EE Lightning: Why we need it!

Oh yeah, quite right. I forgot Kuwait also used them.

 

 

No, im sold, you dont need to convince me.:D

Good man, that

:D

I was sold on the Lightning at about 8 years old and seeing the firebirds display team, for an 8 year old in 1964 it was shock and awe :D

If they did one, I'd oddly like an earlier variant with the guns still in the nose, eg, the F.2A, or failing that, the later F.6 with the cannons in the ventral pod.

Yes, they've both got short legs, but they'd be a hella fun. Probably would be the fastest aircraft in DCS by some margin on the acceleration front.

That said, there's certainly other RAF/Euro craft I'd like to see first.

Everything I've seen indicates that the Lightning was rather unremarkable for its time as far as climb rate and acceleration goes. Remember that it's roughly contemporary with the F-4, which held all of the time-to-altitude records for turbojet powered aircraft until the Streak Eagle came around in the 1970's. The numbers I've seen for its rate of climb makes it roughly on par with the J 35 Draken, which is actually really weird because the Draken uses the same engine, except it's only got one instead of two.

As far as acceleration goes, if it's on the deck I'd bet on the AJ 37 over almost any aircraft that came before it.

If anyone has some real charts with actual data though please post them, I'd be very interested and I could very well be wrong.

If anyone has some real charts with actual data though please post them, I'd be very interested and I could very well be wrong.

Some charts from various different Lightning models. I don't have a proper chart for the Avon 302 engine Lightning. The Draken's engine was quite a bit more powerful than those fitted to the Lightning, it might be comparable with the Avon 302

First image is the Lightning F1 and F2 with the Avon 210 engine acceleration graph with re-heat, the second image is the F3 acceleration with the Avon 301, 3rd image is the F3 g-limits 4th image is the F6 with Avon 301 engines with annotation about the 302 engine, 5th image is F6 g-limits.

EDIT: just added the Draken acceleration table for comparison.

Everything I've seen indicates that the Lightning was rather unremarkable for its time as far as climb rate and acceleration goes. Remember that it's roughly contemporary with the F-4, which held all of the time-to-altitude records for turbojet powered aircraft until the Streak Eagle came around in the 1970's. The numbers I've seen for its rate of climb makes it roughly on par with the J 35 Draken, which is actually really weird because the Draken uses the same engine, except it's only got one instead of two.

 

 

As far as acceleration goes, if it's on the deck I'd bet on the AJ 37 over almost any aircraft that came before it.

 

 

 

If anyone has some real charts with actual data though please post them, I'd be very interested and I could very well be wrong.

Remember that the Draken's maximum take off weight is about 20,000lb lighter than the max take off weight of the Lightning. With no stores and an empty ventral tank the F2/F3/F6 lightnings had a better than 1:1 thrust to weight. It was one of the "tricks" the display pilots used when demoing the Lightning, using up the ventral tank to get an better power to weight :)

Some charts from various different Lightning models. I don't have a proper chart for the Avon 302 engine Lightning. The Draken's engine was quite a bit more powerful than those fitted to the Lightning, it might be comparable with the Avon 302

 

First image is the Lightning F1 and F2 with the Avon 210 engine acceleration graph with re-heat, the second image is the F3 acceleration with the Avon 301, 3rd image is the F3 g-limits 4th image is the F6 with Avon 301 engines with annotation about the 302 engine, 5th image is F6 g-limits.

 

EDIT: just added the Draken acceleration table for comparison.

Interesting, thank you! Does "+VT" in the first image mean it's including a (full) ventral tank?

That Draken chart isn't really representative for the aircraft though. The Danish Drakens were significantly different from all other Draken variants since they were primarily intended as strike aircraft, not interceptors - they didn't even have radar originally. The 35XD/TF-35 was significantly heavier than any other variant because it had a redesigned wing with space for more internal fuel, a stronger undercarriage, more hardpoints, etc. Even with that said though I wonder if that chart might be with a drop tank included, because it's significantly worse than even a J 35F with a combat loadout (two rb28 and two drop tanks) 3000 ft lower.

In SFI J 35F, part 3, page 112, there's an acceleration chart for that loadout in the bottom right. The upper half of the diagram plots Mach number on the horizontal axis vs time in minutes on the vertical axis at 10 km MSL (~33000 ft) - ICAO standard atmospheric conditions in black. An identical chart but with just the two drop tanks can be found on page 100, and for a clean aircraft on page 94. It's easy to see that the J 35F definitely accelerates significantly slower than any Lightning variant (after two minutes it's up to only M 1.22, from M 0.9), but it's not nearly as bad as that TF-35 chart makes it out to be.

Climbing charts for a clean aircraft can be found on page 9, by the way (with drop tanks on page 22, then there's a whole bunch of various loadout configurations covered further on). All four charts have altitude in km MSL on the vertical axis. Top left chart plots it against against time from brakes release on the runway in minutes, top right against fuel consumption as percentage of internal fuel, bottom left against distance over ground in km, bottom right against rate of climb in m/s. Would be interesting to see similar charts for the Lightning, if you have them.

The Lightning completely outclasses the Viggen in acceleration at altitude as well, of course, but that's hardly surprising - the Viggen climbs pretty well (for its time) but is pretty terrible at actually doing anything at high altitude (a trait shared by many other early afterburning turbofans, which probably contributed to the legends of the turbojet interceptors).

e: again though the real king of these contests is the F-4, which - if I'm reading the charts right (p. 382) - can keep pace with the earlier Lightnings even with 4xAIM-7's on the pylons. Once it's burned some fuel, at least.

The only charts I could find on short notice for the Draken were what I posted.

I'm surprised I can actually figure out what some of the pages of the manuals you linked to are saying, knowing a little Dutch helps :)

I'm going to have a look through them later this evening.

 

 

again though the real king of these contests is the F-4, which - if I'm reading the charts right (p. 382) - can keep pace with the earlier Lightnings even with 4xAIM-7's on the pylons. Once it's burned some fuel, at least.

Around 3 minutes 30 seconds for an F.6 (slower than an F.3) to accelerate from M.1 to M.2 at 35k feet according to alicatt's charts.

The Phantom charts are hard for me to make sense of. But at 35k feet it looks like its about 30 seconds slower if you start at 38k lbs and 3 MINUTES slower if you start at 50k lbs!

Interestingly the Lightning F.6 turns better sustained than the slatted F-4E below 20,000 ft after which point they even out.

5.9-6.0 G's sustained at 10,000 ft is pretty impressive for the time. By comparison the MiG-21Bis for example manages 5.5 G's sustained in emergency afterburner 300 m lower (3 km) @ 7500 kg at the same peak speed.

So the Lightning was without a doubt at the top in terms of performance for its time.

MiG-21Bis, 5.5 G @ 10 kft

F-4E, 5.8 G @ 10 kft (graph is slightly tilted, remember to take that into account)

EE Lightning, 5.9-6.0 G @ 10 kft

Interestingly the Lightning F.6 turns better sustained than the slatted F-4E below 20,000 ft after which point they even out.

 

So the Lightning was without a doubt at the top in terms of performance for its time.

 

From speaking with pilots of the Lightning they all say it was a sportscar amongst sedans even up to the time it was retired, it's big limitation was the lack of fuel and all sorties were planned around getting more fuel.

However, the Avro Vulcan pilots said they loved to get the Lightning high and then they could run rings around them as the Vulcan had a better instantaneous and sustained turn rate at high altitude. It was due to the better wing loading of the Vulcan at altitude. :joystick: :pilotfly:

Goddamm Vulcans have to be so perfect!!!!

vulcans out turn everything at high altitude lol

Hmmm maybe we need a Vulcan....

Falklands map is in development after all.

Hmmm maybe we need a Vulcan....

 

Falklands map is in development after all.

Now, I have sat in both a Vulcan cockpit and a Lightning one and for a Blackbuck mission I would much rather be in the Vulcan ;)

Now, I have sat in both a Vulcan cockpit and a Lightning one and for a Blackbuck mission I would much rather be in the Vulcan ;)

i hate to think how much tanking a lightning would need to do to do a blackbuck sortie lol, just attach a bloody great hose to it and fly formation all the way haha

Now, I have sat in both a Vulcan cockpit and a Lightning one and for a Blackbuck mission I would much rather be in the Vulcan ;)

Ive not sat in a Lightning cockpit, but it must be really bad to better a Vulcan Cockpit. I could barely get in it, getting out was not much easier.

Ive not sat in a Lightning cockpit, but it must be really bad to better a Vulcan Cockpit. I could barely get in it, getting out was not much easier.

I'm not that big @ 1.74m and the Lightning cockpit was, lets say, cosy. there is a height restriction for the lightning, but it all comes down to the length of your thigh bone, it is due to the way you egress under assistance, if your legs are too long you risk leaving your knees in the cockpit.

There are one or two pilots that had to use the "assisted egress" and ended up with badly scraped legs on the cockpit combing.

I had my first sit in a Lightning in the early 1990s, was handed a set of keys and left alone to my own devices with a museum example of a B2 Vulcan, and yeah it is not that easy to get in and out, thankfully the centre console lifts to allow it, or it would be nigh impossible :)

The Lightning was at RAF Leuchars and I was a cadet at the time, so many questions I had and the squaddie looking after us didn't have a clue :(

Since then I have been back in one in 1989, I was a lot bigger than at 14 and the cockpit was a lot tighter :)

Had the chance to sit in a F.6 at bruntinthorpe. Friend of mine helps look after them and was talking me through how everything worked. Its certainly rather cosy!

Im terrified of heights and ladders yet I somehow got up and in. Coming down was less easy!

Had the chance to sit in a F.6 at bruntinthorpe. Friend of mine helps look after them and was talking me through how everything worked. Its certainly rather cosy!

I'm glad I've made a few friends that are ex lightning pilots and while I'm full of curiosity I try and temper what I ask them, they are all very helpful I must admit.

I'm terrified of heights and ladders yet I somehow got up and in. Coming down was less easy!

Tell me about it, stalling and spinning at 5000ft + and I'm on the point of freezing once I get to the 4th rung up :D

I managed to put my fear aside just a bit to go flying, I am sitting there in a small aircraft with knees knocking and loving it at the same time,

Ah well, getting too old to start up flying again but every time I pass the local airfield it is all I can do not to turn in there and sign up, today they had a Shorts C330 Sky Van with a big smiley face painted over the camouflage taking paratroopers up at the local airfield (Sanicole)

It would be so great to have a new, weird missile too in the form of the Red Top - one of the first all-aspect heaters, albeit only against targets at supersonic speeds. The Lightning is huge in UK history and was the only supersonic plane completely designed in that country!

There is a lightning half a mile from me in a garden center the owner opens some wednesdays and some weekends It's been there for many years but never taken a look £3 pounds I think the admission is I spoke to the owner 2 months back at a war remembrance day did not realise he owned the plane until we had a chat.

Just imagine this beauty in DCS:

ZfcU-ScArJk

Pretty sure the Lightning Preservation Group would be eager to help... live aircraft too so think of all those lovely authentic sounds that could be recorded!

there are so many AC more interresting than this

and more practical..