over the designated course twice at an altitude of 125 ft. to set a record that still stands of 902.769 mph.

In addition to the spectacular records set by Sageburner and Skyburner described above, these two aircraft and several other F4H-1s, set a number of records. The records established by F4H-1s are:

-1959 December 6, world altitude record, 98,557 feet at Edwards AFB, Cdr. Lawrence E. Flint USN, pilot. 1960 September 5, world speed record to 500 kilometers closed circuit 1216.766 mph, at Edwards AFB, LtCol. Thomas H. Miller USMC, pilot.
- 1960 September 25, world speed record of 100 kilometers, closed circuit, 1390.24 mph, at Edwards AFB Cdr. John F. Davis USN, pilot.
- 1961 May 24, Los Angeles to New York 2421.4 miles in two hours, 47 minutes, 19.7 seconds average speed 869.739 mph. Lt. R. F. Gordon USN pilot and Lt. (jg) B. R. Young USN, RIO.
- 1961 August 28 world speed record for three kilometers at less than 100meters altitude, 907.769 mph at Holloman AFB Lt. Huntington Hardisty USN, pilot and Lt. Earl H. DeEsch USN, RIO.
- 1961 November 22, world maximum speed record, 1606.505 mph, at Edwards AFB, LtCol. Robert B. Robinson USMC, pilot.
- 1961 December 5, world record for sustained horizontal flight, 66,443.8 ft., at Edwards AFB, Cdr. George W. Ellis USN, pilot.
- 1962 February 21, world record for climb to 6,000 meters, 48.797 seconds at NAS New Brunswick, LtCol. W. C. McGraw USMC, pilot.
- 1962 March 1, world record for climb to 12,000 meters, 77.143 seconds at NAS New Brunswick, LtCol. W. C. McGraw USMC, pilot.
- 1962 March 3, world record for climb to 9,000 meters, 61.688 seconds at NAS New Brunswick, LtCdr. D. W. Norberg USN, pilot.
- 1962 March 30, World record for time to climb to 20,000 meters, 178.5 seconds at NAS Point Mugu, LtCdr. John W. Young USN, pilot.
- 1962 April 3, world record for climb to 25,000 meters, 230.44 seconds at NAS Point Mugu, LtCdr. John F. Young USN, pilot.
- 1962 April 12, world record for climb to 30,000 meters, 371.43 seconds at NAS Point Mugu, LtCdr. D. W. Norberg USN, pilot.

All of the F4H-1s, which were redesignated as F-4As in 1962, were assigned to Test and Development and to training squadrons since they were not considered fully operational. The successor to this remarkable aircraft, the F4H-2 (F-4B) served with distinction in the U. S. Navy and U. S. Marine Corps. Subsequently F-4Cs, RF-4Cs, F-4Ds, and F4-Es served in the U. S. Air Force. Later the Navy and Marine Corps acquired the F-4J, subsequently modified to F-4S. The United Kingdom, Israel, Germany, Japan, Iran, and Turkey also operated F-4s.

McDonnell F-4A Sageburner
Any whan planning for breaking the speedrecord of the red baron??

[Rigby]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

I apologize in advance if this sounds a bit naive, but has anyone tried to contact Darryl Greenmayer himself and ask him personally? It seems with all the people who frequent this board, many appear to have had much experience with racing fraternity, that someone would know him well enough to ask. Just my .02 worth.

[mgbf4u]

Re: Darryl greenmayer f104 rb(red baron) ??

Speaking of cool pilots and cool airplanes, it amazes me the SR71 is retired.
Randy do you ever fly computer sims? CFS2 or IL2:Forgotten Battles or Lock-On?
I need some instruction.
Salute!