Bac lightning to the edge of space

[Charlie Farley]

YouTube - English BAE Lightning "Edge of Space Flíght"

What a truly superb airframe.

Some quotes ;

" during a British Airways trial, NATO member nations were invited to attempt to intercept Concorde, the only aircraft to succeed was again Flt Lt Hale in his personal Lightning, XR749, he intercepted the Concorde in a tailchase intercept, pulling alongside a stunned BA crew at M 2.25 "

" My friend flew U2's and did tell me he was intercepted by two Lightnings at 80,000 feet. After a shock wave from my friend to them, the Lightnings did a barrel roll around him in his U2 and cleared off. He said he will never forget it as he was used to being alone that high! "

" Also it could hold its own against an F-15 in a "turn & burn" fight, in NATO excercises, the Lightning's pilots knew they were unable to take on the Eagle in a face to face merge with the Eagle's superior weapon system, they used to hide down at treetop level where the Eagle's radar couldnt see them, then once the Lightnings had visually acquired the Eagles, they would use the Lightning's famous vertical climb performance to attack from underneath "

Is the climb rate of 50,000 ft per minute correct ?. I do know that even though over 50 years old, it still holds various world records.

 

[David Morton]

Climb
The Lightning possessed a remarkable climb rate, and its time to reach an altitude, or time-to-climb, was exceptional. To achieve this short time-to-climb, Lightnings employed a particular climb profile, which was more shallow in angle compared to that demonstrated at air shows. The Lightning was famous for its ability to rapidly rotate at the end of the runway and climb almost vertically away, but although this near-vertical climb was impressive, it did not yield the best time to altitude, nor was it a demonstration of the ability to sustain a vertical climb. When Lightning pilots performed their trademark tail-stand, they were actually trading airspeed for altitude. The Lightnings would seemingly zoom “out of sight,” accelerating away, when in fact they would slow to near stall before pushing over into level flight. During the optimum time-to-climb profile, the maximum climb angle never exceeded 30 deg.
The Lightning’s optimum climb profile began with an afterburner takeoff. Immediately after takeoff, the landing gear would be retracted and the nose held down to allow rapid acceleration to 430 KIAS, then a climb initiated and stabilized at 450 KIAS. At this IAS, the climb rate would be constant at approximately 20,000 ft/min.,<SUP id=cite_ref-F.6_ODM_5-4 class=reference>[5]</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-29 class=reference>[nb 9]</SUP> The Lightning would reach Mach 0.87 at 13,000 ft.<SUP id=cite_ref-30 class=reference>[nb 10]</SUP> The pilot would then maintain Mach 0.87 until the tropopause, 36,000 ft. on a standard day. The climb rate would decrease during the constant-Mach portion of the profile.<SUP id=cite_ref-31 class=reference>[nb 11]</SUP> If further climb were required, the Lightning would accelerate to supersonic speed at the tropopause prior to resuming the climb at supersonic speed.<SUP id=cite_ref-F.6_ODM_5-6 class=reference>[5]</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-Pilot.27s_Notes.2C_F.6_7-5 class=reference>[7]</SUP>
A Lighting flying its optimum climb profile would reach 36,000 ft less than 3 minutes after brake release.<SUP id=cite_ref-F.6_ODM_5-7 class=reference>[5]</SUP> This was—and is—impressive performance. That the Lightning never reached the climb rates of some of its contemporaries during this profile was not important; that it reached altitude quickly, was.
The official ceiling was a secret to the general public and low security RAF documents simply stated 60,000+ ft (18 000+ m), although it was well known within the RAF to be capable of much greater heights; the official maximum altitude mainly being determined by cockpit pressurisation reliability and safety. In September 1962 Fighter Command organized a series of trial supersonic overland interceptions of Lockheed U-2As, temporarily based at RAF Upper Heyford to monitor resumed Soviet nuclear tests, at heights of around 60,000-65,000 ft.<SUP id=cite_ref-32 class=reference>[22]</SUP><SUP id=cite_ref-33 class=reference>[23]</SUP> The trials took place in two stages, the second series consisting of 14 interceptions, including four successful and four abortive ones at 65,000.<SUP id=cite_ref-34 class=reference>[24]</SUP> The late Brian Carroll, a former RAF Lightning pilot and ex-Lightning Chief Examiner, reported taking a Lightning F.53 up to 87,300 feet (26 600 m) over Saudi Arabia at which level "Earth curvature was visible and the sky was quite dark" but control-wise it was "on a knife edge".<SUP id=cite_ref-35 class=reference>[</SUP>

 

[Mike]

Here are a few more comments to David's post.

The Lightning was definitely a hot-rod. 2T squadron at RAF Coltishall (P-2s) was our sister squadron (F-4s, RAF Lakenheath) in the early 70's. We partied andf flew with/against them with some regularity. The airframe, built at similar times, was similar to the F-4 in that they weighed approximately the same empty (29,000# or so for the P-2 vs. 30,000# for the F-4). Thrust was also similar (mid 30,000 #), with an edge to the Lightning at lower altitudes and the F-4 at higher altitudes (intake ramps vs. shock cone). The Lightning had a turning advantage subsonic (lower wing loading), but it's biggest initial advantage was weight. They took off with a full internal fuel load of roughly 4500#. Our internal fuel load was 12,000#, and "bingo fuel - time to go home" was generally 3,000#, about when our performance was getting decent. Tack on external fuel tanks, which we always flew with while the Lightnings generally flew clean, and we could not survive a turning gun fight. Our fire control system had an advantage, so a long range set up gave us the edge.

Against an F-15, I don't think there would be much of a fight, which in no way diminishes the P-2's performance. (Like the Spitfire, it was designed as a defensive fighter, take off, climb, intercept and land before you run out of gas). Heat seeking missiles by themselves are pretty much secondary armament anymore.
Oh., re. the Lightnings flying low to avoid detection by the F-15s, not true. That was probably a misprint and referred to the F-4. Ground clutter was a real limitation for the F-4 pulse radar. The Eagle has a doppler radar, doesn't see the ground, and we used to play with cars on the highway at Nellis AFB, Nevada where our radar lock ons would turn on their fuzz-busters and cause speeders brake lights to come on. One of my squadron guys got 2 kills in Iraq shooting from 35,000' at Iraqi MIG pilots attempting to escape to Iran by flying at 500'.

Check out this pilot commentary from a Brit Lightning pilot who got a ride in an Eagle. Some of his numbers aren't quite right, but his intro to the Eagle is interesting.
English Electric Lightning Site - Story of the Month

Re. climb rates, the published numbers as well as the "records" don't really tell you that much, and David's comments are right on. "Initial climb rate" occurs after take off and depends on your climb profile. You can accelerate level to 500 knots then zoom, and you have a 50,000 fpm climb rate, but you couldn't sustain that in the old days and speed would immediately begin decaying as you climbed. A sustained climb rate would be more like an acceleration to 400-450 knots followed by a constant speed climb. This produces advertised rates in the 20-30,000 fpm ball park for the F-4s and Lightnings, and you arrive at altitude with speed vs. falling off the top of a zoom with no airspeed. F'15s and 16s can generally sustain a near vertical climb through 10,000' if they're clean. Note the climb records to 40,000 ft. from a standing start are: F-4 - 77 seconds - March 1962 and for the F-15: 59 secs - Jan 1975 (I flew this profile in the development simulator while working on the F-15E at MacAir.

For interest sake, it was set up to take the record back from the Mig 25. They flew the airplane out to N. Dakota to take advantage of the winter jet-stream. The airplane was chained to blocks as the engines were run up to Max AB. When they burned the fuel off to the calculated minimum required, the released the chains. The pilot's head banged against the head rest as it launched, the airplane was airborne in 700', the gear handle was spring loaded to "up" to not overspeed the gear, it took a 3+g pull to get the nose up to profile (the video showed there was a little 'pilot induced oscillation" otherwise known as a JC maneuver as the airplane lifted off and the pilot fought to control the acceleration). The jet went supersonic as it was going through 10,000' (setting the 10,000 ft. record in 34.5 secs) and continued in an immelman into the jetstream for the 40,000'/12,000m record. I think the 49,000/15,000m record was set (115 secs) incidentally in the recovery from the attempt. The engines were immediately pulled to idle and the airplane glided to a landing with minimum fuel in the tanks.

The Lightning was a neat jet, and very different (British ? ) )

 

[Paul Brameld]

I worked as an apprentice on the starters for the Avon engines on the Lightning.
The fuel used was IPN (Isopropyl Nitrate) and when these starters were tested at Plessey the term liquid gunpowder was often used as the noise & vibration from the starter was awesome. They were designed , if my memory is correct, to take the Avon from standstill to full speed within 10 seconds! This was required to meet the requirement to have the Lightning at operational height in the minimum time possible.
Seeing and hearing the Lightning stand on it's tail and accelerate vertically on full power at the Farnborough Air show will live with me to my grave....truly fantastic.

BTW this was also in the link Andy posted:

"We can thank the Labour government who scrapped the superb TSR 2 project under pressure from the US government. It did untold damage to our aviation industry, we lost out in huge sales exports to Australia & Germany. Both nations wanted the TSR 2, they ended up buying the mediocre by comparision F-111. The UK never received the 'FREE' F-111's that the Yanks promised in return for scrapping TSR 2. A disgraceful episode. Special relationship?! MY ARSE!"

This is the 1st time I have heard this explanation as to why the TSR2 was scrapped. Can anyone confirm this was indeed the case?

Very interesting!

 

[David Morton]

That is the truth. Denis Healey. What a fool.
I loved some of the stories about Avpin. I watched - from afar- when a young erk (airman) couldn't get the coke stove (a vertical black monstrosity that heated the hut) to light up in the hut for the night guard on the armed Vulcan, staying overnight at Marham. He worked on VSF (Visiting Aircraft Flight) and returned with a milk bottle of Avpin. Blew the hut apart and the chimney from the stove almost went into orbit.

 

[Glenn M]

You can still fly in a two seat Lightning from Thunder City on Cape Town aiport - or you could a couple of years ago anyway when I went there and had a flight - what an experience. WOW!