Aerofax Minigraph 14

Lockheed F-94
Starfire by Rene Francillon & Kevin Keaveney
Lockheed F-94A

ISBN 0·942548·32·9

©1986
Aerofax, Inc.
P.O. Box 120127
Arlington, Texas 76012

,de Distribution by:

ks International
Ave.
:onsin 54020
090

·je Distribution by:

ounties Publications
{, Earl Shilton
I 7NA, England
~56

Stock No. 0214

 THE LOCKHEED F-94 STARFIRE STORY
.~
The prototype YF-94A, 48-356, began life as a P-80; later, it was converted to the prototype T-33, and still later, to the YF-94A. The original markings for the aircraft
are shown. The under-slung tip tanks and the distinctive frameless T-33-type canopy are readily discernible. Both YF-94A prototypes were built to the same
standard and differed only in test instrumentation.
CREDITS:
The authors and Aerofax, Inc. are indebted to the
Lockheed Corporation and in particular to Russ Daniell,
Bert W. Dubell, Robert C. Ferguson, Tony LeVier (retired)
and D. C. Phillips of CALAC (Lockheed-California Com-
pany) for the assistance provided during the preparation
of this Minigraph. We also wish to express our thanks
to the staff of the Air Force MuseumlResearch Division,
the Space CommandlOffice of History, the ATC Historian,
the Sacramento Logistics Center Historian, the AFFTC
Historian, and to the following individuals who contributed
photographs andlor data: Larry Davis, Maj. Gen. Wayne
Gatlin, "Moose" Holmberg and Kierney Bothwell of
Hughes Aircraft Company, Marty Isham, John Kerr, Peter
Lewis, Peter Mancus, David Menard, Steve Miller, Brian
Rogers, Mick Roth, Dennis Savage, Doug Siowiak, Jim
Sullivan, and Gordon Swanborough of Air International.
Finally, we thank Joel Mesnard and Air Fan for the use
ot the L-204-1 drawing.
PROGRAM HISTORY:
During the early days of the Cold War, the Voenno-
vozdushniye Sily (Air Forces of the USSR or Soviet Air
Force) was considered by western forces to be a tactical
air force of only marginal capability. Its most potent
bomber, the Tupolev Tu-2 Bat, was a twin-engine aircraft
roughly in the class of the Douglas A-26/B-26 Invader.
Hence, the USAF's reliance on the piston-engine North-
rop P-61 Black Widow and North American P-82 Twin
Mustang to provide America's home defense under
adverse weather conditions appeared to be a wise ap-
plication of meager postwar military funds. Consequent-
ly, development of the jet-powered Curtiss XP-87
Blackhawk (which the AAF had ordered in December,
1945) and that of the Northrop XP-89 Scorpion (ordered
in June, 1946) all-weather fighters proceeded slowly.
This situation changed drastically after the Russians
unveiled their Tupolev Tu-4 Bull (a copy of the Boeing
B-29) during the 1947 Soviet Aviation Day at Tushino. The
appearance of this four-engine aircraft revealed the fact
that the Soviet Union was finally developing a long-range
bomber force. Moreover, as intelligence reports indicated
that the USSR would soon possess the atom bomb (the
first Soviet nuclear device was indeed exploded in
August, 1949), the need for jet-powered nightfall-weather
fighters became urgent. Unfortunately, technological dif- Secretary of Defense and Lockheed was given an
ficulties led to discontinuation of development of the F-87 amendment to Contract AF 33(038)-1847. This amend-
(the "P" pursuit designation had been replaced by the ment provided for the modification of two TF-80C's into
"F" fighter designation in June, 1948) in October, 1948, all-weather fighte r prototypes and the completion of 110
and the F-89 program, by this time, was running behind other aircraft as F-94A's.
schedule. Accordingly, the United ~tates was thought to Once detailed design began, the need for more
be defenseless against the new threat. substantial changes soon became apparent. It was
discovered, for instance, that the power of the standard
DEVELOPMENT OF AN INTERIM Allison J33 engine of the TF-80C, (the proposed
NIGHT FIGHTER: Lockheed Model 780 4 all-weather fighter) would provide
insufficient performance due to the added weight of the
THE F-94A AND F-948 VARIANTS: electronic equipment and armament. Accordingly,
Daniell's team decided to power the aircraft with an after-
To fill its immediate need for interceptors, in March, burning J33-A-33 with a dry rated thrust of 4,400 lb. and
1948, the USAF approached Lockheed with a request
that the manufacturer explore the feasibility of develop-
ing an interim all-weather two-seat fighter by fitting a
novel Hughes-developed fire control system I in a TP-80C
2 airframe. Furthermore, the Air Force requested that the
first production article be ready for acceptance before the
end of 1949.
Development of the new Lockheed fighter, entrusted
by director of advanced development, Clarence L.
"Kelly" Johnson, to a team led by Russ Daniell, appeared
relatively easy. The fire control system was to be housed
in an enlarged nose 3 while the radar operator's equip-
ment was to be filted in the aft cockpit. For Hughes, the
task proved to be more difficult than originally con-
templated as repackaging the FCS (originally designed
for the defensive system of the immense Convair B-36)
to fit in the TP-80 fuselage was not an easy task.
In November, 1948, the concept was endorsed by the
I Produced by the Hughes Aircraft Company, the E·1 was the fird sophisticated
fire control system to be developed for modern interceptors. The Air Force
ordered the system in June, 1948, when it asked that the ANIAPG·3 radar
be adapted to the Northrop F·e9. By contract amendment in November, 1948,
the requirement was extended to include a variant of the new Lockheed in·
terceptor. The modified AN/APG·3 radar was redesignated ANfAPG-33 and
the entire system, including the A·1 C gunsight, in 1949. became the E-1 Fire
Control System.
z The TP-80C. a two-seal advanced trainer version of the Lockheed P-BOC
ShootingSta" was redesignated TF-80C on June 11.1948 and T·33Aon May
5,1949.
l To evaluate the effect of the larger nose on stability and handling, the ex·
perimental shop, in two days designed and installed on the first TF·80C a The F-94A production line at Lockheed's Burbank,
wooden mockup of the radar nose. Chief test pilot Tony LeVier's report, which California facility during 1950. Including the two
followed, was so encouraging that engineering went immediately into design prototypes, a total of 111 F-94A's were built.
work on the production aircraft.

The relatively small size of the F-49A's Hughes-developed E-1 fire control system and associated radar
permitted a small nose radome. The prototype YF-94A, 48-356, is seen late in its flight test career
at Lockheed's Palmdale, California facility with a red nose radome and conventional tip tanks.
6,000 lb. tho with afterburner. The weight of the after-
burner and its increased length aft of the cg were offset
by the installation of the E-1 Fire Control System in a
longer forward fuselage section, with the AN/APG-33
radar being housed in a somewhat awkward-looking up-
swept nose. The ammunition boxes with 300 rounds for
each of the four 0.50-in. machine guns (weight and space
restrictions forced the omission of two of the six guns in-
itially planned, but the retention of the basic F-80 arma-
ment installation saved tooling and time) were housed
aft of the radar and associated equipment. Compared
with the TF-80C, the all-weather fighter had enlarged ver-
tical tail surfaces and a reduction of 30 gallons in the
fuselage tank. Internal fuel capacity was thus limited to
318 gallons, but the aircraft retained provisions for car-
rying the two F-80ITF-80 standard 165-gallon underwing
tip tanks.
The selection of an afterburning version of the J33 was
expected to be the source of major developmental prob-
lems as the afterburner method of thrust augmentation
was still in its infancy. Fortunately, to obtain some ex-
perience prior to using afterburning engines in its P-80E
and XP-90, Lockheed and the Solar Corporation had
already started working on the probiem by fitting a
Westinghouse J34 with a primitive afterburner in the
second XP-80A (44-83022). The wisdom of this conser-
vative approach was soon vindicated; during the first
flight of the testbed aircraft, Tony LeVier could not light
the afterburner by using the various methods suggested
by engineering. Taking the matter in his own hands,
LeVier accelerated the engine close to maximum rpm and
pushed forward on the throttle abruptly, injecting ex-
cessive fuel into the burner segment. Part of the flame
went downstream to the afterburner fuel nozzles, caus-
ing them to ignite. LeVier's novel approach was later
developed into the "hot streak" afterburner ignition
method.
For the second flight, powerplant engineers were not
yet ready to follow LeVier's suggestion and instructed him
to light the afterburner after closing the exhaust eyelids.
Unfortunately, when this was done the entire hot section
of the J34 melted down and the engine quit, forcing
LeVier to make an emergency landing. Afterwards, Solar
and Lockheed persisted in their efforts to stabilize after-
burner fuel burning and the achievement of inflight relight
with some degree of reliability, thus gaining valuable ex-
perience prior to the F-94's first flight.
Meanwhile, construction of the two all-weather fighter
prototypes had been entrusted to Plant B-1 where, us-
ing 75% of the airframe and systems of the first (48-356,
cln 580-5001) and eighteenth (48-373, cln 580-5018)
TF-80C's, work was completed in 15 weeks. Lacking their
fire control systems and most of their operational equip-
ment, these two aircraft were first designated ETF-80C's
and then ET-33A's (the prefix E then standing for "Ex-
empt") but were better known by the initially unofficial
• Full manufacturer's designations then used by the lockheed Aircraft Cor-
poration consisted of (1) a Basic Model Number or Modified Basic Model
Number, (2) a Powerplant Identification Number, and (3) an Interior Arrange-
rr.ent Identification Number. In this instance, the Modified Basic Model Number
780 indicated thai this was the seventh proposed version of the Basic Model
80 which eventually included the single-seat p·aO/F-80 fighters (Models 80,
180,280.380, and 480), the two-seal TP-80fTF·aOfT-33 trainers (Model 580),
the single-seat F-800 ground attack fighter (Model 680), the two-seat F-94
fighters (Models 780 and 880), the single-seat F-94D ground attack fighter
(Model 980), and the two-seat T2V-1fT-1AfT-33B trainers (Model 1080). The
fact that the same number, 80, was used by Lockheed lor its first jet fighter
and by the Air Force for the F·80 series is believed to be coincidental; Lockheed
Model 75 was the Saturn feeder liner, the Models 76 to 79 were not assigned,
and the Model 81 was the Navy XFV-1 VTOL fighter prototype. The full
Lockheed designations for the F-94 variants are used in the text as appropriate.
2
YF-94 designation. Subsequent modifications of the sec-
ond aircraft resulted in it being redesignated YF-94 in
April, 1950, EYF-94 in January, 1953, and finally EYF-94A
in September, 1954; it still carried the last mentioned
designation when it was dropped from the USAF inven-
tory in February, 1956.
On April 16, 1949, flighttrials began when Tony LeVier
and Glenn Fulkerson flew 48-356 out of the Van Nuys
airport. Although satisfactory from the point of view of
handling characteristics, these trials revealed the initial
temperamental nature of the afterburner. The problem
of frequent flame-outs with often difficult relights, was
eventually solved when Allison, Solar and Lockheed
engineers developed an afterburner flame-holder system.
By now, so urgent was the USAF need for jet night
fighters that 110 F-94A's were ordered on November 10,
1948, five months before the prototype's first flight. The
first of these aircraft flew on July 1, 1949, and, along with
other early production F-94A's, was used for Category
I and Category 11 testing. During these tests, activities
were concentrated on solving the unreliability of the after-
burner and on ascertaining the suitability of the E-1 Fire
Control System. Satisfactory resolution of teething
troubles enabled the Air Force to accept its first Starlire
(a name selected by Lockheed to continue its tradition
of naming aircraft after stars and other celestial bodies)
on December 29, 1949, thus meeting the stringent
schedule set at the start of the program. However, much
development work had yet to be done, the acceptance
rate remained low during the first half of 1950 (with a total
of 14 aircraft accepted by June 30) and picked up only
during the second half of the year (With 109 F-94A's ac-
cepted by December 31 while the 19th aircraft on the
original contract was completed as the F-94B prototype).
The first 17 F-94A-1-LO's, which had conventional fixed
seats, were practically hand-built models using T-33 air-
frames taken from the production line, while the 92
F-94A-5-LO's started down the line as F-94A's and were
fitted with ejection seats.
Even though it entered limited service in May, 1950,
the F-94A still required additional test and evaluation by
the Air Force. In particular, following the initiation of a
Starlire pilot training course in April, 1950 at the Air Force
Flight Test Center (AFFTC), Edwards AFB, California, ac-
celerated service tests were conducted at this base be-
tween September 12 and October 26, 1950. Crews from
the AFFTC and the Continental Air Command, under the
direction of Major Frank K. Everest and First Lt. Fitzhugh
L. Fulton, were scheduled to fly each of the four assigned
aircraft for 150 hours. Aircraft 49-2516 was lost 17 days
into the tests, but the other three completed the re-
quirements without an engine change, 49-2528 passing
the 150-hr. mark in 28 days, 49-2517 doing so in 33 days,
and 49-2515 reaching it In 38 days.
As originally delivered, the F-94A's were armed with
four 0.50-in. machine guns and could carry a 165-gallon
drop tank under each wing tip. For night intruder mis-
sions, they could also carry two bombs of up to 1,000
Ibs. on underwing racks. To shorten their take-off run,
they incorporated provisions for two Aerojet 12AS--
1000D4 JATO bottles, each generating 1,000 lb. of thrust
for 12 seconds. The aircraft were later modified to carry
230-gallon Fletcher centerline tanks in place of the
original underslung tanks. Prior to being transferred to
the Air National Guard in 1954, the F-94A's received ad-
ditional improvements, including redesigned consoles (to
facilitate ingress and egress), improved ejection seats,
and reinforced canopies. Furthermore, they were retrofit-
ted with wing and stabilizer de-icing systems, and their
engines were modified to J33-A-33A standards with ther-
mal de-icing. In ANG service, a small number of F-94A's
were also fitted with two-gun pods on the leading edge
of the wings to double their gun armament (this arma-
ment configuration having been fitted earlier by Lockheed
to an F-94B-1-LO, 50-805).
The F-94B designation had first been used unofficially
by Lockheed in 1948 to identify a significantly more
capable development of the Starlire. Initially rejected by
the Air Force, but resurrected as the YF-97/F-94C which
is described later on, this version proceeded as a
Lockheed-funded venture known by the L-188 Temporary
Design Designation. Thus, the F-94B designation
became available to identify officially a less drastic
deveiopment of the F-94A.
This version, the Model 780-76-12, retained the gun
armament, E-1 Fire Control System, and J33-A-33 engine
of the F-94A but featured a number of internal im-
provements. These included (1) a 1500 psi hydraulic
system in place of the 1000 psi system of the F-94A, (2)
increased headroom in the rear cockpit, (3) a more ef-
fective pressurization system, (4) a high pressure oxygen
system, and (5) windshield anti-icing and de-fogging. For
more accurate landings in bad weather, this version was
also fitted with gyroscopic instruments (Sperry Zero
Reader), an AN/ARN-5B glide path receiver, an RC-105D
localizer receiver, and an AN/ARN-12 marker beacon
receiver. Initially, the F-94B could be distinguished from
the F-94A by its 230-gallon centrally-mounted Fletcher
tanks; however, these larger tanks were later retrofitted
to F-94A's.
To serve as a prototype for the new model, Lockheed
modified the 19th F-94A airframe (49-2497) during pro-
duction and this aircraft, redesignated YF-94B-LO, first
flew on September 29,1950. A total of 356 F-94B's were
ordered by the USAF: 150 F-94B-1-LO's (50-805 to
50-954) were covered by a contract dated March 3, 1950,
and 206 F-94B-5-LO's (51-5307 to 51-5512) with anti-icing
equipment fitted during production were ordered on April
3, 1951. The first production F-94B-1-LO was accepted
in December, 1950, 148 F-94B-1-LO's and 27
F-94B-5-LO's were accepted during the next six months,
and the last four were delivered in January, 1952. In ad-
dition, the Lockheed-funded prototype of the F-94C was
accepted by the Air Force in lieu of the 73rd F-94B-1-LO
(50-877). Two F-94B-5-LO's (51-5500 and 51-5501)
became armament configuration prototypes for the F-94D
variant; the former was later operated by the
Massachusetts ANG while the latter was once again
modified for in-flight testing of the General Eiectric M-61
Vulcan six-barrel 20 mm cannon. Another F-94B-5-LO
(51-5502) was also modified to test the radar and
guidance system of the Bomarc missile during evalua-
tion by the Air Research and Development Command
(ARDC).
The F-94B's performance was investigated by the Air
Force during Phase IV testing conducted at Edwards AFB
between December 6, 1951, and February 18, 1952. In
the course of 46 flights, 56 hr. 20 min. of testing were
accomplished by 51-5398. For Phase IV testing, the air-
craft had calibrated instruments installed on the pilot's
panel and had its armament replaced by instrumentation,
an automatic photo-recorder, and ballast; additional in-
struments and recording equipment were fitted in the rear
cockpit. Maximum speed was calibrated at 504 knots (580
mph) whereas the manufacturer claimed a top speed of
511 knots (588 mph)-for comparison purposes, it is
worth noting that the speeds of the lighter F-80C and
T-33A powered by non-afterburning engines were respec-
tively 594 mph and 600 mph. Flying a typical mission pro-
file over California, with five minutes of simulated com-
bat, range was tested at 720 miles (Lockheed claimed
a combat radius of 332 miles). During Phase IV testing,
the F-94B proved satisfactory up to 40,000 ft. but a rapid
drag rise was noted between Mach 0.65 and 0.675. Dur-
ing speed trials, buffeting also was encountered when
power was increased from military to maximum level. At
speeds below 200 knots drag was found to be less when
tip tanks were fitted, but these same tanks reduced
airspeed by five knots at speeds above 200 knots.
Other deficiencies noted during Air Force evaluations
included an unsatisfactory cockpit with both seats too nar-
row and that of the RO being unadjustable, as well as
poorly located instruments', and ineffective speed brakes
at all altitudes. A number of changes were recommend-
ed and most were later implemented (notably the fitting
of better seats). Other improvements introduced during
the F-94B service life were generally similar to those
noted earlier for the F-94A.
Notwithstanding their rather mundane performance
and their sundry deficiencies, the F-94A's and F-94B's
were of considerable value to the USAF. They were its
first operational jet interceptors capable of operating in
adverse weather conditions and, besides filling a signifi-
cant gap in the nation's defense, they enabled the Air
Force to develop effective tactics and coordinate GCllin-
terceptor operations prior to the entry into service of more
capable interceptors. In this capacity, the F-94C's were
even more important as they pioneered collision course
interception and all-rocket armament. .
In 1950, Lockheed proposed one more development
of the original Starfire. Assigned the Temporary Design
Designation L-199, this variant was planned as a radar-
operator combat trainer; it did not attract Air Force in-
terest as, with the planned entry into service of more
modern interceptors, the interim F-94A's would be
available for use as crew trainers.
The second prototype YF-94A, 48-373, was also a T-33 modification. It differed little from the number one
LAST OF THE BREED: aircraft, 48-356. As can be seen, the F-94A could be flown without tip tanks, though endurance and
range were shortened considerably.
THE F-94C AND F-94D VARIANTS:
Furthermore, to improve dive recovery, the original dive problems and much delay. In particular, the J48 failed
Soon after being requested by the Air Force to develop brakes beneath the fuselage were soon supplemented its 150-hour qualification test and, after some component
an interceptor from the TP-80C, Lockheed realized that by a pair of dive brakes on both sides of the aft fuselage redesign, passed this test only in May, 1952. Even then,
this aircraft would have lower performance than purpose- (the effectiveness of these dive brakes was demonstrated additional power plant problems surfaced (e.g., failure of
designed aircraft being developed by competitors and, later when Tony LeVier's F-94C outdove a chase F-86A fuel burner nozzles and tempermental afterburner), caus-
therefore, would probably not be ordered in substantial flown by Chuck Yeager). In addition, Lockheed and Pratt ing further delays. Frequent failures of the drag chute also
numbers. Conversely, the design team felt that a major & Whitney engineers struggled long and hard to correct necessitated a change to a larger drogue chute and the
redesign of the TP-80C would yield an interceptor a chronic engine compressor stall problem (an early fix replacement of the original steel cable by a heavily in-
possessing fully competitive performance. The team's excessively reduced spool-up speed and nearly resulted sulated nylon strap.
confidence was endorsed by management which gave in a catastrophic accident when Tony LeVier, on landing Of a less serious nature, an unusual incident occurred
its approval to proceed simultaneously with the design at North Base, Edwards AFB, had to "scootch around" during the manufacturer's structural dive tests when the
of the interim aircraft sought by the USAF and that of an an F-86D which had taxied to take-off position on the F-94C became the world's first two-seat aircraft to exceed
advanced aircraft. The latter was to have an all-new wing same runway). the speed of sound'. This achievement, however, made
with reduced thickness, swept stabilizer, revised speed One month after the maiden flight of the civil-registered possible by the aircraft's thin wing and powerful engine,
brakes, increased fuel capacity, all-rocket armament, and prototype, Lockheed saw its perseverance rewarded required a fairly steep dive at full power. Diving from
the E-5 Fire Control System. Power was to be provided when the Air Force, finally facing up to the fact that 45,000 ft. with afterburner on, Herman "Fish" Salmon
by an afterburning Pratt & Whitney J48-a license-built neither the North American F-86D nor the Northrop F-89 neared the pull-out point when SUddenly the aircraft was
version of the Rolls-Royce Tay-offering some 30% more would be ready for service use anytime soon, endorsed shaken by a severe buffet. Checking over his instruments
thrust than the J33-A-33. the program. The unarmed L-188, now assigned serial and noticing no fire-warning lights, Salmon could find
Bearing the Temporary Design Designation L-188, this 50-955, was purchased and, given the military designa- nothing wrong and effected a normal pull-out. During
variant was first proposed to the USAF in July, 1948 (four tion YF-97. The Air Force also ordered a fUlly militarized analysis of the incident, with the noted Dr. Theodore Von
months before the interim design was ordered). However, prototype (50-877) with E-5 Fire Control System and Karman acting as consultant, it was determined that
confident that the Northrop F-89 would be available soon rocket armament. Repainted in USAF markings, the first Salmon had held his dive for so long that the supersonic
after the interim F-94A, the Air Force did not endorse this prototype was progressively upgraded with installation shock wave had caught up with his F-94C as it slowed
proposed "F-94B." Lockheed, on the other hand, still of its afterburner, enlarged tip tanks, and a production down in the thicker air of lower altitude.
believed in the validity of the L-188 concept and decided standard nose. The production configuration prototype The E-5 Fire Control System 8 also suffered its share
to proceed with its development using in-house funds. (50-877) was powered from the onset by the afterburning of teething troubles. Moreover, its inherent design defi-
To produce a prototype at minimum cost, Lockheed J48-P-3 turbojet (static ratings of 6,000 Ibs. without after- ciencies did not allow for identification passes on targets,
elected to build a hybrid aircraft, with the L-188's new burner and 8,000 lbs. with afterburner) and was also pro- forcing imposition of restrictions on active intercepts due
wing and stabilizer grafted to an F-94A fuselage from gressively upgraded prior to being fitted with the definitive to the lack of separation and rate of closure data.
which the armament and radar systems had been de- nose housing the E-5 FCS and rocket armament. A pro- During Phase II Contractor Compliance Tests, aircraft
leted. Produced without government funding, the aircraft duction contract for 388 aircraft (Lockheed Model 50-956 flew 17 hr. 20 min. in 23 flights between January
was assigned the FAA registration N-34C prior to its first 880-75-13's) was awarded on July 21,1950; then desig- 7 and January 21 , 1952. Its crew reported that airframe
flight on January 19, 1950. As the J48 was not yet ready, nated F-97A's, these became F-94C's on September 12, vibrations were encountered during high speed dives;
the aircraft was powered by an imported Rolls-Royce Tay 1950. lateral dynamic stability above 35,000 ft. was poor; the
without afterburner. Flight tests confirmed that the YF-97, while still not as rate of roll was marginal but satisfactory for the use of
Early during flight trials, the hybrid aircraft ran into fast as the F-86D and F-89, possessed much better per- the aircraft as an interceptor; buffeting occurred at high
several problems including severe dutch roll, "tucking" formance than the F-94NB. On the other hand, develop- speeds; the air brakes were unsatisfactory; and the in-
at Mach .84-.85, aileron buzz, reduced elevator effec- ment of its fire control system, autopilot, drag chute " strument arrangement was poor. Progressively, however,
tiveness, poor directional stability, and unsatisfactory fuel purging system, and powerplant resulted in many these deficiencies were corrected by Lockheed and Pratt
handling on approach. Fortunately, through careful coor-
dination of activities between flight test and engineering
personnel, solutions were found and the initially un-
satisfactory prototype was turned into one of "Tony F-94D (from official Lockheed files)
LeVier's favorite aircraft".
To achieve this result, changes were progressively in-
troduced as follows: removal of the wing root extension
fillet (a carry-over from the original XP-80 wing design)
to improve stall characteristics on approach; replacement -.. - ~;;:;;:::;'~'\ 9 J. :;---
of the original F-94 stabilizer with power-boosted swept
surfaces to eliminate high-frequency vibration at high .-- ~EA',.~:-.::~J!ff?:
Mach numbers; addition of dampers to correct the aileron
,.
buzz and of spoilers to increase roll control; redesign of
the door over the drag chute compartment to eliminate <7_.L----"\..."..,
~.
.
shock stall at high speeds; and enlargement of the ver- "'.',-:,'.,j
tical fin to increase directional stability at high speeds.
} In fairness to Lockheed, it should be stated that the unsatisfactory location
of some of the instruments resulted from (1) insufficient volume caused by
the retention of the fuselage cross-section of an aircraft originally built as a
small single-sealer (in the words of Tony LeVier, finding room for the radar

~.....
scope and additional instruments of the two-seal F-94 was like "stuffing 10
pounds of sh . . in a 5-lb. bagl"), and (2) ill-advised recommendations by an
Air Force board. Lockheed, following the advice of Tony LeVier and other
pilots and flight test engineers had initially recommended a tight but logical
instrument arrangement. The Air Force board rejected the proposed installation
and came up with the arrangement later so bitterly criticized by other Air Force
personnel. Of course, by then this had become a "Lockheed" mistake! One ~~-"
of the members of this Air Force board had even forgotten the board's recom-
mendations and, when taking delivery of the first F-94B, blamed the manufac-
turer until he was tactfully reminded that the instruments had been placed
as requested by the board.

3
 & Whitney. Improvements were noted during Phase IV
Performance and Stability Tests (with 82 hr. 52 min. be-
ing flown by 50-962 between September 27,1952, and
June 19, 1953) and Phase VI Functional Development
Tests (with 395 hr. 50 min. being logged by three F-94C's
between May 29,1952, and March 2,1953). In addition
to corrective changes as dictated by these and other
tests, Lockheed introduced two improvements which
altered the appearance of the aircraft: the rounded
radome of early production aircraft was replaced by a
more pointed unit, and, beginning with the 1DOth produc·
tion aircraft (but later retrofilled to earlier aircraft), arma-
ment was doubled by mounting a 12-rocket pod on the
leading edge of each wing. Finally, to minimize horizon-
taltail buffeting, which had progressively worsened from
the F-80 through the F-94A1B into the F-94C, Lockheed
introduced a box fairing covering a portion of the fuselage
located at the juncture of the tail surfaces.
Lockheed L-204-3 Although requiring much time and delaying the F-94C's
entry into service by nearly two years, the various air-
frame, system, and power plant modifications and im-
provements resulted in the Air Force obtaining a potent
interceptor. True, the F-94C was not as fast at high
altitudes as other all-weather fighters then being procured
by the Air Force, but at low altitudes it was the best of
the lot. Furthermore, once modifications eliminated
engine flame-out when all 24 rockets were salvoed, the
closed breech installation of its armament rendered the
Starfire SUbstantially more accurate than the F-86D and
F-89D which had open-ended rocket installations.
In the end, its limited range (515 miles with five minutes
combat and a 1,000-lb. fuel reserve, as demonstrated
during Phase IV tests) was the aircraft's major shortcom·
ing. This, however, was not due to a design oversight:
being the ultimate development of a relatively small 1943
design, the F-94C did not have the internal volume reo
quired for greater fuel capacity (with full afterburner, the
J48-P-5 of the F-94C had a maximum thrust 3.25 times
greater than that of the Halford H.1 B powering the XP-80
and had a greater specific fuel consumption rate).
i';;'.c. The first nine production F-94C's were accepted by the
Air Force during Fiscal Year 1952, 153 were delivered
during the following year, and the last 225 Starfires
followed during FY54. Operational service began in
March, 1953 but initial experience with the type dictated
an evaluation program, Project Lock On, and a major
modification program, Project Hop-Up.
Lock On was conducted at several bases by ADC to
test the ability of several different types of interceptors
" to accomplish their mission. The F-94C phase took place
. LI __._ at Otis AFB and involved the 58th FIS. The major finding
of this phase, which was completed in November, 1953,
was that the squadron could not perform its mission due
to "low availability of combat ready aircraft, lack of
maintenance facilities, TO&E discrepancies, unrealistic
manning, and inadequate aircrew-GCI proficiency." To

">'';;''· correct many of the aircraft deficiencies found during

If
' i > . './
'-:<::.:::<:-:::::/:/:::. --r-'"
Lock On the Air Force initiated Hop·Up.
Approved on April 5, 1954, Hop·Up broke the F-94C
inventory into two phases. Phase I included aircraft
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..'
. . . . . . : ,L. 50-956 to 50-1063 and 51-5513to 51-5566, which need-
...
. ed 179 modifications each, and Phase II covered 51-5567
to 51-5698 and 51-13511 to 51-13603, which required 197
modifications per aircraft. Under the overall control of the
Sacramento Air Material Area (SMAMA), Phase I aircraft
were modified by Lockheed Aircraft Service (LAS) at On-
tario, California, and Phase II aircraft by SMAMA at
'At the suggestion of Tony LeVier, a drag chute had first been fitled to the
privately-funded prototype and the F·94C became the first production fighter
to make use of a drag chute to reduce landing roll.

1 The F-94C was the world's first two-seater and first straight-wing combat air-
craft to exceed the speed of sound in a dive. This was first demonstrated
by Tony leVier who took the privately-funded prototype up to Mach 1.1 dur-
ing a 60° dive. Later, Glen Fulkerson became the first "passenger" to go
supersonic.

I The first FCS designed for collision course interception, the Hughes E-S had
the following operating characteristics: .,As the aircraft was on an intercept
an artificial horizon appeared on the pilot's scope while the RO's scope showed
Lockheed L-204-1 (v-g)' a range trace which consisted of a bright vertical line sweeping in unison with
the antenna. Atlock-on, a steering dot indicated the azimuth and elevation
steering errors. By steering so as to center the dot, the F-94C flew a lead-on
collision course with the target. The inner circle served as a reference for
centering the dot and the outer circle indicated the time-to-go before the rockets
would strike the targets. At twenty seconds before rocket impact, both circles
began to shrink so as to allow more precise steering and to show seconds
before the rockets hit. If the anack was made from a direction other than the
side, this phase of the anack continued until the rockets were fired, at which
time an X appeared. On a side anack, at four and one-half seconds to go
the reference circle f1anened into a straight line. This indicated that the com·
puter was correcting the azimuth errors and that the pilot had to correct only
for elevation errors. As before, an X appeared when the rockets were fired."
After the system was designed, Lockheed developed a scope overlay to aid
the crew in guiding the steering dot to its proper position.

4
McClelland AFB, California. The major difference be- porary state-of-the-art, as performance improvements faces which could be pivoted fore and aft to change the
tween the two phases was the need for cockpit enlarge- were to be derived from the use of a variable-geometry stabilizer incidence. Even though the L-204-1 was an-
ments of Phase I aircraft (later production aircraft hav- wing. Its sweep could be changed in flight from 0° to 55° ticipated to become the first combat aircraft capable of
ing been completed to the revised standards), a task by means of two pivot points and hydraulically-operated exceeding the speed of sound at all altitudes from sea
which LAS was better equipped to perform. Breakdown screw drives. Two schemes were proposed for its all- level to 43,500 ft., it remained on the drawing board; the
for logistical responsibility was as follows: SMAMA, air- moving horizontal tail surfaces. In one instance they were USAF considered the performance calculations to be
frame modifications; Warner Robins Air Material Area to be mounted atop the aft fuselage, below the conven- overly optimistic and preferred the all-new Convair F-1 02.
(WRAMA), FCS modifications; San Antonio Air Material tional swept fin and rudder; the alternative called for rigid- Principal characteristics and calculated performance
Area (SAAMA), in association with Pratt & Whitney and ly attaching the horizontal tail surfaces to vertical tail sur- were as follows'
O&R Alameda, engine modifications; and Middletown Air
Wing sweep 0° 35° 55° L-204-2 L-204-3
Material Area (MAAMA), with subcontract to Westing-
house, autopilot modifications. LAS began processing its Length (ft) N.A. N.A. N.A. 42.7 42.5
first F-94C in June, 1954 and had its Phase I program Span (ft) 37.6 30.9 25.3 37.3 31.0
in full swing three months later. SMAMA received its first Wing area (ft) 233 254 271 392 275
Startire in July of the same year, and the Phase II pro- Zero fuel weight (Ibs) 14,573 -- -- 13,316 12,305
gram reached maturity in December. The last F-94C to Combat weight (Ibs) 18,330 18,380 18,750 18,390 16,190
go through Hop-Up was completed in February, 1956, Max T·O weight (Ibs) 22,186 -- -- 24,098 20,345
with modifications taking up to 100 days per aircraft. Internal fuel (gals) 665 665 665 812 730
Special uses of the F-94C included tests of an ex- External fuel (gals) 460 -- -- 750 460
perimental thrust reverser, which were conducted at the Vmax at s.l. (mph) 654 739 765 704 706
NACA Ames Aeronautical Laboratory with an early pro- Combat climb rate (ft/min) 3,500 3,800 6,200 4,100 4,150
duction aircraft bearing the NACA number 156, modifica- Combat ceiling (ft) 50,000 48,800 44,500 49,500 49,000
tion of at least one aircraft to the DF-94C configuration Combat radius (miles) 575 560 455 760 540
for early trials of the Hughes Falcon air-to-air missile and
one EF-94C with a highly modified camera nose at Wright
Field circa 1954.
The USAF ordered 'one more version of the Startire by
contract dated April 4, 1951. Prompted by the F-80 suc-
cess in the ground attack role in Korea, Lockheed and U£AJR~

the Air Force sought to obtain a higher performance air- 82481

craft without disrupting established production lines. To
that effect, the F-94D fighter-bomber was designed as
the Lockheed Model 980-75-14. This variant, which was
to have retained the F-94C's power plant, was a single-
seat ground attack aircraft with eight nose-mounted
0.50-in. machine guns, and provision for two 1,OOO-lb.
bombs and 16 five-inch HVAR rockets on wing racks; if
required, the F-94D could carry the 12-rocket wing pods
of the F-94C in lieu of some of the external stores. Pro-
posed electronics was comprised of the AN/APW-11
ranging radar, AN/APX-6 IFF, AN/ARC-27 radio set, and F-94A, 49-2481, the third F-94A completed, at Chanute AFB, Illinois, in May, 1956. This aircraft was assigned
AN/ARN-6 radio compass. to the Air Training Command at the time. It is equipped with the later, banded canopy and it appears that
In order to carry the greater loads required of a fighter- all rear seat equipment and instrumentation have been removed.
bomber, the wing area was increased 50% by adding
area in the chordwise direction. The span was unchanged
but the wing aspect ratio decreased from 6.1 to 4.0 and
thickness ratio from 10 to 6.7% (thus hopefully alleviating
the aircraft's propensity to land hard, one of the items
complained about by F-94C crews). This was expected
to result in markedly improved top speed at sea level (685
mph versus 640 mph for the F-94C) and excellent airfield
characteristics. Similarly, range was to be increased by
boosting internal fuel capacity from 366 to 685 gallons
(primarily by fitting a tank in the area occupied by the
F-94C's radar-operator station) and using 320-gallon tip
and pylon tanks; total fuel capacity went up from 1,326
to 1,965 gallons. Moreover, the F-94D was to have been
one of the first aircraft to incorporate a retractable inflight
refueling probe (installed centrally in the nose between
the guns). Other notable F-94D features included re-
designed tail surfaces (with moderately swept vertical sur- A pre-delivery line-up of F-94A's at Lockheed's Burbank, California facility. It appears that the radar systems
faces and a straight, all-moveable boosted horizontal have yet to be installed (this often took place at the Hughes Aircraft Company facility at Culver City,
stabilizer) to improve flight characteristics at transonic California). The early, unbanded canopies are readily apparent.
speeds. ~
To obtain validation of the aerodynamic characteristics ~
of the F-94D and test its armament, two configuration pro- ~
totypes were obtained by fitting the redesigned nose to C!:
two F-94B-5-LO's (51-5500 and 51-5501). However, ~
delays with the F-94C program led the Air Force to '"
reverse its earlier decision and the contract for the 112
F-94D's (51-13605 to 51-13716) was cancelled on Oc-
I
E
tober 15, 1951. i
THE STILLBORN L·204 VARIANTS:
Seeking to exploit fully the potential of its F-94C Star-
fire, in July, 1950, Lockheed proposed a noteworthy
development. Under Temporary Design Designations
L-204-1 to L-204-3, a team led by Willis Hawkins studied
ways to increase performance, notably top speed and
range, by revising the cockpit for single-crew operation
and adding a 143.5-gallon saddle tank behind the revised
cockpit. All three variants retained the rocket armament,
E-5 Fire Control System, and the 8,750-lb. thrust J48-P-5
of the F-94C. A new wing with its thickness-to-chord ratio
reduced from ten to six percent was proposed for the
L-204-2, while the L-204-3 was to have a low aspect-ratio, F-94A, 49-2495, the last of the first production batch of 17 aircraft, with the early under-slung wingtip drop
highly-tapered wing of six percent thickness. tanks. The latter were eventually replaced by the aerodynamically cleaner and slightly more capacious
The L-204-1, however, was the most promising variant. center-mount tanks.
Its design represented a bold departure from the contem-
5
SERVICE HISTORY:
A product of the Cold War (first ordered after the
dramatically increased tension resulting from the Soviet
blockade of Berlin which had been declared on June 18,
1948), the Startire went into service one month before
tension rose again due to the start of the Korean War on
June 25, 1950. Consequently, the type's usefulness
stemmed mainly from its availability when America had
to boost its home defense.
Two squadrons of the 325th Fighter Group (All
Weather), the 319th and 317th, respectively based at
Moses Lake AFB and McChord AFB, Washington, con-
verted from North American F-82G's to F-94A's in May,
1950, to become the first Continental Air Command
(CONAC) units to fly all-weather jet interceptors. In the
second half of 1950 and in early 1951, after the Air
Defense Command (ADC) became a major air command,
additional squadrons were equipped with F-94A's while
others-beginning in April, 1951 with the 61st FIS at
Selfridge AFB, Michigan-received F-94B's. Distributed
at bases along a northern crescent extending from
Oregon to Delaware, these ADC squadrons (including
three Guard units-the 121st, 142nd and 148th FIS-
which had been placed on active duty as part of the
Korean War call-up) provided a barrier along the likely
routes of Soviet bombers. In addition, advance defense
was provided by four Startire squadrons (the 64th, 65th,
66th, and 449th FIS) of the Alaskan Air Command and
by four squadrons (the 59th, 61st, 82nd, and 318th FIS)
of the NorthEast Air Command (NEAC) operating from
Labrador, Greenland and Iceland.
As early as 1950, CONAC had addressed the need for
a combat training program for F-94 air and ground crews.
As a result of this planning, various courses and schools
contributed to the output of trained personnel: the Air
Training Command (ATC) all-weather F-94/F-89 course
at Tyndall AFB, the ATC Phase I of the USAF Instrument
Flying School at Moody AFB, the Radar Observer
Courses at James Connally AFB and Keesler AFB, the
ATC Primary Observer Upgrade Training at Ellington
AFB, and the ATC Fire Control School at Lowry AFB. In
addition to their use for training, the ATC Startires were
given the role of bolstering ADC interceptor squadrons
when needed (e.g., in December, 1951, 12 F-94B's from
Tyndall were planned to deploy to Selfridge AFB in time
of crises while 12 others were to go to O'Hare AFB).
Whereas pilot training courses soon yielded the re-
quired output, the situation was not as satisfactory for
radar observers (RO's). CONAC had initially taken the
position that RO's should be trained pilots, but Head-
quarters judged that this wouid constitute an unaccep-
table drain on the limited number of availabie piiots.
Accordingly, the RO course at Keesler AFB was enlarged
and incentives, such as an aeronautical rating and per-
manent flying status, were provided to encourage ADC
personnel to become RO's.
Coinciding with the training program was the establish-
ment of an all-weather gunnery program to keep F-94 air-
crews at their peak efficiency. Criteria for this prcgram
changed several times but, in April, 1952, they called for
34 flight hours, with each pilot required to fly 40 air-to-air
gunnery sorties per year, half of them above 20,000 ft.
To be deciared combat-ready, a pilot needed 12 gunnery
missions (two of them above 20,000 ft.), with 10% hits
on one or more missions; 15% to 22% hits qualified a
pilot for marksman rating, 23% to 29% for sharpshooter
rating, and 30% or more for expert rating.
In practice, 'preserving the gunnery qualification rate
of F-94A1B crews was not easy for the operational
squadrons. One problem centered on maintaining the
proper synchronization of the M-3 guns and the E-1 FCS.
After tests at Nellis AFB by the 325th FIW in late 1951,
it was decided that harmonizing firing ranges should be
built at Startire bases. However, the ADC's impending
switch to all-rocket armed interceptors left little time for
implementing this recommendation, and most squadrons
had to make do with whatever facilities were in place. Fur-
ther difficulties stemmed from the crews' initial reluctance
to shoot with the gunsight fully integrated with the E-1
FCS, and great efforts had to be made to encourage long-
range, radar-assisted marksmanship. Fortunately, none
of the Startire squadrons defending North America were
called to fire their guns in anger. Those assigned to Far
East Air Forces (FEAF) were less fortunate.
Beginning in April, 1951, when the 68th FIS at Itazuke
AB, Japan, converted from F-82G's, four FEAF squad-
rons flew F-94A/B's to proyide air defense for U.S.
facilities in Japan and Okinawa. In addition, from
December, 1951, the 68th FIS also sent small detach-
ments to Suwon AB (K-13), South Korea, to maintain run-
way alert against potential North Korean or Chicom raids.
Operating only over territory held by United Nations
forces, these aircraft did not engage the enemy. To sup-
plant these detachments, in early 1952, the Air Force
transferred the 319th FIS from CONUS to Korea. How-
ever, still wishing not to compromise the security of the
E-1 FCS, Headquarters initially forbade the 319th from
flying its F-94B's north of the front line. Finally, this restric-
tion was lifted in November, 1952, as enemy fighters were
proving increasingly effective against B-29's operating
at night. Maintaining a screen between the Chicom bases
across the Yalu and the B-29 targets in North Korea, Star-
fires effectively disrupted enemy interceptions and, in the
final months of the Korean War, downed five enemy air-
craft (the first being a Lavochkin La-9 Fritz which was shot
down by Capt. Ben L. Fithian, pilot, and Lt. Sam R. Lyons,
RO, during the night of January 31, 1953). Starfires also
flew night interdiction sorties, dropping 1,100 tons of
bombs. During the war, 28 F-94B's were lost (none to
enemy guns, but one going down after colliding with a
Polikarpov Po-2 Mule).
Within CONUS, the importance of the F-94A1B pro-

F·94A/B/C OVERVIEW:

..... -4

--~--~
F-94A,- 49-2496, during final pre-delivery prep at Lockheed-Burba-';'k. Atthe tim~,
the aircraft was being used as a company testbed. Note that the right wingtip
drop tank carries an unidentified probe on its nose tip.
llooL.-.... --.-- ------
F-94A, 49-2500, possibly from a Wright-Patterson AFB test unit. The aircraft is
seen in standard bare metal finish with stock aI/-black buzz letters/numbers
-

and a white (or possibly, off-white) radome.

F-94A, 49-2503, during a pre-delivery test flight out of Lockheed Burbank. The A stock F-94A, 49-2517, utilized by Lockheed for pre-delivery flight test work.
vertical fin, rudder, horizontal stabilizer, elevator, and fuselage empennage Note that the inside halves of the wingtip drop tanks are painted black to
are aI/ painted insignia red. Note clear border around fuselage insigne. eliminate sun glare.

6
gressively decreased as new interceptors became opera-
tional (the F-89B in June, 1951, the F-94C in March, 1953,
and the F-86D one month later) and these early Starfire
variants were phased out by ADC in 1954. Nevertheless,
these aircraft continued to protect American skies after
being transferred to the Air National Guard. Beginning
in June, 1953, when the 137th FIS, NY ANG, received
its first aircraft, twenty ANG squadrons flew F-94A1B's.
The type was finally phased out by the ANG in 1958.
The first ADC unit to receive F-94C's was the 437th
FIS at Otis AFB, Massachusetts, which was specially
activated in March, 1953, and became operational three
months later. Other squadrons followed quickly but the
F-94C had only a slightly longer career than the F-94A1B
as supersonic interceptors were introduced into ADC ser-
vice during the second half of the fifties (the Convair
F-102A in April, 1956, the McDonnell F-101 B in January,
1959, and the Convair F-106A in May, 1959). With the
availability of these faster and longer-ranged aircraft,
ADC disposed of its last F-94C's in early 1959 when the
60th FIS converted to F·101 B's. With the ANG, the type
had an even shorter service life, it was first assigned to
the 101st FIS and 131st FIS, MA ANG, in early 1956, and
was phased out by the 179th FIS, MN ANG, in July, 1959.
Upon entering service, the F-94C became the first
fighter to rely exclusively on rockets to down enemy air-
craft and to use a new intercept tactic. Whereas older
aircraft, inclUding earlier Starfire variants, used lead-
pursuit tactics to attack their targets from the rear with
a subtle curve pattern to keep rounds on target for the
longest possible period of time, the F-94C attacked its
targets at sharp angles to minimize exposure to defen-
sive armament. This method of attack, which was con-
trolled by the E-5 FCS, was necessary due to the im-
possibility of "walking" rockets as was done with rounds
of rapid-firing guns and was possible due to the greater
destructive power of rockets. In its infancy, the new tac-
tic proved risky as collisions between targets and in-
terceptors were often only narrowly avoided. Hence, the
F-94C played an important role in developing procedures
for collision course interception.
Often overshadowed by the F-86D and by late models
of the F-89, the F-94C was better than either of these
types for low altitude interception. More importantly, the
F-94C was the best weapon platform, a fact twice proved
in competition. Facing two F-86D teams during the 1954
USAF Gunnery Meet at Yuma, the ATC's 3550th CCTW
and the ADC's 84th FIS respectively took the first and
second places in the rocket phase of the competition.
During the following year's meet, the only F-94C team
took top honors against four F-86D teams and two F-89D
teams, once again proving the superiority of the c1osed-
breech rocket installation of the Lockheed fighter.
CONSTRUCTION AND
SYSTEMS:
The F-94C was a tandem two-seat subsonic all-weather
interceptor of all-metal construction.
The fuselage was comprised of three sections. From
its tip to the front pressure bulkhead, the nose section
contained the radar scanner covered by a pointed
radome; an electronic cooling air intake; the radar track-
ing mechanism; the main rocket armament; the batteries;
the electronic, communication and navaid equipment;
and the oxygen bottles. Starting at the front pressure
bulkhead, the main fuselage section housed the nose
gear, the side air intakes with boundary layer bleed air
duct, the twin hydraulically-operated ventral airbrake, the
pressurized and air conditioned cockpits, the fuselage
fuel tanks, and the engine bay. The rear fuselage sec-
tion was attached to the main fuselage section by three
bolts. For easy removal of the turbojet and afterburner,
this rear fuselage section and the empennages were
disconnected from the rest of the aircraft.
The pilot and radar operator sat on Lockheed ejection
seats beneath a single-piece clamshell canopy. The
pilot's cockpit center console was heavily oriented
towards flight instrumentation. The pilot's left side con-
sole contained the throttle quadrant; the panels for the
circuit breaker, lighting controls, and fuel control; the
aileron and elevator boost shut-off levers; and the con-
trols for JATO, landing gear, drag chute, drop tank
release, and armament. The pilot's right side console
grouped the controls for the radio and interphone, the
actuation of the canopy, and the autopilot; in addition,
this console incorporated the accelerometer, the
aerodynamic controls, the relief tube, and other
miscellanea. The radar viewing scope and primary radar
controls were mounted centrally in the RO's cockpit. The
RO's left side console contained light rheostats, voltage
adjusting rheostats, airspeed indicator, altimeter, oxygen
regulator control panel, life support controls, radio com-
pass control panel, and other items. The RO's right side
console grouped together canopy controls, additional life
support controls, radar antenna control, generator voltage
adjusting rheostat, wing and empennage de-icing con-
trols, AC and DC voltmeters and ammeter, airplane basic
weight potentiometer, fuel weight potentiometer, airplane
load adjuster, and other items.
The laminar flow "ribless" wings had three spars and
were covered with heavy skin, as this method of construc-
tion had been found to cut weight by 250 Ibs. Of
trapezoidal planform, the wings had 9° 18' of sweepback
on their leading edge, 8° of dihedral and incidence vary-
ing from + 2° at the root to - 1° 30' at the tip. They were
fitted with conventional ailerons each incorporating a
ground adjustable tab, aileron spoilers, and split trailing
edge flaps. Operation of the flaps was by way of two in-
terconnected 28-volt DC motors, while the ailerons were
provided with hydraulic power boosters.
Tail surfaces were preceded by a dorsal spine that ex-
tended from the rear of the canopy to the base of the fin.
They were comprised of a conventional fin and rudder,
and swept stabilizers and hydraulically-boosted elevators
'Vjh an electrically-operated trim tab.
A 16' diameter ribbon-type drag chute was housed in
a fairing extending above and aft of the exhaust nozzle.
Usable at speeds below 200 knots, this drag chute re-
duced landing roll by about 40%.
The tricycle undercarriage was fully retractable and
consisted of a nose gear that retracted aft into the center
fuselage section, and two single-wheel main gear that
retracted inboard into the wings. When retracted, the
nose gear was covered by twin doors and the main gear
were covered by doors attached to the undercarriage legs
and to the lower fuselage. Twin taxi and landing lights
were attached to the nose gear. Ground steering was ac-
complished by differential use of the main gear
hydraulically-operated brakes.
The hydraulically-operated air brakes consisted of two
panels beneath the center fuselage section and one
panel on each side of the rear fuselage just behind the
wing trailing edge. There were no speed restrictions on
the use of these air brakes.
Primary DC electrical power was provided by a
400-amp, 30-volt generator; two 12-volt storage batteries
were located in the aircraft's nose. A regulator maintained
voltage at 28 volts. The primary AC electrical power con-
sisted of three inverters and two alternators. All inverters
required a 28-volt power source. Hook-up for an exter-

Continental Air Command/Air Defense Command/Northeast Air Command

F-94A/B F-94C F·94A/B F-94C
2nd F(AW)S/2nd FIS, McGuire AFB, NJ, 1950-53 6·6th FIS, Elmendorf AFB, 1951-54
5th F(AW)S/5th FIS, McGuire AFB, NJ, 1950-53 449th FIS, Ladd AFB, 1950-54
27th FIS, Griffiss AFB, NY, 1954-57
29th FIS, Great Falls AFB, MT, 1953-57 Far East Air Forces
46th FIS, Dover AFB, DE, 1952-58 4th F(AW)S/4th FIS, Naha AB, Okinawa, 1951-53
48th FIS, Langley AFB, VA, 1953-57 Kadena AB, Okinawa, 1953-54
58th FIS, Otis AFB, MA, 1952-55 39th FIS, Yokota AB, Japan, 1954-55
59th FIS, Otis AFB, MA, 1951-52 Kornaki AB, Japan, 1955-57
Goose Bay, Labrador, 1952-56 68th FIS, Itazuke AB, Japan, and Suwon AB, Korea, 1951-53
60th FIS, Otis AFB, MA, 1955-59 319th FIS, Suwon AB, Korea, 1952-54
61st FIS, Selfridge AFB, MI, 1951-52 Johnson AB, Japan, 1954-55
Harmon AFB, Newfoundland, 1952-54 339th FIS, Johnson AB, Japan, 1951-54
74th FIS, Presque Isle AFB, ME, 1952-53 Chitose AB, Japan, 1954-55
82nd FIS, Larson AFB, WA, 1952-53
Keflavik, Iceland, 1953-54 Air Training Command
Presque Isle AFB, ME, 1954-55 3550th CCTW, Moody AFB, GA
84th FIS, Hamilton AFB, CA, 1952-54
95th FIS, Andrews AFB, MD, 1952-53 Air National Guard
96th FIS, New Castle Co. Airport, DE, 1952-57 101st FIS, MA ANG, Boston-Logan Airport, 1954-58
97th FIS, New Castle Co. Airport, DE, 1955-57 102nd FIS, NY ANG, NAS Floyd Bennett, 1956-57
121st FIS, Andrews AFB, MD, 1951-52 103rd FIS, PA ANG, SW Philadelphia Airport, 1955-59
142nd FIS, New Castle Co. Airport, DE, 1951-52 109th FIS, MN ANG, Wold-Chamberlain Airport, 1957
148th FIS, Dover AFB, DE, 1951-52 114th FIS, NY ANG, NAS Floyd Bennett, 1957-58
3Hth F(AW)S/317th FIS, McChord AFB, WA, 1950-51 116th FIS, WA ANG, Geiger Field, 1955-57
318th F(AW)S/318th FIS, McChord AFB, WA, 1951-53 118th FIS, CT ANG, Bradley Field, 1956-57
Thule, Greenland, 1953-54 123rd FIS, OR ANG, Portland Airport, 1955-57
319th F(AW)S/319th FIS, Moses Lake AFB, WA, 1950-52 131st FIS, MA ANG, Barnes Field, 1954-58
Bunker Hill AFB, IN, 1955-57 132nd FIS, ME ANG, Bangor, 1954-57
332nd FIS, New Castle Co. Airport, DE, 1953-55 133rd FIS, NH ANG, Grenier Field, 1954-58
354th FIS, Oxnard AFB, CA, 1953-55 134th FIS, VT ANG, Burlington, 1954-58
433rd FIS, Truax Field, WI, 1953 136th FIS, NY ANG, Niagara Falls, 1954-57
437th FIS, Otis AFB, MA, 1952-55 137th FIS, NY ANG, White Plains, 1953-58
Oxnard AFB, CA, 1955-56 138th FIS, NY ANG, Syracuse, 1954-58
438th FIS, Kinross AFB, MI, 1953 139th FIS, NY ANG, Schenectady, 1954-57
497th FIS, Portland Int. Airport, OR, 1953-54 175th FIS, SD ANG, Sioux Falls, 1954-58
178th FIS, ND ANG, Hector Field, 1954-58
Alaskan Air Command 179th FIS, MN ANG, Duluth, 1954-59
64th FIS, Elmendorf AFB, 1951-54 180th FIS, MO ANG, St. Joseph, 1957-58
65th FIS, Elmendorf AFB, 1951-53 190th FIS, ID ANG, Boise, 1954-56

7
nal power source was located at the trailing edge of the
right wing.
ARMAMENT AND ELECTRONICS:
Primary armament for the F-94C consisted of 24
Aeromite 2.75" FFAR (folding-fin aerial rocket) Mighty
Mouse rockets. The FFAR's were mounted in groups of
six on longitudinally-hinged, closed breech, snap action
doors around the aircraft's nose, with a retractable shield
being mounted in front of each door. This basic arma-
ment was supplemented by 24 additional FFAR's in two
12-rocket pods mounted on the leading edge of the wing.
These pods had a frangible nose cone which disinte-
grated when the rockets were fired. Each FFAR was com-
prised of three major assemblies: fuze, warhead, and
engine. The FFAR's were stabilized by means of folding
fins, which opened by air pressure as soon as the rockets
left the aircraft, and were powered by a solid-propellant
rocket engine which used a double-base, ballistic-type,
propellant grain. They were fitted with either a high ex-
plosive warhead or an inert training warhead, and with
either a MK-176 delayed fuze or MK-178 fuze.
For its alternate night interdiction mission, the F-94C
could carry bombs of up to 1,000 Ibs. on underwing racks.
Maximum bomb load was 2,000 Ibs.
The Hughes E-5 Fire Control System fitted to the F-94C
consisted of an AN/APG-40 radar set, an AN/APA-84
computer, and a NAOAR radar coupler. The pilot was
also provided with a standby N-3C reflector sight. Other
standard electronic equipment included an AN/ARC-27
or - 27A UHF command radio, an AN/ARN-6 radio com-
pass, an AN/ARN-112 marker beacon receiver, an
AN/ARN-18 or AN/ARN-5B glide slope receiver, an
AN/APX-6 IFF transponder, an 10-249 course indicator,
an RC-l030 localizer receiver, a Westinghouse W-3A
automatic pilot, and an AN/AIC-2A interphone.
POWERPLANT:
The F-94C was powered by a Pratt & Whitney J48-P-3,
J48-P-5, J48-P-5A, or J48-P-7 centrifugal flow turbojet.
Only some 20 J48-P-3's, with a take-off thrust of 6,000
Ibs. without afterburner and 8,000 Ibs. with afterburner,
were delivered to Lockheed for installation in early pro-
duction models. Most P-3 engines were SUbsequently re-
rated as J48-P-5's. On delivery, most production F-94C's
were powered by the J48-P-5 with static thrust ratings
with and without afterburner increased respectively to
6,350 Ibs. and 8,750 Ibs. at 11,000 rpm, and a normal
continuous rating of 5,250 Ibs. at 10,500 rpm. Late pro-
duction aircraft received the J48-P-5A with similar ratings
but fitted with low-loss flame tubes and the turbine moved
1-%" aft. Finally, during the Hop-Up modification pro-
gram, the P-5's and P5A's were field converted to J48-P-7
standards by installation of a solenoid actuated after-
burner; thrust ratings remained unchanged but the
reliability of afterburner operation was markedly
increased.
The J48-P-7 was a continuous flow turbojet engine with
nine through-flow combustion chambers and a single
stage, double entry, centrifugal compressor driven by a
single stage, axial flow, reaction turbine. The compressor
delivered air under a pressure ratio of approximately 4:1
at sea level static conditions to the nine combustion
chambers. Fuel under high pressure was sprayed from
dual orifice nozzles into the flame tubes inside the com-
bustion chambers where the fuel burned continuously
with the primary air, supplying heat for expanding the re-
mainder of the air. The resulting heated gases were
discharged through the rear of the combustion chambers
into the nozzle box and through guide vanes onto the tur-
bine blades. The turbine drove the compressor, cooling
air impeller, and the accessory case gearing. The turbine
exhaust gases discharged through the tail pipe and were
finally expelled through the nozzle as a high velocity jet.
For normal starting purposes, two igniter plugs were in-
stalled in combustion chambers No.4 and 7.
A cooling fan was installed on the rotor shaft between
the center main bearing and the compressor. Cooling air,
taken in just aft of the rear compressor inlet through radial
volutes in the c,enter casting of the engine, was delivered
from the impeller to the center and rear bearing hous-
ings, passing over the center bearing and over and under
the rear bearing. All the cooling air was then collected
in an annular chamber and discharged to an external
sheet metal manifold and to a common outlet.
Control of the engine power schedule was obtained
from a single lever power control which maintained any
selected engine speed regardless of changes in altitude
or density.
The afterburner, which was attached to the engine
directly aft of the turbine, was essentially a divergent-
convergent duct. Fuel was injected through spray bars
and initial ignition occurred in the region of two annular
"U" shaped flame ring assemblies which had the open
side of the "U" pointing aft. At the forward end of the
unit were two air cylinders, one on either side, with rods
running aft to actuate the "eyelid" shutters which varied
the area of the exit orifice. The eyelid had two positions:
fully closed during non-afterburner operation and fully
open when the afterburner was functioning.
The J48-P-7 had a diameter of 50" and a length of
202"; dry weight was 2,725 Ibs.
The F-94C internal fuel system consisted of a 94-gallon
main fuselage tank just behind the rear cockpit, a
41-gallon sump tank ahead of and below the engine, and
five non-self-sealing nylon bladders with a combined
capacity of 115.5 gallons in each wing; total internal fuel
capacity was 366 gallons. For normal operation, a
250-gallon drop tank was attached centrally to each wing
tip. For ferry purposes, a 230-gallon pylon tank could be
carried beneath each wing to bring total fuel capacity to
1,326 gallons. All tanks, with the exception of the pylon
tanks which had individual refueling points, were fueled
through a single refueling point. If desired, the tip tanks
could also be refueled from a refueling point on each
tank. All fuel passed through the engine sump tank, via
gravity force from the internal tanks and air pressure force
from the external tanks. Inside the sump tank were two
submerged, electrically-operated, boost pumps to provide
the engine with the needed amount of fuel. The engine
was normally started by an external power source but,
in emergency, could be started by the aircraft's own bat-
teries. The engine was equipped with an integral dry
sump full-pressure oil system, with oil contained in a
3-gallon pressurized reservoir.
The primary fuel type was Mil-F-5624A (JP-4) and the
1010-grade oil type was Mil-L-6081.
To enable operation from shorter airfields, the F-94C
could be fitted with two 1,000 lb. thrust Aerojet
14AS-l00004 or 05 JATO bottles.
AVAILABLE SCALE
MODELS AND DECALS:
KITS
Revell, 1/55th, 1/56th Frog, 1/82nd
Addar, 1/82nd International Modeling,
Aeroform, 1I48th 1/82nd
Aurora, 1/82nd Kader, 1/55th
Comet, 1/82nd Kleeware, 1I82nd
UPC, 1/100th Lincoln International,
Continental Model 1/55th
Airplane Co., ? Lindbergh, 1/48th
Sanwa/Tokyo Plamo, ?
DECALS
Microscale: 1/72nd - 72-0471, 72-507

SERIAL AND BLOCK NUMBERS:

Block No. USAF Serial Numbers Nos. built Block No. USAF Serial Numbers Nos. built
Amendment to USAF Contract AF 33(038)-1847 dated November 10, 1948. USAF Contract AF 33(038)-11205 dated July 21,1950.
YF-94-LO 48-356 and 48-373 (2) (1) YF-94C-LO 50-955 1
F-94A-l-LO 49-2479 to 49-2495 17 F-94C-l-LO 50-956 to 50-1063 108
F-94A-5-LO 49-2496 1 51-5513 to 51-5698 186
49-2498 to 49-2588 91 51-13511 to 51-13603 93
YF-94B-LO 49-2497 1
USAF Contract AF 33(038)-18671 dated January 4, 1951.
USAF Contract AF 33(038)-9844 dated March 3, 1950.
F-940-LO 51-13605 to 51-13716 (112) (3)
F-94B-l-LO 50-805 to 50-876 72
50-878 to 50-954 77 F-94 Production Total. . 854
YF-94C-LO 50-877 1

USAF Contract AF 33(038)-14804 dated April 3, 1951. (1) Converted from TF-80C airframes.
F-94B-5-LO 51-5307 to 51-5512 206 (2) Converted from F-948 airframes.
YF-940-LO 51-5500 and 51-5501 (2) (2) (3) Contract cancelled on October 15, 1951; aircraft not built.

SPECIFICATIONS AND PERFORMANCE:

F-94B F-94C F-94D F-94B F·94C F-94D
Fuselage length (ft) 40.1 44.5 42.9 Wing loading (Ib/sq ft) (at combat weight) 57.4 75.9 55.4
Wingspan (ft) (without tip tanks) 37.5 37.3 37.3 Power loading (Ib/lb s.t.) (at combat weight) 2.25 2.0 2.21
Wing area (sq. ft.) 234.8 232.8 350.0 Max speed at s.l. (mph) . 588 640 685
Wing aspect ratio 6.36 6.1 4.0 Combat speed (mph) 490 523 503
Height (ft) 12.7 14.9 15.6 Cruising speed at 36,000 ft. (mph) 452 493 529
Wheel track (ft) 8.7 9.2 9.2 Max rate of climb (ft/min) 7,800 10,800 3,810
Empty weight (Ibs) 10,064 12,708 13,574 Combat ceiling (ft) 45,700 49,700 49,300
Basic weight (Ibs) 10,498 12,895 14,634 Service ceiling (ft) 47,260 51,800 52,700
Design weight (Ibs) 13,400 18,300 24,250 Combat radius (miles) 332 239 391
(load factor) 7.33 g 8.67 g 8.67 g Ferry range (miles) 905 1,275 2,200
Combat weight (Ibs) 13,474 17,670 19,380 Take-off ground run (tt) 2,880 2,790 5,480
Max T-O weight (Ibs) 16,844 24,184 29,153 Landing ground roll (ft) 2,050 3,520 2,630
Max landing weight (Ibs) 13,000 16,338 17,138

8
 F-94A, 49-2520, of the 449th FIS, Ladd AFB, Alaska. Alaskan-based F-94's served as defensive interceptors during the 1950-1954 period. The cold weather
environment typically found in Alaska dictated the use of special protective measures such as the canvas wing covers, shown. Use of the wing covers
permitted quick removal of snow and ice which, if allowed to stand, could seriously affect the aircraft's takeoff performance in a wartime emergency.
~
(jj
g>
<3
.~

~
~

--_.~

F-94A, 49-2521, with the typical Alaska Air Command all-red empennage, vertical F-94A, 49-2535, of the Alaskan Air Command's 64th FIS with updated center-
fin and rudder, and horizontal stabilizer and elevators of the early 1950's. This mount tip tanks. The tip tanks are painted green with white teeth and a
view also illustrates the faired connections for the under-slung tip tanks. r- red mouth. The empennage and tail surfaces are.-all pain,;,;t.;;e.;;d_r.;;e..:;d.... .,
f

F-94J1, 49-2538, of the 2nd FIS. The buzz letters/numbers on the extreme end of F-94A, 49-2545, of the 103rd FIS, Pennsylvania ANG. The nose lightning bolt
the fuselage empennage are somewhat unusual. Note, too, that the was red and the radome and nose anti-glare panel were black. This aircraft
under-slung drop tank fairings have been discarded. had the later, banded canopy in place of the original single-piece unit.

~~f"'-.::-
\

-
",
92550
ASS A.N.G.

~ ;" ;;:::::"--"<.~4~~~ __

F-94A, 49-2550, of the 101 FIS, Massachusetts ANG. The gun port blast panels F-94A, 49-2551, "Hot BeeHind", fate of the 66th FIS, at transfer to North Dakota
have been painted black. It also appears that the wing leading edges have ANG. The wing leading edges appear to have been equipped with deicing boots.
been equipped with deicing boots-or simply painted black. Other markings include black lightning bolts and a yellow mask on the tip tanks.

9
 F-94A, 49-2553, of the 101st FIS, Massachusetts ANG. This aircraft has been
updated to include the later banded canopy and the center-mount tip
tanks. Markings are standard for mid-1950's.
-
F-94A, 49-2577, probably of the 319th FIS, formates with three other F-94A's
during southern California maneuvers during the early 1950's. Markings
include yellow-and-black bands on the vertical fin and fuselage:
-----.,

"-
F-94A, 49-2586, belonging to the group commander of '"
" the 325th FG (AW), was
one of the last A-models built by Lockheed before production was
The first production F-94B, 50-805, is seen at Lockheed Burbank during a short
test program exploring the capabilities of paired twin-pack leading edge gun
phased into the improved F-94B. pods. Each pod contained two .50 cal. M-3 machine guns.

_.di. ~ ~ _"_~~ ........... _"'_....

The first two F-94B's assigned to the 101st FIS, Massachusetts ANG, 50-867 and F-94B, 50-869, of the 319th FIS being towed to a loading area at Suwon AB, S.
51-5338, are seen shortly after arrival at Logan Airport, Massachusetts, Korea on July 27, 1953. Unit patch is visible on the fuselage side just above the
on March 30, 1954. Distinctive unit markings have yet to be applied. wing root leading edge section. Weathering on nose radome is noteworthy.

'I
"""- - ' - = ' ff\'~n~~

Though ordered as an F-94B and initially referred to as the YF-97A (developed F-94B, 50-879, of the 61st FIS. The shark mouth had white teeth with a red
from the Model 880 study), 50-877, was in fact the second prototype F-94C. This interior. The eyes were also white and red. Note the RA TO bottle under
aircraft was the first to incorporate the F-94C's revised intake configuration. the fuselage just to the rear of the main landing gear.

10
 Several F-94B's, including 50-870 and 50-872, of the Air Defense Command's F-94B, 50-910, of the 134th FIS, Vermont ANG. The nose markings are yellow
59th FIS, are seen during formation training near Otis AFB, Massachusetts. and black. Note, too, that the airbrakes under the fuselage were also painted
The bands on 50-870 were yellow with black borders. black with the last two digits of the serial number in white .
.,.,------
.~
cjj
'l'
<3
.~
~

I
~
ill

F-94B, 50-913, of the 179th FIS, Minnesota ANG in July, 1955. The unit patch F-94B, 50-936, of the Alaskan Air Command's 66th FIS. The wingtip tank
split the yellow lightning bolt on the forward fuselage. The anti-glare panel markings were yellow with a black outline and black lightning bolts.
was medium green . The empennage and vertical and horizontal tail surfaces were red.
.,.
.~
.....---------------_.:..._------------...
cjj
'l'
<3
.~

~
~
~
ill

----.
F-94B, 51-5323, "PFFHT", of the 136th FIS, New York ANG. Markings were A full-afterburner static ground run by F-94B, 51-5428, of the 319th FIS at
primarily red and yellow. The large "V" was in black. The gun blast Suwon AB, S. Korea, in February, 1953. The unit patch is barely visible
panels were also painted black. just above the wingtip tank, on the fuselage side.

F-94B, 51-5433, of the 118th FIS, Connecticut ANG. The unit patch is visible on A single F-94A, 49-2579, and two F-94B's, 51-5474 and 50-913, of the 179th FIS,
the nose. With the exception of the black painted gun blast panels just behind Minnesota ANG, are seen during a practice mission over the Minnesota
and below the nose radome, all other markings for the aircraft were standard. countryside. The red, yellow, and black markings were very distinctive.

11
 lOClH££O

- ---
The first prototype F-94C, N-34C, began life as the 151st F-94B. Though initially referred to as the YF-97A, this designation was later dropped in favor of YF-94C. As
initially flown, N-34C was powered by a non-afterburning "Tay"; it was not until the advent of the second prototype YF-94C, 50-877, that the afterburning J48-P-5
was flown in the F-94C airframe. Major changes over the earlier F-94A and F-94B inctuded a new wing and tailplane, and tip tanks of modified design.

The first YF-94C did not incorproate the production F-94C's distinctive intakes, This distinctive rear view of YF-94C, 50-955, taken at Edwards AFB during the
nor did it have the F-94C's reconfigured rOCket-carrying nose. By the time of early 1950's, gives a good perspective of the wing dihedral, the extended air-
this photo, N-34C had been assigned an Air Force serial number, 50-955. brakes, and the wingtip fuel tanks unique to this particutar prototype.
. .'

tnflight view of YF-94C, 50-955, following modification to incorporate an after- Late in its flight test program life, YF-94C, 50-955, was modified to incorporate a
burning J48-P-5 and a more conventional F-94C fuselage empennage section. more conventionat F-94C nose configuration. This nose permitted the carrying
Retained were the early F-94A!B intakes and nose, and the tengthy nose boom. and firing of 2.75" rockets. No radar was mounted under the nose radome.
...

"\
i
-' \
0962

---~

The first production configured F-94C, 50·956, incorporated all the standard Another early production F-94C, 50-962, is seen at Edwards AFB during the flight
features of this ultimate F-94 production model. For flight test purposes, test program. Like 50-956, it was equipped with a non-standard test boom. In
it was equipped with a test boom and associated test instrumentation. photo, it is carrying a set of 230 gallon pylon·mounted drop tanks.

12
 The second production configured F-94C, 50-957, was used for armament F-94C, 50-970, utilized by the Air Force and Lockheed as a test aircraft, is seen
systems trials and was equipped with several special cameras, including one during trials with optional leading edge-mounted 2.75" rocket pods. This
mounted on a short stalk attached to the leading edge of the vertical fin. aircraft also was modified to incorporate the more pointed nose radome.
~ 1:'
jjj
>,
j
\
~
.~
~
i'l ,
~ .~

~ ""~
0
.~
III
'0964 Ql
E
0995
~h ----
i

F-94C, 50-964, of the Air Research and Development Command. The ARDC F-94C, 50-995, possibly prior to delivery to the Air Force. Somewhat unusual in
patch is visible just above the wing root on the fuselage side. Markings this view is the fact that the aircraft is not equipped with wingtip tanks. Also
were otherwise standard for type. note the original, blunt nose radome.
~
0

1.
E
c -
I:.
jjj
€
~
.~
jjj
€
~
j

ANG
01010
..
j11
III
0
:i/OI7
'j.~
III

f
Two- F-94C's, 50-1010 and 51-3581, of the 175th FIS, South Dakota ANG. The F-94C, 50-1017, from an unidentified unit. Markings were otherwise standard for
unit patch is visible under the windscreen on the fuselage sides. The leading type, with bare metal finish, standard Air Force insigne, and buzz numbers

.E
jjj
edge rocket pods appear to be painted black for sun glare elimination.
~
~
and serial numbers in black.

€ ~
~ i'l
.~
.~
.~

.~
u.
(Ji
~
0
::;,

0
~

F-94C, 50-1042, of the 437th FIS. The unit patch was readily visible above the Three F-94C's, 50-1063, 51-5642, and 51-5643(?), from the 354th FIS, are seen
wing root section, on the fuselage side. The rudder, nose fairing, in flight during formation training maneuvers during the late 1950's. Markings
and wingtip fuel tank bands were green. were red, with all other details standard for type.

13
F-94C, 51-5524, of the 97th FIS. Unit patch is visible above wing root section on F-94C, 51-5526, of the 96th FIS. Unit patch is visible above wing root section on
fuselage side. The rudder was red with a white stripe, the vertical fin tip and fuselage side. The rudder, wingtip drop tank stripes, and intakes were red,
wingtip tank markings were yellow, and the fuselage stripes were red. the vertical fin tip was blue, and the nose radome was light brown.

I'.,

F-94C, 51-5565, of the 96th FIS. Unit patch is visible above wing root section on F-94C of the 103rd FIS, Pennsylvania ANG. The nose section had been painted
fuselage side. The rudder was red. This aircraft had been modified to light grey for corrosion protection. This aircraft was equipped with the
incorporate the banded canopy and more pointed nose radome. optional leading edge-mounted 2.75" FFAR pods.
~ !"
S. g>
~
~.

~
s.
~
~
~.

~
q
~
3

F-94C, 51·5576, of the 101st FIS, Massachusetts ANG. Taken in July, 1957, this Impossible as it might sound, this photo of F-94C, 51-5590, was taken at the top
photo provides good detail of the double crew egress ladder that permitted both of Colorado's Pike's Peak on July 15, 1959. Apparently, it was placed on
pilot and radar systems operator access to the aircraft at the same time. display there during the late 1950's. When it was removed is unknown.

",
:.'.~ .,-~~.-~~~
F-94C, 51-5604, of the 46th FIS. Unit patch is visible above wing center section F-94C, 51-5641, of the 84th FIS. Unit patch is visible on nose, splitting the yellow
of fuselage side. The rudder was painted yellow. This aircraft also was flash with black border. A similar yellow flash was visible on the wingtip drop
equipped with the leading edge-mounted 2.75" FFAR rocket pods. tanks. Note rarely seen blow-in doors on top of fuselage, aft of canopy.

14
E
J'! .g<
"E-
~
~
~
..
.~

(Ji
"
~
~
'" '"

~F-94C, 51-5650, during its assignment to the School of Aviation F-94C, 51-5659, of the 60th FIS, is seen during a late 1950's William Tell air
Randolph AFB in June, 1957. The colors seen on the vertical fin and combat meet launching 2.75" FFAR's. The wingtip tank markings were
wingtip tanks are thought to have been red, white, and blue. blue and white, and the rudder scheme was red and white.

F-94C, 51-5695, of the 437th FIS. The rudder, nose fairing, wingtip tank stripes, F-94C, 51-13545, of the 180th FIS, Missouri ANG. This aircraft is painted in the
and rudder were all green. The fuselage stripes were divided by black borders. standard ANG scheme of the late 1950's, with a light grey nose
The unit patch is visible on the fuselage just above the wing center section. and black nose radome.

~.~=-­
F-94C, 51-13555, of the 27th FIS. Markings are yellow with black borders and Unusual inflight view of F-94C, 51-13566, of the 179th FIS, Minnesota ANG.
black stars. The rudder is in black and yel/ow checkerboard. The unit patch Visible are the offset center-span mounted external fuel tank pylons and
is visible on the fuselage, just under the windscreen. the black painted inside halves of the wingtip fuel tanks.
!~"9'~~~~'-"'~'~

Landing configuration view of F-94C, 51-13566, of the 179th FIS, Minnesota F-94C, 51-13580, of the 178th FIS, North Dakota ANG. The unit patch is visible
ANG. Visisble are the extended flaps, airbrakes, and landing gear, on the nose. Visible are the two airbrake sets and the extended wing flaps. Not
and the horizontal stabilizer leading edge deicer boots. visible and rarely seen are the spoilers, located on the wing upper surfaces.

15
 r

F-94C, 51-13591, of the 175th FIS, South Dakota ANG. The unit patch is readily Hughes Aircraft Company maintained a number of specially modified and
visible on the fuselage side, just under the windscreen. All other camera-equipped F-94'S, including F-94C, 50-965, and F-94A, 49-2492, for use as
markings were standard for type. testbed aircraft for various radar and fire control system development programs.

/~.~ .. ":""'~;; ..:-

.... ~ ~_ ~_ ..1-,--",,- • ~,,,.; IfJ:il\~ ,""£"~,;. ~1',*1:J ~ - ';;'."...~-.r_:_ ...,
::::,,£~~j~~~~~;i"!$··"\.'
A single F-94C was placed on indefinite loan to the NACA at Ames, California, A single F-94B, 51-5502, was modified under contract to the ARDC to accom-
. for use as a testbed to explore the attributes of thrust reversing. The reverser modate and provide testing parameters for a Boeing IM-99 "Bomarc"
clamshell doors are visible at the aft end of the aircraft. surface-to-air missile nose section and associated avionics.

(
I;
...i
OSS3

This is one of three views known ofthe ARDC's EF-94C (E = Exempt) recon- Serving as an aerodyn"amic prototype for the never-completed F-94D, F-94B,
naissance modification. Aircraft 50-963, part of an early batch of F-94C's, 51-5501, retained its original two-seat cockpit while incorporating the
was utilized for this configuration study, about which little is known. extended, and somewhat awkward looking nose of the F-94D.

j
r

Two F-94D aerodynamic prototypes were completed, including F-94B, 51-5500. An artist's rendering of one possible single-seat F-94 configuration optimized for
Besides an improved armament complement, the F-94D also was to have had ground support missions. It remains uncertain as to whether this was also
a retractable inflight refueling probe in its nose. referred to under the F-94D designator.

16
F-94A, 49-2521, of the 449th FIS, normally assigned to Ladd AFB. Markings are typical of aircraft assigned to Alaska-with red empennage and vertical tail surfaces
provided to ease visual identification of the aircraft in snow covered terrain. This aircraft appears to have been photographed pre-delivery. Note that back seat
equipment appears not yet to have been installed.

The prototype YF-94C, 50-955, as initially flown following modification to production F·94C aerodynamic standard with a da·glo and polished aluminum markings
scheme. This aircraft was first operated by Lockheed and utilized as a systems and aerodynamic testbed. As shown in photo, it was not equipped with a radar system
(note aluminum radome), though this would be installed at a later date. The large test instrumentation boom, with its barber pole markings, is noteworthy.

17
 F-94C, 50-970, while being used as a testbed for Lockheed out of their Burbank, California, facility. This aircraft was painted in standard markings for type, with all
lettering in black, a black nose radome, a beige plastic wing leading edge rocket pod nose cap (note that the pod on the left wing is apparently of aluminum
construction, thus indicating its possible use as a test instrumentation bay), black wing leading edge de-icing boots, and a light green nose anti-glare panel.

F-94C, 51-13550, of the 29th FIS, normally assigned to Great Falls AFB. The markings 'for this unit, including the white lightning bolt on blue background found on the
wing tip fuel tanks, are quite distinctive. The red vertical fin and empennage are standard for aircraft operating in areas where snow is constantly present.
The wing leading edge rocket pods are black with white caps.

18
 SELECT MARKINGS
Drawn by Jay Miller
Scale: 1/72nd

U.S.AIR f
fA-53 ::J

Lockheed F-94C, 51-5631, of the ADC's 354th FIS while stationed at Oxnard AFB, California, during 1954. The basic fuselage is unpainted
natural metal (aluminum). The nose radome is essentially a bleached brown and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat green
(approx. FS 34151). The rudder and wing tip fuel tanks are painted with red (approx. FS 31136) candy-stripes. All other markings
are standard for type.

U.S.AIR f
FA-S77
Lockheed F-94C, 51-5577, of the ADC's 97th FIS, Newcastle County Airport, Delaware, during the mid-1950's. The basic fuselage is unpainted
natural metal (aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat
green (approx. FS 34151). The rudder is painted with large red (approx. FS 31136) panels split by a white diagonal slash.
The nose gear doors are also painted red. The unit badge is visible on the fuselage side, just above the wing center
section. All other markings are standard for type.

::J

::J

Lockheed F-94C, 50-1054, of the ADC's 60th FIS, Otis AFB, Massachusetts, during the mid-1950's. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural
metal (aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat green
(approx. FS 34151). The vertical fin tip is painted blue (approx. FS 15045). The unit badge is visible just above the wing center
section. All other markings are standard for type.

U.S.AIR f
fA-596 ::J

Lockheed F-94C, 51-13596, of the ADC's 46th FIS, Dover AFB, Delaware, during the mid-1950's. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural metal
(aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat green (approx.
FS 34151). The nose cap, behind the nose radome, the wing tip flashes, and the rudder are all painted yellow (approx. FS 13655).
Two fuselage bands, just behind the cockpit, are red (approx. FS 31136). The unit badge is visible just above the wing center
section. All other markings are standard for type.
(with references furnished by Marty Isham and Douglas Siowlak)

Lockheed F-94B, 50-870, of the ADC's 59th FIS, Otis AFB, Massachusetts, during 1950. The nose radome is gray or off-white (approx. FS
36622) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat green (approx. FS 34151). The three fuselage bands are yellow (approx. FS
13655) outlined in gloss black (approx. FS 17038). The vertical fin tip is white (approx. FS 17875). All other markings are standard for type.

Lockheed F-94B, 51-5447, of the ADC's 438th FIS, Kinross AFB, Michigan, during October, 1953. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural metal
(aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat black (approx. FS
37038). The only distinctive markings are the red (approx. FS 31136) horizontal bars on the rudder. All other markings are standard for type.

Lockheed F-94B, 51-5410, of the ADC's 82nd FIS, Larson AFB, Washington, during 1952. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural metal
(aluminum). The nose radome is gray or off-white (approx. FS 36622) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat black
(approx. FS 37038). The under-nose gun port panel, the wing tip fuel tank trim, and the diagonal stripes on the vertical tail
surfaces are red (approx. FS 31136). The unit badge is visible on the fuselage side just above the wing center section.
All other markings are standard for type.

Lockheed F-94A, 49-2516, of the ADC's 319th FIS, Larson AFB, Washington, during the early 1950's. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural
metal (aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat green
(approx. FS 34151). The lightning bolts, visible on the fuselage and vertical tail surfaces, are red (approx. FS 31136), outlined in
black. All other markings are standard for type.

20
 LOCKHEED F-94C, 51·13550

Lockheed F-94C, 51-13550, of the ADC's 29th FIS, while stationed at Great Falls AFB, Montana, during the mid-1950's. The basic fuselage is
unpainted natural metal (aluminum). The nose radome is gloss black (approx. FS 17038) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen
is flat green (approx. FS 34151). The fuselage empennage section, vertical tail surfaces, and horizontal tail surfaces are all insignia red
(approx. FS 31136). The wing tip fuel tanks are trimmed in blue (approx. FS 15045) with a white lightning bolt through the middle.
All other markings are standard for type.

,
.
!
'.

Lockheed F-94B, 50-816, of the MATS' 82nd FIS, Keflavik, Iceland, during the early 1950's. The basic fuselage is unpainted natural metal
(aluminum) and the anti-glare panel ahead of the windscreen is flat black (approx. FS 37038). The band on the nose, the aft portions of
the wing tip fuel tanks, the fuselage empennage, and the vertical and horizontal tail surfaces are painted red (approx. FS 31136).
The vertical fin tip is black (approx. FS 17038). The name "Jan IV" is painted in black on the left side of the nose, just ahead
of the intake. All other markings are standard for type.

21
 Drawn by Jay Miller
~
Scale: 1/72nd

(with references furnished by Marty Isham and Douglas Siowiak)

22
J
 ::;:
'-

i."
\(>
~.

~
~
;::
L
~
a.

F-94C, 51-12555, of the 27th FIS, Griffiss AFB, during the mid-1950's. The unit's yellow and black markings were quite attractive. All other markings were fairly
standard for type, with the exception of the unit badge visible on the fuselage side just underneath the windscreen, and the yellow and black checkerboard
rudder. As can be seen, the wing leading edge rocket pods were painted dark green.
------------------, ~ G)
~
~
~.

i?
~

( f
a.

113513

F-94C, 51-13513, of the 354th FIS, in mid-1955. The red trim and distinctive unit patch on the fuselage side just above the wing root leading edge section are easily
discerned. Barely noticeable, however, is the manner in which the left wing insigne is painted over the wing leading edge rocket pod aft fairing. A color shift
occurring during the transparency duplication process has made the rocket pods appear gray, when in fact they are dark green.

23
>! --------------------------------~------~~~~~
j
~
c'3
.~

~
~

\
\

F-94C, 51-5592, of the 48th FIB, during a training flight in January, 1955. Because of photo angle, some of the markings applied to this aircraft, including the yellow
with white stars nose trim and distinctly blue/green wing tip fuel tank trim and rudder, are not readily apparent. All other markings on this aircraft were standard
for type with the exception of the white vertical fin cap and white vertical fin access panel.
-~II!I!'

F-94C, 50-1054, now on permanent display at the U.S. Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, has recently been restored and made available for pUblic
viewing. Fortunately, the restoration process included a complete refurbishment of the front and rear cockpits-with heavy emphasis being placed on utilization
of period instrumentation and actual F-94C hardware. Additionally, special attention was given to markings and paint accuracy.

24
 IN DETAIL:
~~
~~

The front cockpit of F-94C, 51-5570. This configuratio~ appears stock for the early F-94C family. The instrumentation is stock for the period, with most flight con'trol
related displays on the main panel, and all communications and environmental controls on either of the two console panels. The gunsight was mounted
in the center top portion of the instrument panel and rearview mirrors were provided for rearward observation.

.... ' • - .C

A view of the forward cockpit of the first production F,94C, 50-956. This cockpit The forward cockpit of the F-94B differed significantly from that of the later F-94C
set precedent for most of the first F-94C production blocks as few changes in having a much larger and more complex gunsight, instrumentation on the
are noticeable. In this view, the gunsight has been removed. center console, and other miscellaneous instrumentation variances.

25

The F-94C forward cockpit left console supports the powerplant throttle quadrant,
interior lighting switches, fuel management switches, cabin environmental
controls and miscellaneous armament controls.
\ "'--;
The F-94C forward cockpit right console supports the aircraft autopilot, some of
the radar system controls, some of the communications equipment,
and a selection of systems-related circuit breakers.
......,.,....,..-----

The F-94C rear cockpit forward panel contains most of the Hughes Aircraft Company furnished radar system controls and the articulated radar screen and CRT.
The latter items are tube-mounted and hinged so that they can be moved out of the way for rear seat access
(note ball grips on each side of the unit). There are no controls in the rear cockpit.

26
 0 .~

"~ <3
~ ~
"f .~
"-
(jj
~
:::>

The tube-mounted and hinged screen and CRT are The screen and CRT of the F-94B were somewhat larger and bulkier than those found in the later F-94C.
seen in working position in this view Because of the relatively weak screen imagery developed by these early radar systems, it was
of the F-94C's rear cockpit. necessary to provide rear crew members with a hood to block out extraneous light.

j----L..J

.~.

" ..... ~r JrJ'"""'_:--.........-.:;.........."""

The F-94C rear cockpit left console contained communications equipment, some The F-94C rear cockpit right console contained some radar system
environmental control system instrumentation, and the cockpit lighting controls. instrumentation, the radar antenna control stick, and an
instrument panel illumination light.

21.
21.
JATOfllllNGIlUTTON
MAIN fUEl SHUT-ofF SWITCH ~
23. VENTll....TORCONTROllEVER I. LANDING Gl:AR POSITION INDICATORS
2•• 'RESSUREAlR IEMPEUTURE CONTROL
25. AfTERBURNER SWitCH

~: ~;rE~~~eE~a~:::CONTROl
t ~~~w~r::::::::UCl
$. TARGET TRACKING-INDICATOR
6. GENERATOR fAILURE WAlNl1'fG LIGHT

H: S~l~~~;~~R~~RNCU'-OUT
I. CANOPY lOCK CONTROl
~: ~~~~I~~:~R.tI~~~~~iATOR 2. fGNlIION '"NORMAl.()Ff'" SWITCH :~: ~~~S~:eOlUME CONTROL
3. STARTEtSWIlCH
::: ~~p;~~~~~~~l~~~;.r~SELECTOR
~. GYRO INSTIlUMENTS WARNING LIGHT
8unON
~~: ~~~~~~T::NKWARNINGIIGHt :: i:~~:~ ~1~~~~~~
~t i~~~~~E:w~~~~
16. RlGHT·HANDCIKUIT aUAKERS

It ~~,!~;b;l~~~r,';:~:HT :~: ~~~~,~~i:~~~~~~~l:AUFUs.ES

6. COCKPIT LIGHT
1. GE,...ERATORSWITCH
3$. GUNSIGHT FILAMENT SELECTOR SWITCH I. EMERGENCY HYORAULIC PUMP SWITCH 19. CANon co,...nOl SWITCHES

::: ~~~~:R~~~~~~~~NTROl ::: ~~;EK~~~T:~:i~~~U~~lrDICATOR

9.
10.
AN!ARC.3 RAOIO CONTROLS
AN!ARN.' RADIO COMPASS CONTROLS
'10, EMERGENCY FUel CHECKOUT SWITCH
21. PITOT HEAT SWITCH

;! ~~~~I~~~~i~:"oo,,,, 'W,,,"
43. "0" SUIT CONNECTION
44. RAOARPRfSSVReCIRCUI1BREAKER
II. INSTRUMENT INYUlER TEST SWITCH
:::. ~J{~;~~:tg:~R~EWARNING liGHTS
~O. CABIN ALTIMETER
21. CABIN PREssURIZATIONGRlll
~'1. JATO ARMING SWITCH AND INOICATOR
'13. FUSELAGE TANK lOW lEVEl INDICATOR

F·94A Front Cockpit Left Console F·94A Front Cockpit Center Console F-94A Front Cockpit Right Console

27
 rutlCU1£
RfntCTOR

TARGET
SPAN
ADJUStM[Nt
WHEn

"'ANQl
DIAL

I. Go-__ "Ou<'" w......... L4h< U6.ll - . .... lioiDd........

l.H)'dnuli<Pn.m.r..I_ _ U.f'>o.I I.ev<lW.'noi""LiP<
.... 0.0:. _ lJ._IQu.aa,; ... I............

.
l6.1l... ofOimttI.oc._
.f.1l So»p<
11.1'\10(.0-......
~ G'fOe-uoI It.1l_hdolAd;...,;.,,Cno....
~ l'lI. c.k.... A;,- e-<l'Ol~
'.z...,_l.oc._ JO.e--e-mlP_
.. EoPo<OilP......... I _ JI_e..-~8<...a. .. "'1>d
.l.l.c......e-
...........
,..r.:;:;~fire .... e-.f<II
, .... z.,..Il
j4.P.. I..i""II hH• ...u.
lG.r'"_O'......., l.ialM
lI_j:=o..._W ... j4""f:':"~"::Su."Sho<p.
jl.T"'•• ""n.....I_
lJ.hdP,........- - . . l6. .. lu ,
}1.7 1I._.1k........ Sa1~
I). ~"t.:~~_F.dm. .... jlI.Al<>r-!lnd..._
IIlT""-. .
I'..." G.- l".I.u,"...... rn..""s.ri"b
olO.lhdioCoMI'."hul....,..
II.E...u..F"<I""mpF.;1,,,.. IG.TulpipoT<1Ilp<t"&",,,,I.d;",...
1l:'.,n;~Lia"b,
11. S1",<dG,'~M'8n,,;.Compo .. 41,lo'''"....,1'0.. ''0!! .... ".i...
U~h'
16.1LSD<.",ionlnd.,,,,,,,.nd II, f~.l~.n,;.,.T."Sw;"b
M"k" 0..,,,,,
lodi<olOl!;8h' lJ,F".IFlo... lndiulO,
41,C""krhAi,P...,u«lndiu'nr

17.c>.op,Unlo"bodW.";n8l;lh' lJ",lru"".IFu<l~
••,i,yT.,,S";I<h H. ~l::.:,~j~~~,::rP,.. ,~..

The A Ie gunsight was utilized in both the F-94A

F-94C Front Cockpit Group (5) F-94C Front Cockpit Group (6) and F-94B.

F-94B Ejection Seat F-94B Ejection Seat

(Modified Aircraft) ~ ~

SHOULDER HARNESS F-94C Ejection Seat

INERTIA REEL

DROPPABlE tANK
(AND IOMI) HEADREST
RElEASf SWrtCH

CATAPULT SAFETY
SEAT LOWERING PIN EXTRACTOR
CYliNDER (CONNECTED BY
I ACTUATED BY CABLE TO
RAISING RIGHT __
CANOPY YOKE I-lO-~~~--SHOULDER
ARM REST)~ HARNESS
GROUND SAFETY
PIN (REMOVE
BEFORE FLIGHT)
INURPHONE ONLY
SWITCHI ---.rC

ARMREST
(NORMAL POSITION) ---Hi-tilJl

~EIGENCY HYDRAULIC
PU'-'P SWITCH _

LEVER
F-94B Control Stick
Rear Front
28
 The F-94C windscreen was a three-transparency configuration with an armored The F-94C rear cockpit was equipped with a clear plexiglas blast shield for rear
glass forward element-all of which were supported by a conventional aluminum crew protection during the emergency ejection process. This WilS mounted
frame. It was equipped with dual wipers for rain and snow removal. above the rear instrument panel and was attached with steel framing.
~ \

!'"
.~
'"~
1

The F-94C was equipped with at least two models of the same ejection seat dur- The first production F-94A1B's were completed with single piece canopies.
ing its operational career. The headrest back of an early seat is shown, along Operational difficulties with these units eventually led to the development
with some details of the forward cockpit, cockpit railing, and rear cockpit panel. of a stronger, banded unit that was later retrofitted to most aircraft.
~
ti - - -........
,;:
~ i'"
~ ~
~
§ §
~
::;; ~
~ .!!l'"

The F-94A1B nose wheel assem~/y was a conventional hydraulically steerable design with a conventional oleo strut and a two-piece drag link. The dual taxi lights were
attached to the upper fixed portion of the oleo and retracted rearward with the rest af the assembly. The nose gear well doors were single piece units
mechanically linked for actuation to notched grips that wrapped themselves around the gear strut as the gear retracted.

29
 c: i>
~ '<

~
."

f
0
3
So
"a
~

~. ~
";
~
~ "
~
~
it

~~
The nose gear of the F-94C differed in detail from that found on the F-94A1B. One of the more obvious The F-94A1B main gear assembly was similar to
changes was the use of a non-spoked wheel of lighter and somewhat stronger construction. Additionally, that found on the F·94C only in the fact that the
the support fork was lightened somewhat by resorting to a ribbed, rather than a solid design. retraction sequence remained essentially unchaged.
~
~
§;;

..
~
!<

Design of the main gear for the F-94C was dictated in part by the F-94C's thinner wing. Accordingly, the main gear wheel and tire assemblies were made thinner, and
the main gear strut and retraction mechanisms were completely redesigned. Additionally, the gear fork was routed to the inside wheel half, rather than the outside,
and the disc brake units were configured to fit on the front side of the disc. These changes dictated new gear well doors.
~ ~
~ ~
~ §
a~
,>< 2<
a
~

~ ~

The F·94C was equipped with two major airbrake assemblies. One unit, consisting of two almost flat surfaces, was mounted on either side of the fuselage centerline
just ahead of the main gear wells. The other, also consisting of two nearly flat surfaces, was split on either side of the fuselage just aft of the wing root
section trailing edge. All four units were hydraulically actuated and could be used throughout the aircraft flight envelope.

30
 The F-94A1B intake design was based on that of the proven P-80 and T-33 series The F-94C intake was a totally new design, dictated in part by the increased
aircraft. A small boundary layer bleed ramp was provided just inside the intake length and reconfiguration of the F-94C's nose. A boundary layer bleed
lip. Dump ports were located just to the rear and above the intake. gap was provided between the intake and the fuselage.
!

- _..-

I
~

The Pratt & Whitney J48-P-5 was a conventional A J48-P-5 installed without afterburner attached. The engine was accessible in the F-49C by removing the aft
centrifugal flow turbojet capable of generating portion of the fuselage at a break point just behind the wing root trailing edge. The engine could be
8,750 Ibs. th. in full afterburner. removed by unbolting the mount lugs and sliding the engine rearward on support rails.
-~--~-...

I 1\

A variable area exhaust nozzle for modulating the Powerplant maintenance was relatively easily accomplished with the F-94CIJ48 installation. Dollys were used
exhaust flow was attached to the afterburner. to support the aircraft's removable empennage section. The afterburner was then disconnected
Hydraulic rams actuated the exhaust nozzle doors. and moved. This was followed by withdrawal of the actual engine.

31
 -r
I
I

All four Pratt & Whitney J48 variants used in the F-94C were equipped with a Because of Lockheed Burbank's proximity to residential property and other
single-stage afterburner. Unlike today's refined multi-stage units, it was highly sound-sensitive areas, the company developed a series of sound suppression
inefficient and prone to hard lighting. engine run-up docks that effectively muffled the roar of operating J48's.
: W- . ~

~
i;
~
;;;-
.'
~

~dC~
The F-94C empennage served;; house the afterburner and accommodate the The F-94A1B empennage was somewhat shorter than that of the F-94C and did
drag chute compartment which was located in the large fairing just not have accommodations for a drag chute fairing aft of the rudder root section.
above the engine exhaust nozzle. The empennage shell was usually left unpainted because of afterburner heating.

a'
.g
~

~
~.

~
Ii?
~

- I'. ;r'/l ,".0

;::
~

~
a.

\:11 ... ltl'

~~ \ -
There were many variations to the stock wingtip tank configurations utilized on the F-94 series aircraft. Normally, F-94A1B center-mount tanks carried 230 gals. F-94C
tanks had a plug and thus could carry 250 gals. The tanks, which were equipped with their own navigation lights, were removable and jettisonable. The F-94 could be
flown without them.

32
 ,-

Wingtip tank connections consist of a single locking pin, a pair of bumpers, The fuel and electrical lines connected to the tank near the wing leading edge.
and several fuel and electrical lines and their connections. A fairing was Small metal strips welded to the tank indentation served as mounting brackets
then placed over the gap remaining between the tank and the wingtip. for the sheet aluminum aerodynamic fairing that covered the remaining gap.

-
I~

The prototype YF-94C, 50-955, first flew with non-standard wingtip tanks of F-94NB's were initially equipped with wingtip drop tanks of varying configuration
unknown capacity. Unlike the stock, somewhat tubular tanks found on production that were slung underneath the wing, rather than centrally attached to it
F-94C's, they were teardrop shaped and equipped with a small triangular fin. via a side slot. These ti;lnks were jettisonable.

i~
U:
---- ---'=-:;;-
i
i l:;~~~
U:
--::::=:=-:=-
~ ~

~
.~ - ...~
~

A more advanced underslung tubular wingtip tank replaced its predecessor early When long range missions were flown, the F-94C could be equipped with
in the F-94 program. This tank, in turn, was eventually succeeded by a central- pylon mounted auxiliary drop tanks carrying 230 gallons each.
mount tank that was to become standard for the entire F-94/P-801T-33 family. These tanks were jettisonable.

N"rA~ "leI.
J.FA~,.vti (PH "«rlc.., ,.
Ad/) M"lap""'d'

The auxiliary drop tanks were mounted on mid-wing pylons that were faired into Drawing illustrating an early F-94D-type design study cEi/ling for a retri;lctable,
the wing leading-edge mounted 2.75" FFAR pods and their associated rear nose-mounted inflight refueling probe and the pli;lcement of a large fuel cell
fairings. Some pylons, such as this one, angled forward; others angled aft. in the space normally occupied by the radar systems operator.

33
 F-94B - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,
1 PLASTIC NOSE 17. RADAR OPERATOR'S SEAT 33. CABIN AIR MIXING VALVE
2. RADAR ANTENNA 18. FUSELAGE FUEL TANK 34 INTERPHONE AMPLIFIER
3. RADAR MODULATOR 19. ElEVATOR CONTROl ROD 35. D·2 INVERTER
4. OXYGEN BOTTLE 20. J33-A-33 ENGINE 36. RADAR INVERTER
5. RADAR RANGE SERVO GEAR BOX 21. FUSElAGE AFT·SECTION ATTACHING POINT 37. RADAR VERTICAL GYRO
6 AMMUNITION BOXES (4) 22. AFTERBURNER 38, RADAR
7. C·1 POSITION LIGHT FLASHER 23. AN!ARC·3 RADIO ANTENNA 39. BATTERIES
8 AN! ARC·3 AND AN!ARN·6 RADIO RECEIVERS 24. AFTERBURNER TRACK 40. AILERON· ELEVATOR CONTROl ASSEMBLY
9. GUN·SIGHT 25. AFTERBURNER EYELID ACTUATOR 41. RUDDER PEDALS
10. PILOT'S RADAR INDICATOR 26. ElEVATOR TAB MOTOR 42, NOSE ALIGHTING GEAR
1 I. INSTRUMENT PANEL 27. GYROSYN COMPASS FLUX VALVE 43. FUSELAGE NOSE·SECTION ATTACHING POINT
12. PILOrs SEAT 28. AILERON BOOSTER UNIT 44. CASE EJECTION DOOR
13. AN!ARN.6 RADIO COMPASS LOOP ANTENNA 29. WING BEAMS 45 MACHINE GUNS (4)
14. RADA.R INDICATOR POWER SUPPLY 30. DIVE FLAPS 46. AIR· SPEED PITOT
15. RADAR MANUAL CONTROL 31. TURBINE AND COOlER UNIT 47. GUN·SIGHT COMPUTER
16. OPERATOR'S RADAR INDICATOR 32. AILERON TORQUE TUBE 48. GUN·SIGHT AMPLIFIER SERVO

18 19

F-94B Hughes AN/APG-33 Radar

34
 The F-94A1B was equipped with a nose armament consisting of four .50 cal. machine guns which fired through a series of four faired nose tubes mounted just under
the Hughes E-1 Fire Control System radar and its associated radome.

The .50 cal. machine gun barrels protruded slightly from each of the four nose
gun ports of the F-94A1B. Mounted just above them at the extreme end of the
nose was the radar dish antenna and its associated radome.

~~
.t
~
~
.~
1?
j
~
1'5
.. .~

_ ..:;;,,;,.,.....n WloI.·,
The ammo boxes for the four .50 cal. machine guns were mounted just ahead of NT·33A, 51-4120, on long term loan to Cornell Aeronautical University, was
the forward cockpit firewall and just behind the radar system avionics boxes. modified to incorporate a nose from an F-94B. This permitted the flight test
Loading, as can be seen in this photo, could be accomplished from ground level. facility to equip the aircraft with radar required for various research programs.

35
 A-Ie SIGHT HEAD ~
~
MOUNTING

:IA"3S8
MT-762/APG-33

AZIMUTH-ELEVATION
RANGE INDICATOR
.P-.~
~
IP-86/APG-33 AZIMUTH-ELEVATION
SERIAL I THRU 13 ONLY RANGE INDICATOR
o
IP-86A/APG-~3
SERIAL 14 AND UP

A-Ie ROCKET SETTING

The nose of the F-9.48 was designed around the Hughes E-1 Fire Control
System, its associated ANIAPG-33 radar, and the four .50 cal. machine guns
underneath. Avionics for the fire control system were mounted above th~ guns.

AMPLIFIER,
ELECTRONIC CONTROL
BLOWER HO-71!APG-33 AM-39S/APG-33
-> MOUNTING MT -766/U

nO~
.., CONTROL-
CORD CG - 456/U A-Ie AMPLIFIER A-Ie MANUAL POWER SUPPLY
(? FT 7 IN) RANGE CONTROL C- 691 IAPG- 3 3

Drawing illustrating some of the many parts involved in the Hughes E-1/APG-33 The four .50 cal. machine guns were each allocated 300 rounds of ammunition.
Fire Control System and radar found in the F-9.4A. This unit was optimized for Initial F-9.4 design studies had called for the installation of six guns,
the aiming of the four .50 cal. machine guns in an all-weather environment. but space restrictions had limited the aircraft to four.
....
~
~

,
~.
:n
,
~

~-
\ ~

I
II
I
I
f,

The F-9.4C, here seen in prototype form, incorporated a complete revised nose configurarion that was optimized for the transp;;(ation and firing of twenty-four 2.75"
FFAR's. The rockets were mounted in groups of six in longitudinally-hinged panels around the radar system avionics bay and radar antenna and radome.
An inwardly retracting snap action door was mounted in front of each panel to maintain nose aerodynamics when FFAR's were not being fired.

36
 ~
The new (left) and old nose radomes of the F-94C program. The newer radome was aerodynamically cleaner and significantly more pointed. The older, blunter nose
radome was eventually replaced by the newer on all operational F-94C's. Interior dimensions of the newer radome did not restrict radar antenna movement,
though clearances were, in some instances, significantly tighter.
c c ...._ - -.....
F-94C Rocket Firing Sequence ~c ~c
~ J:
~ ~
.~ .~

I I

FOUR SALVOS - SIX ROCKETS PER SALVO

SALVO ROCKET FIRING SEQUENCE
1 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21
2
3
3,
2,
7,
6,
11,
10,
15,
. 14,
19,
18,
23
22
~ J.
Loading of the 2.75" FFAR's in the nose panels of
.. "i
With its snap action doors retracted, the F-94C's
4 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24
the F-94C was a relatively easy task. The rockets 2.75" FFAR complement was readily visible. The
were fight enough to be manually inserted. prototype F-94C, shown, was not radar equipped.

The F-94C's nose mounted missile tubes were wrapped in electrically heated The F·94C's nose housed the ANIAPG-40 radar system and associated avionics,
insulation blankets. The forward avionics compartment, here seen with some as well as the mechanisms for actuating the rocket launch tube doors. All the
systems removed, was located in the cavity created by the missile tube panels. nose mounted equipment was accessed via the hinged rocket tube side panels.

37
 The F-94C's Hughes-manufactured AN/APG-40 radar was considered exceptionally powerful for a fighter. Targets could be tracked at ranges up to miles. The
radar dish was articulated to permit movement both in azimuth and elevation. The AN/APG-40 was integrated into the Hughes E-5 fire control system which
then gave the radar observer target range, speed, azimuth, and elevation data. Few provisions were made for target countermeasures capability.

i"
~.

'"

The Hughes E-5 fire control system was exceptionally sophisticated for its day. Almost all the equipment The twenty-four 2.75" FFAR tubes were mounted
shown fit inside the F-94C's various equipment bays. This particular aircraft was one of several Hughes inside the F-94C's four hinged nose panels. As
testbeds; note the cameras mounted on the nose, and the underslung drop tanks. can be seen, the tubes were easily accessed.

38
J
I
In order to increase the F-94C's somewhat limited firepower, a test program, initiated with a testbed F-948, led to the successful development of leading
edge mounted rocket pods. Each of the two pods carried a total of twelve 2.75" FFAR's. The rockets salvo fired through a frangible plastic nose cap
that could be easily replaced following use.

I
J~
'~--..,/
The leading edge mounted rocket pods could be easily hand loaded as they The frangible nose caps were made of a plastic material designed to
were a convenient height above ground level and the 2.75" rockets shatter under the force of the exiting rockets. The cap was held in
were not particularly heavy. place by snap pins on the pod.

A single F-948, 50-80S, was modified as a testbed for ~ podded twin-.50 cal.
machine gun system. Though doubling the F-948's firepower, it later
attained only limited use on operational aircraft.

The addition of the podded .50 cal. machine guns to the stock F-948 required only minor modification to the wing and armament system. Conveniently, the pods
created little drag while increasing the aircraft gross weight only marginally. Few difficulties were encountered during tests. Somewhat surprisingly, the system
was seen in operational use only rarely. F-94C's could also carry the pods, though their primary weapon remained the 2.75" FFAR.

39
 --- :----.
A single F-94B was modified to serve as a testbed for the wing leading edge pod 2.75" FFAR system. A special yaw-sensing probe was mounted on the nose,
and cameras were installed in small pods on the outboard wing panel leading edges and under the nose radome. The tests proved highly successful
and the system was later operationally integrated into the basic design of the F-94C.
r--------------

F-94C Major Component Assembly Drawing A typical flight suit, with lower torso g-suit in place,
was represented by this Air Force flight acceptance
team at Lockheed's Burbank facility.
·~~i777?--------------------~-....;.----,i
g>
§:

The F-94C was equipped with lift dumping spoilers on each wing. When In order to overcome the rather lengthy landing roll-out characteristic of the
actuated, they effectively destroyed wing lift, thus improving roll F-94NB series aircraft, the F-94C was equipped in production with a very
characteristics and landing roll-out distances. effective 16' diameter ribbon-type drag chute.

40
 AEROFAX, INC. is pleased to announce presently available and forthcoming MINIGRAPH aircraft
monograph titles. These high-quality authoritative booklets have been created for the serious enthusiast
and modeler,and are designed to provide textual and pictorial detail not usually found in other readily available
books of this type. Each MINIGRAPH contains over 100 photos, fold-out-type multi-view drawings, color
scheme information, systems drawings, and highly detailed and accurate text.
, MINIGRAPHS presently available (marked with an *) or due for delivery during 1986 include the following:
MINIGRAPH 1: Lockheed SR-71 (A·12/YF·12/D·21)* Revised edition
MINIGRAPH 2: McDonnell Douglas F·15A/B*
MINIGRAPH 3: Grumman F·14A/B*
MINIGRAPH 4: McDonnell F·4D*
MINIGRAPH 5: McDonnell F·101B/F*
MINIGRAPH 6: Boeing B-52G/H
MINIGRAPH 7: Grumman EA·6A/B
MINIGRAPH 8: Boeing P·26 Variants *
MINIGRAPH 9: North American A3.1/A·5 Variants
MINIGRAPH 10: Rockwell International Space Shuttle
MINIGRAPH 11: Lockheed P·3 Variants
MINIGRAPH 12: Saab .1·35 Variants
MINIGRAPH 13: McDonnell RF·4 Variants *
MINIGRAPH 14: Lockheed F·94 Startlre*
MINIGRAPH 15: Republic F·84F (Swept Wing Variants)
MINIGRAPH 16: North American P·82/F·82 Variants
MINIGRAPH 17: Dassault Mirage F1 *
MINIGRAPH 24: Rockwell International B·1A/B*
If you find the new MINIGRAPH series to your liking and would like to have your name added to our mail-
ing list, please drop us a line at P. O. Box 120127, Arlington, Texas 76012. We would like to hear from you
and would particularly appreciate comments, criticisms, and suggestions for future titles.
AEROFAX is also in need of interesting, previously unpublished photos of aircraft for use in forthcoming
MINIGRAPH titles and other AEROFAX publications. If you have such items in your files, please consider
loaning them to AEROFAX so that others may have a chance to see them, too. You will, of course, be credited
if your photo is used, and a free copy of the publication in which it is used will be sent.
AEROFAX QUARTERLY is now scheduled for release during late 1986. If you would like to have your
name added to the mailing list of those who will be receiving introductory copies and introductory subscrip-
tion rates, please write.
And don't forget the other fine AEROFAX publications, including the definitive AEROGRAPH series describ-
ing the General Dynamics F-16, the Air National Guard, the Lockheed U·2, and the Convair B-58. Forthcoming
AEROGRAPH titles due for release during 1986 include the Douglas A-3. Also look for the new DATAGRAPH
series which will be initiated with the release of DATAGRAPH 1: North American P·51 Mustangs In Latin
American Service.
AEROFAX looks forward to hearing from you ...
Thanks for your interest,
Jay Miller and
the AEROFAX, INC.
Editorial Staff

F-94C Servicing Diagram l , . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - F-94 Main Differences - - - - - - - - ,

ITEM F-94A F-94B
ENGINE )·33 ENGINE AND )·33 ENGINE AND
AFTERBURNER AFTERBURNER
BOOSTER PUMPS IN MAIN BOOSTER PUMPS IN MAIN
FUEL SYSTEM TANKS, AIR PRESSURE IN TANKS, AIR PRESSURE IN
TIP TANKS, 230 GALLON TIP TANKS, 230 GALLON
CENTERLINE TIP TANKS CENTER· LINE TIP TANKS
ZERO READER, INTERPHONE,
INTERPHONE, GLIDE SLOPE RECEIVER,
RADIO UHF COMMAND, LOCALIZER RECEIVER,
EQUIPMENT RADIO COMPASS, UHF COMMAND, RADIO
RADAR, IFF COMPASS, RADAR, IFF,
MARKER BEACON RECEIVER

FLIGHT ElEVATOR SPRING TABS, ElEVATOR SPRING TABS,

CONTROL AILERON BOOST AILERON BOOST
FORWARD SPEED BRAKES FORWARD SPEED BRAKES

.OXYGEN 0-1 OR D·2

A·14 D·l OR D·2
REGULATOR

.-
ANI APG·40 SEARCH TRACKING
GUNSIGHT A·1C A-1C AND ROCKET FIRING

.-
N·3C STANDBY GUNSIGHT
MACHINE GUNS WITH PNEU- MACHINE GUNS WITH PNEU- ROCKETS IN NOSE
ARMAMENT
MATIC GUN CHARGERS MATIC GUN CHARGERS AND WING PODS
AUTOMATIC
• i"14'"","' Wi ''',m' PILOT NO NO
WINGS AND SWEPTBACK TAIL. THIN WING
$INGlEKlINTflllUYAtvf mTANKfllLElC"" CONVENTIONAL CONVENTIONAL
alAn ~fSf~VOI~
OXYGfNSYSTfMflLLU
HYDlAUlIC",CCl»oIUl..ATOlS EMPENNAGE WITH INCREASED DIHEDRAL
EMflGfNCY HVDUUtlC WHfM lHflVOll i~J~f:~~~~tf:£CEPT~CLE HYDRAULIC
~~;~:~~ :~~TK~I:I~~~ms 1000 PSI 1500 PSI 1500 PSI
NlONTANKFILUlCA'
FUil flllH DE-ICING TANK
MAIN HYlllAUlIC SY\UM I(SUVOll
SYSTEM