I agree Guppy, I too think that the 106 and the 102 somewhat as well are overlooked a little, but were superb interceptors that even by today's standards so far as climb/cruise/range are pretty decent.
I'm very interested in the Navy's new program for an F18 replacement. There are so many camps with interesting opinions. I kind of like the one that says throw the stealth/Low Observe stuff down the ladder a bit, still have a low RCS, but nothing like the very expensive and difficult to maintain current stuff and coatings and whatnot. This camp wants a high performing, very long range interceptor type, that will rely on a powerful AESA radar for detecting and EW vs airborne threats, as well as very effective, fast, and long range a2a missiles and rely on these things instead of being less detectable. I've read stuff that they want a 1.6 or higher super cruise capability, range greater than what the F14D had (which was fantastic already compared to any Hornet variant), and the ability to carry 10 AAM split between internal and external rails.
Thanks for all the info Puma, it's great to hear it first hand from a 106 driver. I figured the 2nd stick was a sensor control. Did you ever train for using the Genie vs a potential ground or sea based threat? I figured such a fast missile would give you a bit more stand off capability over a B61 vs say a fleet of ships or exposed infantry/light armor in a pinch. I understand it's far outside of what the F106 was tasked and designed for, just interested if it was ever an option. Also, after the refit/design in the early 70s that added the M61, did you train a lot with it in a2a combat? It's interesting that a fighter with such a big stick with the Genie would also have the gun (not that I'd be complaining or critical, it just seems cross purpose a little, an interceptor made to hit formations with an area affect weapon, having a precise short range pewpewpew as well).
