F-11 (F11F) Tiger

[jcf]

On the actual F11F-1F (not the proposed XF11F-2 Super Tiger as shown in the drawings on Secretprojects) the major change
was a 13.5" extension added to the aft end (evidently not originally fitted when the engine was changed).
The F11F-1F aircraft (BuNos 138646/138647) were conversions of the last two aircraft from the initial contract,
so originally they were short-nosed aircraft without the 60-degree LERX. The LERX were added during the F11F-1F test program.

The J79 has a smaller diameter than the J65, so I doubt that was the reason for the increased fuselage width of the XF11F-2.



F11F-1


F11F-1F with tail extension

So Daryl, to answer your question, yes you can J79 your bird, just extend the donkey end.
It worked for Grumman.  

Jon

[Daryl J.]

Very well then.  One J79 powered G-98 coming up with 1/4" added rear styrene.    Late Spring/Early Summer project.



Daryl J.

[KJ_Lesnick]

What would have happened if the F11F-1F actually succeeded as an export fighter instead of the F-104?

Assuming Grumman did better with advertising and such, and either Lockheed did not engage in it's bribery scandal, or it was unsuccessful in one way or another, or they were exposed immediately?


KJ Lesnick

[tigercat2]

An excellent question; from what I have read and heard, the F11F-1F was actually much better suited to the German's needs (and other European countries as well).  It was a great performer, perhaps not as "hot" as the F-104, but likely would have had a much better safety record than the '104. 

When you think about it, Lockheed really pulled a fast one in 1958; getting the Germans to purchase an aircraft that was at that very time being phased out of USAF service due to its short range and limited armament.

I have a 1/72 model of an F11F in German markings, and it really does look good; a glimpse of what could have been.

Wes W.

[jcf]

Irrespective of any bribery allegations (they've never been proved), the USAF and DoD backed the F-104 as part of MAP and for other reasons, the F11F Tiger was not part of the 'Big Boys' game plan and therefore never really had a chance.

Add to that the fact that the USN wasn't interested either and the program is dead in the water.

Why is Lockheed always singled out as the villain? Who is actually worse, the one who offers
payment or the persons in positions of trust who take it, or as was apparent from some of the
other related investigations, ask for it?

It takes two to tango.

Jon

[MAD]

Ah yes the F11F-1F Super Tiger!

You must not forget that the JSDF actual selected it for their F-86 Sabre replacement!
Amazingly at the 11th hour changing its mind for the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter!!!
Funny money or what?


M.A.D

[KJ_Lesnick]

JCF,

Irrespective of any bribery allegations (they've never been proved)

I thought the bribery thing was proven and confirmed?

the USAF and DoD backed the F-104 as part of MAP and for other reasons

What's MAP?  And why did the USAF and DoD back it?

the F11F Tiger was not part of the 'Big Boys' game plan and therefore never really had a chance.

May I ask why?

Why is Lockheed always singled out as the villain? Who is actually worse, the one who offers
payment or the persons in positions of trust who take it,

The person who offers the bribe is morally worse than the person who accepts the bribe because if the person did not offer the bribe, the other person would not have taken the bribe.

Bribery is a very serious problem, far more serious than many take it to be.

or as was apparent from some of the other related investigations, ask for it?

I suppose if a person asks to be bribed, that's worse than giving the bribe as it actually encourages the bribe.   


KJ Lesnick

[MAD]

What's MAP?

'Military Assistance Program' (MAP)
The program in which the United States Government gave arms to friendly foreign governments.
Technically they were meant to be of a defensive nature.
The MAP program was what gave the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter its life and success, as to would the more advanced F-5E/F Tiger II

M.A.D

[MAD]

Got this from another web forum
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=92164

Germany's conservative CDU/CSU party alledgedly recieved some 10mn US$ through Franz-Josef Strauss. Also the Italian Christian-Democrats got money from Lockheed.
'Arthur'


M.A.D

[MAD]

At the end of the day - I think that the greatest problem with Grumman's pitching of its aircraft to potential foreign customers, was the known fact that it was a specialist in carrier-based aircraft - period!!

Have a look at their sales records of their great designs during and post WWII
Even though the likes of the Hellcat / Bearcat / Panther / Cougar were very advanced and powerful fighter-bombers of their day. How many were purchased by land-based air forces (Save France, who was willing to take every and anything they could lay their hands on!!).

The one thing that I can see a problem with from a land-based air force perspective is that carrier-based designed fighter-bombers tend to carry 'additional luggage', due to their carrier lineage - i.e. heavier construction, folding wings etc............

Well its just an opinion!

Hell after I've written all this why does it pop into my head, the success of the Vought F4U Corsair, McDonnell Douglas F4 Phantom II and the McDonnell Douglas (Northrop - I like to give credit, when credit is due!) F/A-18 Hornet
But I think this was more due to U.S government backing and lobbying?

M.A.D

[NARSES2]

What's MAP?

'Military Assistance Program' (MAP)
The program in which the United States Government gave arms to friendly foreign governments.
Technically they were meant to be of a defensive nature.
The MAP program was what gave the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter its life and success, as to would the more advanced F-5E/F Tiger II

M.A.D

I didn't realise until recently that the Gloster Javelin programme received assistance via the MAP scheme

[Weaver]

What's MAP?

'Military Assistance Program' (MAP)
The program in which the United States Government gave arms to friendly foreign governments.
Technically they were meant to be of a defensive nature.
The MAP program was what gave the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter its life and success, as to would the more advanced F-5E/F Tiger II

M.A.D

I didn't realise until recently that the Gloster Javelin programme received assistance via the MAP scheme

Would that be MAP or MWDF (Mutual Weapons Development Fund)? The latter put money into the Buccaneer as well, and carried the Harrier virtually single-handed for some years.

[NARSES2]

I'm sure it was MAP as the US saw the limited number of all weather fighters under active development in Europe and wanted it as a back-up to be available to some smaller NATO nations.

I'll try and find the reference again

Chris

[Martin H]

most european export Hunters and many of the french air forces mysteres were paid for under MAP as well.

[Tornado]

The F11F-1F might have had technical merit but like MAD says there seems to be a certain bias against naval aircraft. Lockheed certainly had business acumen to some sort, even corrupt, to save what was essentially a dead-end programme. It's a shame we could not have done likewise for the Saro P.177 and other projects that fell by the wayside.

Japan might have been put off by being the only export customer and maybe Grumman wasn't willing to let Mitsubishi have a licence to build them?

MAP and MWDF certainly was a big lifeline for Europe and although in some occassions the US abused it to fund their own exports I think it saved a lot of good designs going to the wall.