IMHO your interviewing style is superb; your questions so well thought through. How did you manage to find such an incredible pilot to interview? I don't see any way to support you by patreon or channel membership?
Thanks for the kind words, Charles. Donations to the 10 Percent True tip jar can be made here! Thank you for asking :) www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=GDJU6CM3GWZTN
Have known Brad for 13 years now, never when we were active though. One of the most humblest men I know, with an "I didn't do much" attitude, but a gentle giant in the deeds he did. Yes, as Brad said, the F model aircraft had no speed limit, other than the materials of the airframe. The aluminum would not melt, but you always had a chance of blowing the temper of the material, weakening it. The most visible evidence was ALL the coatings. We had a F model, 71-892, at Lakenheath, doing a Functional Check Flight (FCF) over the North Sea, (1981?) and it tested those limits. The pilot mentioned he had been curious whether the speed tape could register Mach 3, said he was surprised it did! We did have to do a lot of recovery work though as all the originally painted leading edges were bare, no paint, speed tape on the comm/IFF antennas was melted, and the radome edges had bubbles in the neoprene. The F model was also the airplane that could rival the F-15 for fastest time to altitude with a near 1 to 1 thrust ratio on take-off, albeit with a wings empty fuel load. You could do a lot with a 45,000 airframe weight and 52,000 pounds of thrust. It WAS political that the airplane was not allowed to prove its worth, as F-15's and F-16's were the 'sexy' choices for the white scarf type pilots in charge of the USAF at the time.
Wow! This is an old interview, but I see some people still comment on it. I will add mine. I flew the F-105, A-7, F-111D, F, A, EF-111, A-7 again, and F-16. I was a very fortunate pilot. I did not know Brad. I enjoyed the interview a lot. He was a lucky guy too. At 5,000 hours, you really are good in the airplane. I am writing to add to his comments on the top speed of the F-111F. I came to it from the ANG A-7. I took a five-year leave of absence and went on active duty to initially fly the F-111D and F. The A-7 was so slow, I wanted to go fast again. I sent a postcard back to the ANG squadron telling them of my high-speed adventures as a student. I took the plane to match 2.05 just because I could. I had heard the stories about the F's Mach 3 capability during FCF flights. We couldn't let the SR-71 guys, down the road at Mildenhall, be the only ones who could brag about going Mach 3. (They were Mach 3+) I didn't try Mach 3 because I understood that moisture would get into the honeycomb structure in the wings. At high speed, it would vaporize and peel off the skin as well as burn the paint. We could easily see the engine temp limits, but the skin temp gauge was above the WSO's seat and was very difficult to see so I never looked at it in flight. At altitude, you can't tell you are going that fast, but it is still thrilling to be able to say you have done it. There was no prohibition against it at that time, but you didn't want to hurt the airplane and we still had to save gas to fly a "counter" sortie. Usually, though, the speed limit of F-111s was the speed limit of the weapons. During wartime, shouldn't be the first time you take the plane to high speed. During my early training days in the F-16, I took it to its limit of match 2.02 at 40,000 feet and 800 knots at sea level. In the F-111, we did a dipsy doodle climb to altitude like the SR, but in the F-16 all you had to do was push it up, amazing! Both of them were amazing machines. I tried to get into the SR-71 program but wasn't selected. I did have the opportunity to go to launches and recoveries. What a thrill that was. Adding to his refueling stories, the F-105 refueled thirteen times crossing the Atlantic and I refueled twice in the F-111F. F-111 guys didn't get the recognition they deserved. All personnel in the air and on the ground worked hard to keep it going. It probably reached its pinnacle during Desert Storm and it should have been praised more for its precision bombing capability. In those days, it was the only airframe we had that could do self-lasing precision bombing and do it reliably. The F-117 could do it too. I am proud of those guys. It had some reliability problems when I flew it, but the bad guys should have been afraid of it.
Thank you for this. I was the guy who worked on the INS and TFR systems at Nellis (428TFS, 1969-72), and got out just before the redeployment back to Thailand. I never knew what happened, during the Linebacker II missions, or any of the other missions flown in SEA by the aircrews and F-111A's that I worked on. The squadron wanted me to extend so that I could go to Thailand, and even promised me a stripe if I would extend for 6 months. I had already been accepted to Fresno State, and had moved my family to Fresno CA, so extending was not an option. Things worked out for me because I managed to get a BA and MA from Fresno State, so that was the right decision made back so many years ago. I'm glad that this interview was posted because it gave me so much insight into what I had worked on for three years. Thank you!
Maj Donald E. Primas WSO was there at that time and had transferred from SAC B-58 Little Rock. He was deployed May 1972. He flew with Col. Anderson and Lt. Col Fred Darling. A lot of night flights... a long time ago.
Thanks so much for doing this interview with Brad...priceless. I flew with Brad as my first IP in 1989 and he's the MAN! Thanks to Steve and Brad for recording this.
1:16:30 there are still a few F-111s around in Australia in museums but the only one that hasn't been truly gutted is the one at RAAF base Amberley. The museum is on the base and as such, it still has all the original internals. It's a great exhibit and well worth visiting if you're in Brisbane.
Great interview. I flew many times with Brad in the 79th TFS at Heyford. The man was an encyclopedia and knew more than those that developed the aircraft. I will miss him.
Brad's mention of the requirement to bury the F-111s (to satisfy the SALT agreement) is of interest. I was at a business dinner in Linlithgow (near Edinburgh) in 2004, seated next to Lord James Douglas Hamilton, whose family has a rich aviation history (his father and three uncles each commanded RAF Spitfire squadrons during the Second World War). When he learned of my history, he asked if I could investigate the possibility of acquiring an F-111 for the National Museum Of Flight in East Lothian. I did, and it was feasible, but would have cost in the region of £150-£200K. Plus, this was in the wake of the second Gulf War, and the sentiment against the war was strong enough that gathering sufficient British support for importing an American fighter jet would have been very difficult to obtain. So after an exchange of letters, we left it there.
Just stumbled upon this outstanding interview - thanks very much, Steve @10percenttrue. You have a superb interviewing style (well considered questions, allowing plenty of space for the interviewee and an excellent radio voice on your part, based on my living in the UK for 36 years, sounds familiar... hints of historian Michael Wood). As it happens, I may be the guy with the fewest F-111 hours (only 65, as I had cataracts discovered in both eyes whilst finishing RTU at Mtn Home AFB in the latter half of 1982, before being posted to RAF Lakenheath). Brad Insley's name sounds familiar and I certainly heard many stories like his. He provides so many top insights in this interview, and in a humble way. I admire how he comes across. In fact, my first Deputy of Operations commander at Lakenheath was Col Robert Sponeybarger, who had been shot down in his F-111 and was captured and as a result was a PoW N Vietnam for the final six months before the PoWs were released. Anyhoo, thanks very much for this excellent blast from the past.
This really is the definitive F111 flight crew interview. What an insight to the operational nature of that aeroplane and the people who flew it. Congrats to you both for recording and preserving this legacy. Keep up the great work.
So many memories…. Went into the program in January ‘71, fresh out of tech school. Joined the instrument shop in the 442nd TFTS. As we were the aircraft training squadron saw many mid grade student pilots transitioning into the -111. A lot of them had the familiar “100 Missions - F-105” patch. I later understood many of them were not happy going into the -111, no doubt because at that time the program was still recovering from the ill fated SEA deployment and a series of groundings (It was said that Johnnie Carson said “the F-111 is the fastest airplane on the ground today”). Likewise, I understood a common sentiment was as a driver coming out of a single seat aircraft, who needs another guy there too? But, we most all came to love the -111. I later worked F-4C, E and RF and maintenance-wise, the -111 was way easier to work on. Was at Takhli Oct ‘72-Mar ‘73. RIP Bob Morrissey - Whaler 57
Me too. 79th 88-91. Many flights with him as his WSO. Taught me so much. Even had a check ride with him. No question, I would pass. I was good in the radar, but he made me so much better as a WSO in DS.
Logged a whopping 79 hours in the Vark as we said goodbye to them and sent them down under. What a magnificent airplane. Always felt like I was flying something special. Infinite respect to the Vietnam crews flying under the ribbons of ack ack.
I remember the first time I saw a F-111, My dad took me to work with him one morning at Nellis in 1967-68, he had been in Vietnam and now was flying the F-111. We stopped at a store and got some bullet hole decals and he wanted to prank another pilot and I got a bowl of water to put the decals in and then he had me put them on the windscreen. The pilot showed up, they had a laugh and then a maintenance guy removed them. Dad sometimes came home very upset about failures and crew losses over the years. One time at Nellis a F-111 ejection escape module had landed in the desert, and we had seen it sitting there with scorched and burned brush around it. When he came back from Vietnam with the F-111 he also was not happy about the experience although he had been to V/N several times in A-1s, A-37s and F-105s. He did keep flying the F-111 at Cannon AFB and Upper Heyford AFB England before he retired.
@@10percenttrue Yes but he is not doing well. He really loved his time in the USAF and me and my brother are proud to have grown up on airforce bases and hanging out with my dad and all his fighter pilot buddies, listening to all the stories! It is great watching your interviews.
Fascinating interview. New information for me on one of the most underrated aircraft in history. The USAF and RAAF put the time and effort in to mature that plane and got a lot out of it. I wad fortunate that I got to see the FBs at Pease AFB in New Hampshire many times. If you think about it the Vark was sort of the F-117 of it's day.
I sat in on a maintenance debriefing of an F111D at Cannon AFB around 1972. The pilot reported a max Mach of 2.7 like it was nothing special. I was an instrument\autopilot tech and later an FTD (full time drunks) instructor on the F111s. I grew to love and respect the F111. The sofistication of the AFCS was something special that even some of the pilots didn't understand. I think it could have saved the government a lot of money over its lifetime if the Navy had accepted it. I think the Navy rejected it because they didn't want a trend of AC selection by the Pentagon to get started and there is a hiring trend of top brass hiring by AC companies that probably weighed heavily on the decision makers. Most of cost of an AC program is not the purchase of the AC but in the pilot/maintenance training and repair of components over the lifetime of the AC. A lot of money could have been saved if the Navy had accepted it.
Wonderful interview. I maintained F111s for 16 years until they were retired. Lots of things that I had never heard about before. The 111 was dancing on the razor edge of technology and I hold all of the pilots in high esteem as they were well aware that the tech was prone to failure.
@@Habu2 I did two extended tours at RAF Lakenheath. At one point, I wanted to retire there. I seriously miss the good beer on tap, pub crawls in Norwich, and stopping on the way home to get a kebab or one of those huge spring rolls from the chinese.
@@markwybierala4936 Ha ha.....good stuff. I believe current crews/ground staff apply for Lakenheath with it being desirable. Nice part of the world....Mildenhall holds great memories for me, (British)
As a person who worked on these aircraft in Takhli, I was a bomb/nav tech: 32652 afsc. This is an awesome aircraft, and in my opinion, the pilots were fearless to take this thing into battle. Grab your ass at night and fly auto TFR into Hanoi took guts. I am now a retired electrical engineer and can admire the technology in this aircraft for this era. My comments concern my looking back at the challenges of maintaining these aircraft in that environment. So, my responsibilities were to work on the attack radar, INS, and TFR, with challenges for all these systems. This was an era at the dawn of digital avionics and before GPS. Having a taste of digital avionics with the F-111F, the F-111A seemed a model T to work on, having analog computers and an earlier model INS. TFR seemed the same, but all the systems seemed a little dated, having been spoiled on the "F" model. Big wake up, and I think a missed detail was that these aircraft were from Nellis AFB, which is a desert. This aircraft was loaded with avionics requiring airconditioned dry air, much like the challenges of present day aircraft like the F-35, and we were now in a jungle. Some aircraft I worked on had water dripping from the black boxes we replaced on aircraft returning from missions. The attack radar was frequency agile to resist jamming and used waveguides to deliver rf from the magnetron transmitter to the antenna in the raydome, (think of your microwave oven). This required dry air in the waveguides to prevent arcing and there was a desiccant cannister to accomplish this. But, this was never an issue in a desert environment, and many techs had not seen these issues. I only had one pilot to come out and see what the techs were doing in maintaining their aircraft, we called him Mr. TFR and I don't remember his name. I wished more pilots would do the same. I did mission de-briefing for bomb/nav squawks and pilots gave me the radar bomb film for processing. Worked on the F-111D at Cannon AFB. Too advanced for its time, Dopler radar, glass cockpit, but we couldn't keep it in the air, it was broke all the time. Many more memories, and a big shout out to SMSGT Bruce Norton, who ran our shop in Takhli. As an aside, we rarely did TF tie-in tests, which involved testing the auto TFR mode to control the hydraulic flight controls.
Great channel, fascinating interview! Good insight into the F111 teething problems in Vietnam. Looking forward to the Upper Heyford stories. I used to fly over the disused base every day in the mighty Seneca when training at Oxford. It must’ve been heaving with air traffic, back in the day.
In high school I was lucky enough to see an F-111 from Cannon fly at low altitude! Well it was only moderate low but unmistakable and low enough to be loud and impressive, wings swept close to fully back but in 1994 it was now forbidden in law for AC to fly supersonic over civilian areas even if rural. Very cool and glad to experience this as the plane was pretty much fully retired from USAF service by the end of 94!
I'm pretty sure I remember being told about the F-111E models (and maybe the F-models) launching from Gander in Newfoundland to cross the Atlantic, to be based at Upper Heyford and Lakenheath, respectively.
We had problems with the Canadian Marconi Doppler system at Cannon AFB in the early 1970's on our D models. The rumor circulated that our tech rep from Canadian Marconi discovered a factory assembled part was the culprit and re-assembled by hand the component properly.
I was in the 429 TFS, the other squadron, same time, same experiences. Brad Insley's comments about our Squadron Commander, Lt Col "Matt" Mattheson, were inaccurate. He was the bravest officer I ever had the serve with.
Miss the F-111 .. was just a nice two seat medium bomber that the USAF could still use in a stealthy form. Hopefully they will get a new bomber ..and we need at the least 200 and carry hypersonic missiles in its bay. Long range as well and laser defense system.
The f-14 was the better plane for the navy but curious if it could’ve been side by side seating for the f-14 same as the f-111? Well if in visual range dogfight it’s best for a fighter to have the canopy glassing close to body to have unobstructed view for majority of angles and the side seating doesn’t allow for the pilot as main trigger guy to see out one side having to look over the WSO location though it’s great arrangement for a bomber to have side seating adjacent crew. Only reason I bring up the two different seating is the reality that even though the F-14 is tandem seating, the forward fuselage width of the f-14 is at least as wide as that of the F-111 maybe even slightly fatter! This can be seen if they are compared to each other but otherwise people would instinctively consider the f-14 nose to be thinner than an f-111 due to the seating being tandem. In summary I’m just pointing out the fact that the f-14 is quite bulky, or the f-111 for such a large aircraft is quite sleek! I don’t care for McNamara policy in many things he was a clown, but the F-111 was I believe THE best attack bomber aircraft the US military ever had even if it was just an air force plane and was correctly rejected by the navy! McNamara was correct in getting the GD f-111 into service even if just in USAF service and the navy was correct for rejecting it! I’ll stand by this argument even if it makes the f111 out to be a failure. The F111 was a major success for both SAC and tacair, even if it being a naval aircraft was a failed idea!
F111 was used as the reason to cancel the TSR2 for the RAF. So many delays RAF went with the Phantom. You hear the faults that a new design can bring in development. You had to fly the F111 carefully high loss rate. The TSR2 was flying those who know the test pilots gave a pretty factual statements about the loss of the plane they where disgusted. The TSR2 on one.afterburner made the English Electric Lightning fighter use both afterburners and that was a Mach 2 plus fighter. Shame too many committees and know nothings involved slowed development. Example of how to screw up development.
Thank you, Bill. Yes, you can get the podcast version from a bunch of hosts, including Apple, Spotify, Amazon and Google. Checkout my Buzzsprout account to chose where to get it from: 10percenttrue.buzzsprout.com/
I sat in on a maintenance debriefing of an F111D at Cannon AFB around 1972. The pilot reported a max Mach of 2.7 like it was nothing special. I was an instrument\autopilot tech and later an FTD (full time drunks) instructor on the F111s. I grew to love and respect the F111. The sofistication of the AFCS was something special that even some of the pilots didn't understand. I think it could have saved the government a lot of money over its lifetime if the Navy had accepted it. I think the Navy rejected it because they didn't want a trend of AC selection by the Pentagon to get started and there is a hiring trend of top brass hiring by AC companies that probably weighed heavily on the decision makers. Most of cost of an AC is operating them over 20 to 30 years. If the training and parts repair were more common huge savings could have been made.
I haven't seen any. Tony. The closest would probably be the writings of Peter E Davies (no relation and Tony Thornborough: www.amazon.com/s?k=peter+e+davies+f-111&ref=nb_sb_noss
I have flown both the A model and the F model, including as chief of FCF section at Lakenheath (so plenty of time above Mach 2). The Mach 3 story is pure BS. Mach 2.5, no problem, but 3, no way.
IMHO your interviewing style is superb; your questions so well thought through. How did you manage to find such an incredible pilot to interview? I don't see any way to support you by patreon or channel membership?
Thanks for the kind words, Charles.
Donations to the 10 Percent True tip jar can be made here! Thank you for asking :) www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted_button_id=GDJU6CM3GWZTN
I wanted to pass on that Brad Insley passed away recently. I was a mechanic on F-111Es at Upper Heyford. He was a legend in the F-111 world.
Have known Brad for 13 years now, never when we were active though. One of the most humblest men I know, with an "I didn't do much" attitude, but a gentle giant in the deeds he did. Yes, as Brad said, the F model aircraft had no speed limit, other than the materials of the airframe. The aluminum would not melt, but you always had a chance of blowing the temper of the material, weakening it. The most visible evidence was ALL the coatings. We had a F model, 71-892, at Lakenheath, doing a Functional Check Flight (FCF) over the North Sea, (1981?) and it tested those limits. The pilot mentioned he had been curious whether the speed tape could register Mach 3, said he was surprised it did! We did have to do a lot of recovery work though as all the originally painted leading edges were bare, no paint, speed tape on the comm/IFF antennas was melted, and the radome edges had bubbles in the neoprene. The F model was also the airplane that could rival the F-15 for fastest time to altitude with a near 1 to 1 thrust ratio on take-off, albeit with a wings empty fuel load. You could do a lot with a 45,000 airframe weight and 52,000 pounds of thrust. It WAS political that the airplane was not allowed to prove its worth, as F-15's and F-16's were the 'sexy' choices for the white scarf type pilots in charge of the USAF at the time.
Wow! This is an old interview, but I see some people still comment on it. I will add mine. I flew the F-105, A-7, F-111D, F, A, EF-111, A-7 again, and F-16. I was a very fortunate pilot. I did not know Brad. I enjoyed the interview a lot. He was a lucky guy too. At 5,000 hours, you really are good in the airplane. I am writing to add to his comments on the top speed of the F-111F. I came to it from the ANG A-7. I took a five-year leave of absence and went on active duty to initially fly the F-111D and F. The A-7 was so slow, I wanted to go fast again. I sent a postcard back to the ANG squadron telling them of my high-speed adventures as a student. I took the plane to match 2.05 just because I could. I had heard the stories about the F's Mach 3 capability during FCF flights. We couldn't let the SR-71 guys, down the road at Mildenhall, be the only ones who could brag about going Mach 3. (They were Mach 3+) I didn't try Mach 3 because I understood that moisture would get into the honeycomb structure in the wings. At high speed, it would vaporize and peel off the skin as well as burn the paint. We could easily see the engine temp limits, but the skin temp gauge was above the WSO's seat and was very difficult to see so I never looked at it in flight. At altitude, you can't tell you are going that fast, but it is still thrilling to be able to say you have done it. There was no prohibition against it at that time, but you didn't want to hurt the airplane and we still had to save gas to fly a "counter" sortie. Usually, though, the speed limit of F-111s was the speed limit of the weapons. During wartime, shouldn't be the first time you take the plane to high speed. During my early training days in the F-16, I took it to its limit of match 2.02 at 40,000 feet and 800 knots at sea level. In the F-111, we did a dipsy doodle climb to altitude like the SR, but in the F-16 all you had to do was push it up, amazing! Both of them were amazing machines. I tried to get into the SR-71 program but wasn't selected. I did have the opportunity to go to launches and recoveries. What a thrill that was. Adding to his refueling stories, the F-105 refueled thirteen times crossing the Atlantic and I refueled twice in the F-111F. F-111 guys didn't get the recognition they deserved. All personnel in the air and on the ground worked hard to keep it going. It probably reached its pinnacle during Desert Storm and it should have been praised more for its precision bombing capability. In those days, it was the only airframe we had that could do self-lasing precision bombing and do it reliably. The F-117 could do it too. I am proud of those guys. It had some reliability problems when I flew it, but the bad guys should have been afraid of it.
Thank you for this. I was the guy who worked on the INS and TFR systems at Nellis (428TFS, 1969-72), and got out just before the redeployment back to Thailand. I never knew what happened, during the Linebacker II missions, or any of the other missions flown in SEA by the aircrews and F-111A's that I worked on. The squadron wanted me to extend so that I could go to Thailand, and even promised me a stripe if I would extend for 6 months. I had already been accepted to Fresno State, and had moved my family to Fresno CA, so extending was not an option. Things worked out for me because I managed to get a BA and MA from Fresno State, so that was the right decision made back so many years ago. I'm glad that this interview was posted because it gave me so much insight into what I had worked on for three years. Thank you!
Maj Donald E. Primas WSO was there at that time and had transferred from SAC B-58 Little Rock. He was deployed May 1972. He flew with Col. Anderson and Lt. Col Fred Darling. A lot of night flights... a long time ago.
Thanks so much for doing this interview with Brad...priceless. I flew with Brad as my first IP in 1989 and he's the MAN! Thanks to Steve and Brad for recording this.
Thanks for the intro to Brad, Marco! I have very much enjoyed my chats with him so far.
1:16:30 there are still a few F-111s around in Australia in museums but the only one that hasn't been truly gutted is the one at RAAF base Amberley. The museum is on the base and as such, it still has all the original internals. It's a great exhibit and well worth visiting if you're in Brisbane.
A legend in the Vark community, and more than that, a hero. Respect...
It's Pave Tack system was incredible. Many years ahead of it's time!!!
Great interview. I flew many times with Brad in the 79th TFS at Heyford. The man was an encyclopedia and knew more than those that developed the aircraft. I will miss him.
Brad's mention of the requirement to bury the F-111s (to satisfy the SALT agreement) is of interest.
I was at a business dinner in Linlithgow (near Edinburgh) in 2004, seated next to Lord James Douglas Hamilton, whose family has a rich aviation history (his father and three uncles each commanded RAF Spitfire squadrons during the Second World War).
When he learned of my history, he asked if I could investigate the possibility of acquiring an F-111 for the National Museum Of Flight in East Lothian. I did, and it was feasible, but would have cost in the region of £150-£200K. Plus, this was in the wake of the second Gulf War, and the sentiment against the war was strong enough that gathering sufficient British support for importing an American fighter jet would have been very difficult to obtain. So after an exchange of letters, we left it there.
Just stumbled upon this outstanding interview - thanks very much, Steve @10percenttrue. You have a superb interviewing style (well considered questions, allowing plenty of space for the interviewee and an excellent radio voice on your part, based on my living in the UK for 36 years, sounds familiar... hints of historian Michael Wood).
As it happens, I may be the guy with the fewest F-111 hours (only 65, as I had cataracts discovered in both eyes whilst finishing RTU at Mtn Home AFB in the latter half of 1982, before being posted to RAF Lakenheath). Brad Insley's name sounds familiar and I certainly heard many stories like his. He provides so many top insights in this interview, and in a humble way. I admire how he comes across.
In fact, my first Deputy of Operations commander at Lakenheath was Col Robert Sponeybarger, who had been shot down in his F-111 and was captured and as a result was a PoW N Vietnam for the final six months before the PoWs were released. Anyhoo, thanks very much for this excellent blast from the past.
This really is the definitive F111 flight crew interview. What an insight to the operational nature of that aeroplane and the people who flew it. Congrats to you both for recording and preserving this legacy. Keep up the great work.
So many memories…. Went into the program in January ‘71, fresh out of tech school. Joined the instrument shop in the 442nd TFTS. As we were the aircraft training squadron saw many mid grade student pilots transitioning into the -111. A lot of them had the familiar “100 Missions - F-105” patch. I later understood many of them were not happy going into the -111, no doubt because at that time the program was still recovering from the ill fated SEA deployment and a series of groundings (It was said that Johnnie Carson said “the F-111 is the fastest airplane on the ground today”). Likewise, I understood a common sentiment was as a driver coming out of a single seat aircraft, who needs another guy there too? But, we most all came to love the -111. I later worked F-4C, E and RF and maintenance-wise, the -111 was way easier to work on. Was at Takhli Oct ‘72-Mar ‘73. RIP Bob Morrissey - Whaler 57
I had the honor to serve with him in the 80s in the UK. Great guy to work with. TIGER, TIGER!
Me too. 79th 88-91. Many flights with him as his WSO. Taught me so much. Even had a check ride with him. No question, I would pass. I was good in the radar, but he made me so much better as a WSO in DS.
f-111A and D crew chief here. Cannon AFB and over seas Korat, Thailand 347 Tac ftr wing Life changing time in my life
Very interesting, have always wondered about F-111 SE Asia ops.
Logged a whopping 79 hours in the Vark as we said goodbye to them and sent them down under. What a magnificent airplane. Always felt like I was flying something special. Infinite respect to the Vietnam crews flying under the ribbons of ack ack.
Presumably, you ended up going F-15E?
@@10percenttrue I wound up in the B-1
I remember the first time I saw a F-111, My dad took me to work with him one morning at Nellis in 1967-68, he had been in Vietnam and now was flying the F-111. We stopped at a store and got some bullet hole decals and he wanted to prank another pilot and I got a bowl of water to put the decals in and then he had me put them on the windscreen. The pilot showed up, they had a laugh and then a maintenance guy removed them.
Dad sometimes came home very upset about failures and crew losses over the years. One time at Nellis a F-111 ejection escape module had landed in the desert, and we had seen it sitting there with scorched and burned brush around it. When he came back from Vietnam with the F-111 he also was not happy about the experience although he had been to V/N several times in A-1s, A-37s and F-105s. He did keep flying the F-111 at Cannon AFB and Upper Heyford AFB England before he retired.
Thanks for sharing these memories. Is your father still with us?
@@10percenttrue Yes but he is not doing well. He really loved his time in the USAF and me and my brother are proud to have grown up on airforce bases and hanging out with my dad and all his fighter pilot buddies, listening to all the stories! It is great watching your interviews.
Nice account.....
@@Habu2 Thank You.
Great interview with the master ,met him at the Dec2010 closeout -a true gentleman and raconteur.Shot many pictures of him for his own use and mine.
Thanks, Steve
Steve, do you know if Brad met Ivan? (Col. Ivan H. Dethman USAF)
Fascinating interview. New information for me on one of the most underrated aircraft in history. The USAF and RAAF put the time and effort in to mature that plane and got a lot out of it. I wad fortunate that I got to see the FBs at Pease AFB in New Hampshire many times. If you think about it the Vark was sort of the F-117 of it's day.
I sat in on a maintenance debriefing of an F111D at Cannon AFB around 1972. The pilot reported a max Mach of 2.7 like it was nothing special. I was an instrument\autopilot tech and later an FTD (full time drunks) instructor on the F111s. I grew to love and respect the F111. The sofistication of the AFCS was something special that even some of the pilots didn't understand. I think it could have saved the government a lot of money over its lifetime if the Navy had accepted it. I think the Navy rejected it because they didn't want a trend of AC selection by the Pentagon to get started and there is a hiring trend of top brass hiring by AC companies that probably weighed heavily on the decision makers. Most of cost of an AC program is not the purchase of the AC but in the pilot/maintenance training and repair of components over the lifetime of the AC. A lot of money could have been saved if the Navy had accepted it.
Wonderful interview. I maintained F111s for 16 years until they were retired. Lots of things that I had never heard about before. The 111 was dancing on the razor edge of technology and I hold all of the pilots in high esteem as they were well aware that the tech was prone to failure.
Where based mainly Mark.....any UK time ?
@@Habu2 I did two extended tours at RAF Lakenheath. At one point, I wanted to retire there. I seriously miss the good beer on tap, pub crawls in Norwich, and stopping on the way home to get a kebab or one of those huge spring rolls from the chinese.
@@markwybierala4936 Ha ha.....good stuff. I believe current crews/ground staff apply for Lakenheath with it being desirable. Nice part of the world....Mildenhall holds great memories for me, (British)
As a person who worked on these aircraft in Takhli, I was a bomb/nav tech: 32652 afsc. This is an awesome aircraft, and in my opinion, the pilots were fearless to take this thing into battle. Grab your ass at night and fly auto TFR into Hanoi took guts. I am now a retired electrical engineer and can admire the technology in this aircraft for this era. My comments concern my looking back at the challenges of maintaining these aircraft in that environment. So, my responsibilities were to work on the attack radar, INS, and TFR, with challenges for all these systems. This was an era at the dawn of digital avionics and before GPS. Having a taste of digital avionics with the F-111F, the F-111A seemed a model T to work on, having analog computers and an earlier model INS. TFR seemed the same, but all the systems seemed a little dated, having been spoiled on the "F" model. Big wake up, and I think a missed detail was that these aircraft were from Nellis AFB, which is a desert. This aircraft was loaded with avionics requiring airconditioned dry air, much like the challenges of present day aircraft like the F-35, and we were now in a jungle. Some aircraft I worked on had water dripping from the black boxes we replaced on aircraft returning from missions. The attack radar was frequency agile to resist jamming and used waveguides to deliver rf from the magnetron transmitter to the antenna in the raydome, (think of your microwave oven). This required dry air in the waveguides to prevent arcing and there was a desiccant cannister to accomplish this. But, this was never an issue in a desert environment, and many techs had not seen these issues. I only had one pilot to come out and see what the techs were doing in maintaining their aircraft, we called him Mr. TFR and I don't remember his name. I wished more pilots would do the same. I did mission de-briefing for bomb/nav squawks and pilots gave me the radar bomb film for processing. Worked on the F-111D at Cannon AFB. Too advanced for its time, Dopler radar, glass cockpit, but we couldn't keep it in the air, it was broke all the time. Many more memories, and a big shout out to SMSGT Bruce Norton, who ran our shop in Takhli. As an aside, we rarely did TF tie-in tests, which involved testing the auto TFR mode to control the hydraulic flight controls.
My favorite plane is F-111. It's so ahead of its time but its engines, weapons and materials just could not catch up...
Great channel, fascinating interview! Good insight into the F111 teething problems in Vietnam. Looking forward to the Upper Heyford stories. I used to fly over the disused base every day in the mighty Seneca when training at Oxford. It must’ve been heaving with air traffic, back in the day.
Coming soon, Dave! Thanks for your kind words.
Thanks Steve for doing this.
My pleasure. Thanks for commenting!
In high school I was lucky enough to see an F-111 from Cannon fly at low altitude! Well it was only moderate low but unmistakable and low enough to be loud and impressive, wings swept close to fully back but in 1994 it was now forbidden in law for AC to fly supersonic over civilian areas even if rural. Very cool and glad to experience this as the plane was pretty much fully retired from USAF service by the end of 94!
I'm pretty sure I remember being told about the F-111E models (and maybe the F-models) launching from Gander in Newfoundland to cross the Atlantic, to be based at Upper Heyford and Lakenheath, respectively.
This was great! I'm so glad Brad's recollections are now part of recorded history. Nice intuitive interview style also.
Thanks, Patrick.
It feels like dipping into history as it happened. Very engaging!
Wow !! I can’t wait for the upcoming guests. Those will be great to listen to!
Thanks, Matthew. Part 2 will be out at the end of next week.
Very good channel, your stuff is top notch and historically important.
Great interview - thank you for your service Mr. Insley!
We had problems with the Canadian Marconi Doppler system at Cannon AFB in the early 1970's on our D models. The rumor circulated that our tech rep from Canadian Marconi discovered a factory assembled part was the culprit and re-assembled by hand the component properly.
I was in the 429 TFS, the other squadron, same time, same experiences. Brad Insley's comments about our Squadron Commander, Lt Col "Matt" Mattheson, were inaccurate. He was the bravest officer I ever had the serve with.
We used to get RAAF F111 here in NZ.. 2 of them crashed in separate incidents.. thanks from NZ 👍🇳🇿
Met Brad when I was stationed at Mountain Home…1989-1990
Great interview. For those who do not know "departing controlled flight" means losing control of the aircraft :)
Miss the F-111 .. was just a nice two seat medium bomber that the USAF could still use in a stealthy form. Hopefully they will get a new bomber ..and we need at the least 200 and carry hypersonic missiles in its bay. Long range as well and laser defense system.
Brad Insley USAF pilot in Vietnam war . Excellent pilot F111 aardvark
RAAF F-111C had the wing extensions.
Thanks for the interview! I have heard very interesting things for me!
Glad you enjoyed it!
Regarding comments of not caring for the F-111, didn’t want a 2-place, etc., it’s mind blowing to me a single pilot could handle the workload.
The f-14 was the better plane for the navy but curious if it could’ve been side by side seating for the f-14 same as the f-111? Well if in visual range dogfight it’s best for a fighter to have the canopy glassing close to body to have unobstructed view for majority of angles and the side seating doesn’t allow for the pilot as main trigger guy to see out one side having to look over the WSO location though it’s great arrangement for a bomber to have side seating adjacent crew. Only reason I bring up the two different seating is the reality that even though the F-14 is tandem seating, the forward fuselage width of the f-14 is at least as wide as that of the F-111 maybe even slightly fatter! This can be seen if they are compared to each other but otherwise people would instinctively consider the f-14 nose to be thinner than an f-111 due to the seating being tandem. In summary I’m just pointing out the fact that the f-14 is quite bulky, or the f-111 for such a large aircraft is quite sleek! I don’t care for McNamara policy in many things he was a clown, but the F-111 was I believe THE best attack bomber aircraft the US military ever had even if it was just an air force plane and was correctly rejected by the navy! McNamara was correct in getting the GD f-111 into service even if just in USAF service and the navy was correct for rejecting it! I’ll stand by this argument even if it makes the f111 out to be a failure. The F111 was a major success for both SAC and tacair, even if it being a naval aircraft was a failed idea!
Haha my father is the other pilot who has 4,500 hours!!!
Nice......
F111 was used as the reason to cancel the TSR2 for the RAF. So many delays RAF went with the Phantom. You hear the faults that a new design can bring in development. You had to fly the F111 carefully high loss rate. The TSR2 was flying those who know the test pilots gave a pretty factual statements about the loss of the plane they where disgusted. The TSR2 on one.afterburner made the English Electric Lightning fighter use both afterburners and that was a Mach 2 plus fighter. Shame too many committees and know nothings involved slowed development. Example of how to screw up development.
you do great work sir. do you have an RSS podcast?
Thank you, Bill. Yes, you can get the podcast version from a bunch of hosts, including Apple, Spotify, Amazon and Google. Checkout my Buzzsprout account to chose where to get it from: 10percenttrue.buzzsprout.com/
When DCS makes an F-111F, I'm going go make sure everyone knows it can go mach 3.
I sat in on a maintenance debriefing of an F111D at Cannon AFB around 1972. The pilot reported a max Mach of 2.7 like it was nothing special. I was an instrument\autopilot tech and later an FTD (full time drunks) instructor on the F111s. I grew to love and respect the F111. The sofistication of the AFCS was something special that even some of the pilots didn't understand. I think it could have saved the government a lot of money over its lifetime if the Navy had accepted it. I think the Navy rejected it because they didn't want a trend of AC selection by the Pentagon to get started and there is a hiring trend of top brass hiring by AC companies that probably weighed heavily on the decision makers. Most of cost of an AC is operating them over 20 to 30 years. If the training and parts repair were more common huge savings could have been made.
Are there any biographies of F-111 pilots over Vietnam or the Gulf?
I haven't seen any. Tony. The closest would probably be the writings of Peter E Davies (no relation and Tony Thornborough: www.amazon.com/s?k=peter+e+davies+f-111&ref=nb_sb_noss
@@10percenttrue thanks for that.
كابتن ليست جميله f111وسبب مقدمة الطائرة أي جهة قائد الطائرة مفروض أن تكون مثل mig 23ms أنا من ليبيا 🇱🇾
All this and the little men on bicycles chased you out
The US never lost a battle in 'nam, South Viets betrayed by the Dems. who cut off their ammo and fuel.
I have flown both the A model and the F model, including as chief of FCF section at Lakenheath (so plenty of time above Mach 2). The Mach 3 story is pure BS. Mach 2.5, no problem, but 3, no way.