Oldest aircraft to (be photographed) intercept(ing) a Bear?

As a genuine matter of interest, was there any agression shown by the Bears, against the interceptors, in any way shape or form, or was it just nuisance value by the Russions?.

Lincoln. 7

The F-102 image is from July 1970. See image in National Museum records.

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/050323-F-1234P-006.jpg

From (See page 2 of images)

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=1881

This F-102A (S/N 56-1416) flies formation with a Soviet “Bear” long-range bomber off the coast of Iceland in July 1970. (U.S. Air Force photo)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:F-102A_57th_FIS_intercepting_Bear_1970.jpg

Links to image of Bear intercept by F-102 in 1965.

F-102A 56-1417 photographed with a Bear in 1965. Photo 57th FIS

http://www.verslo.is/baldur/57th_fis/f102a-417-bear-1000.JPG

From

http://www.verslo.is/baldur/57th_fis/57th.htm

TJ

Excellent picture Jelle, must be unique ZA141 in camo alongside a Bear!

This one was a while ago:

There’s another one on the same page: http://www.vc10.net/Photos/raf_tanker_force.html

Perhaps F-89 and F-94 would never have been able to catch Bear, as both were subsonic aircraft, basically too slow for a Bear. Intercepting plane should have at least significant speed advantage.

A couple of assumptions there, the Bear is subsonic as stated but also it wouldn’t be cruising around at its maiximum speed anyway for range and stress considerations. Look at F-14 intercept pics and the wings are usually swept forward, and other jets seem to be in a tail down attitude, indicating the pics are taken at lower speeds.
Also an intercept could be launched from ahead, or any position not just from the tail, enabling slower jets like F-89 etc to intercept, especially in the NORAD/DEW and UK Radar areas.

Just to clarify, the Bear is subsonic as well! It is doing just about M.78 at altitude. Without having checked I would have thought the F89 and F94 would have been doing about .85 to .90 minimum.

Isn’t it the case of the Bear not being around in sufficiant numbers and not conducting NATO mainland airspace incursions until the mid 1970s?
If that is the case F-89s, F-94s etc would never have encountered them.

Perhaps F-89 and F-94 would never have been able to catch Bear, as both were subsonic aircraft, basically too slow for a Bear. Intercepting plane should have at least significant speed advantage.

Not NATO Airspace, I know but in the early’60’s Bears were “poking around” Alaskan airspace,causing many a” Duece” to scramble. I was assigned to a “Dart” unit from McChord AFB in Washington and we augmented / supplemented the F-102’s during a project known as “White Shoes”

I would love to hear more anecdotes on ‘106s and Bear intercepts.

Nah, the difference in light is the fact the Bear is ‘bare’ (pardon the pun!) metal,

Interesting as I interpreted it as being in the earlier white painted under and sides with bare silver top scheme worn by TU-95Ms, with the white giving the bleaching effect in the photograph. A more ‘original’ copy with better tones shows the fin as being silver in appearence with detail rather than bleached out as in this pic.

The earliest I can find for NATO intercepts is 1968, by F-101s and an F-8.
This must be one of the latest interceptions…

Nah…

just me, then.

Jon

I’m not sure why anyone would go to the trouble of photoshopping it.
There are plenty of F-102/Bear photos out there.

Or is this photo a cut and paste-job?

To me, the lighting on the two are not much alike…

Jon

Nah, the difference in light is the fact the Bear is ‘bare’ (pardon the pun!) metal, and the F102 is painted, so does not reflect as much light. If you look at the glare on the F102 tail, it does seem the light is coming from the same direction. I’d also suggest that it is late in the day with a low, weak sun judging by the shadow on the bear.

Sometimes older black and white film does react like that, with not a great latitude of stops between correctly exposed and over exposed. If the picture is in focus, the outline of the aircraft may seem sharp, but lacks detail due to the glare. A polarising filter may have helped, but I doubt fighter jocks would be that worried…

Hope this helps,
Scotty

Is it just me?

Or is this photo a cut and paste-job?

To me, the lighting on the two are not much alike…

Jon

Not NATO Airspace, I know but in the early’60’s Bears were “poking around” Alaskan airspace,causing many a” Duece” to scramble. I was assigned to a “Dart” unit from McChord AFB in Washington and we augmented / supplemented the F-102’s during a project known as “White Shoes”

Isn’t it the case of the Bear not being around in sufficiant numbers and not conducting NATO mainland airspace incursions until the mid 1970s?
If that is the case F-89s, F-94s etc would never have encountered them.

Thanks for the info. So… is there a shot of an F-89 intercepting a Bear in this book? 😀

Nope…

Thanks for the info. So… is there a shot of an F-89 intercepting a Bear in this book? 😀

In the new book, USAF Interceptors by Isham & McLaren, there are photos of an Iceland-based 57th FIS T-33 (hack & interception target) intercepting a Bear in July, 1979.

It may have been 58-0575.

Is there anything older out there? F-94 Starfire perchance?
Cheers

Most Bear intercepts were in the Iceland/Greenland gap…F-94s were based in Iceland from 1953 until late 1954.
F-89s were stationed there from 1955 until replaced by F-102s in mid-1962.