XF-88A and F-101A & C Voodoo (Gun-Armed Voodoos) — History, Performance, and Discussion

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
21

MacDonnell was by this time mainly making planes for the navy, even if there were differences it wouldn’t matter since MacDonnell was using what they know. You could also argue that the 7a itself gradually evolved into different versions, but by necessity they had to maintain backwards compatibility with all the bombs then available in stock.

The obvious thing to do is recognize that gravity dropped nuclear weapons by necessity were designed to be compatible with existing bomb mountings to facilitate logistics, so a 2000 lbs nuclear bomb would be necessarily be replaceable with a 2000lbs conventional bomb , and so on.

1 Like
22

True, I’ll keep that in mind, thanks.

From a quick Google,

Mk 7, Mk 28, and Mk 43 weigh 1,600 lbs, 2,000 lbs, and ~2,100 lbs, respectively.

23

looks like they denied the carriage of any conventional secondary weapons… I have to wonder why they even went with the C if it’s going to be so barren, maybe they’re planning on doing a low BR nuclear thunder someday where the voodoo would be very useful but as of right now I don’t see much reason to grind this out

24

ask for stupid nuclear bomber variant get stupid nuclear bomber turn rates

image
image1448×900 353 KB

Summary

image
image1430×880 383 KB

25

Hey dude! I saw that you posted the F-101C standard aircraft characteristics, where did you find that document?

26

Big bunch of them here

1 Like
27

F-102 is all we have left now in the way of supersonic falcon carriers

28

F4D Phantom II also exists

29

Thank you so much!!

30

I really don’t expect to get a phantom that only has 4Ds, they will be a lower tier mod on it IF its added so that doesn’t really count imo

31

It has been proven that it can use XAIM-4H as well, so that would be a kind of top-tier mods along with possible AIM-9J.

32

Day 2, more dev bug reports (will add more over time)

2 Likes
33

You could say the same about F-100D and F-105D

1 Like
34

the AIM-4H is still not on the level of the AIM-9 though is it, the range will be significantly less, especially at low altitudes

35

as far as i know they should be all aspect

36

so should the AIM-4D and AIM-4G, I still don’t think they’ll be as good as sidewinders, even the H, the range just isn’t as good, they cannot compete with the sidewinder, which is why I moreso count the F-101B, F-102A, and F-89H as “falcon carriers” as they don’t have the sidewinder

37

true. The AIM-4h has less range than the AIM-4D which is comparable to an AIM-9J

38

are we sure it’s comparable to a 9J? does the 4D/H not use the same motor as the G? is the AIM-4Hs range simply worse because of the slighty weight increase?

39

the D/H use the same motor as the AIM-4A, B and C not the one on the G and the AIM-4H weighs like 10 pounds more than the D since it has a larger warhead and a laser proximity fuse

40

alright, but is the standard falcon motor really enough to make the missile comparable in performance to a 9J? that just doesn’t sound right to me