Navy pilot who shot down R MIGs

[Terry Carraway]

How do they work, Terry?

When the speed brake is deployed, and you reduce the throttles below 60% RPM (IIRC), there are small panels behind the engines that pop out and deflect the thrust sideways

Here is a drawing of one deployed.

When deployed, you kept the engines spooled up, but reduced the thrust. When you got good with the jet, you would "play" the attenuators. Popping them in and out with small throttle movements, without really changing the throttle setting.

[Dave Siciliano]

Kinda fun to compare some business GA aircraft today to past war birds. Brings out the Walter Mitty in us :-)

[Tom Charlton]

Looks like that had an engine with 5,000 pounds of thrust. The Citation II I flew had two with 2,500 pounds each. :-)

Hi Dave,
Likely the Citation drinks considerably less kerosene also<g>.

Regards,
Tom Charlton

[Ray Tackett]

Looks like the max gross weight of the Panther was 19,500. The Citation I flew was just over 14,000.

That's because you didn't order the quad .20 mount, plus ammo and fire control system.

[Scott Dyer DXR/CT]

The T-37 had thrust attenuators to allow you to keep the RPM up around 60% for faster response.

How do they work, Terry?

[Terry Carraway]

Looks like that had an engine with 5,000 pounds of thrust. The Citation II I flew had two with 2,500 pounds each. :-)

The early jets were NOT over powered.

But what I see is the prototype had 5000 pounds of thrust. The production aircraft had 6250.

And yes, centrifugal compressor engine would spool up VERY slowly, especially from idle. J-69 in the T-37 could take 10 seconds from idle to full power. One thing you checked during preflight was the actual spool up times for the engines in the aircraft you were going to fly. I remember 6 seconds was common.

The T-37 had thrust attenuators to allow you to keep the RPM up around 60% for faster response.

[B.Butler]

Maybe that Citation had better performance than the F9F. I'll bet it did.

Certainly faster spool-up. Very few ramp-strikes in the Citation.

[Rod Madsen]

Maybe that Citation had better performance than the F9F. I'll bet it did.

[Dave Siciliano]

Looks like the max gross weight of the Panther was 19,500. The Citation I flew was just over 14,000.

[Dave Siciliano]

Looks like that had an engine with 5,000 pounds of thrust. The Citation II I flew had two with 2,500 pounds each. :-)

[Dave Siciliano]

Agree, the vid could be confusing to folks without your calibrated eye ;-)

[Jeff Hartmann]

I believe he was flying an F9F.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F9F_Panther

Exactly, Ray was responding to my post about the video, where in the dogfight sequences, they showed 2 or 3 different types, unrelated to the story.

[Ralph Jones]

I believe he was flying an F9F.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F9F_Panther

Possibly the coolest looking jet ever designed.

Deck crews remembered them for the difficult wing fold. The prototype wing folded to a vertical position, but then fuel consumption forced Grumman to add tip tanks that exceeded the hangar deck height limit -- so they had to limit the fold angle to an outward spread condition that increased the total width and made deck spotting difficult.

The F9F's put on a great show in The Bridges at Toko-Ri.

[Dave Siciliano]

I believe he was flying an F9F.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F9F_Panther

[Ralph Jones]

Whoever put the video together didn't know their airplanes.

I'm shocked, SHOCKED.