|
Description
| Notes: A-6E modified with advanced radar and armament system along with higher thrust engines and increased landing weight. | ||
| Manufacturer: | Grumman | |
| Base model: | A-6 | |
| Designation: | A-6 | |
| Version: | F | |
| Nickname: | Intruder II | |
| Designation System: | U.S. Tri-Service | |
| Designation Period: | 1962-Present | |
| Basic role: | Attack | |
| Crew: | Pilot & Bombardier-Navigator | |
| See Also: | ||
Specifications
| Length: | 54' 9" | 16.6 m | |
| Height: | 16' 2" | 4.9 m | |
| Wingspan: | 53' 0" | 16.1 m | |
| Wingarea: | 529.0 sq ft | 49.1 sq m | |
| Empty Weight: | 26,746 lb | 12,129 kg | |
| Max Weight: | 60,400 lb | 27,392 kg | |
Propulsion
| No. of Engines: | 2 | ||
| Powerplant: | General Electric F404-GE-400D | ||
| Thrust (each): | 10,800 lb | 4,897 kg | |
Performance
Known serial numbers
Examples of this type may be found at
| Museum | City | State |
| Cradle of Aviation Museum | Garden City | New York |
| Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum | New York | New York |
A-6F on display
Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum |
Recent comments by our visitors
| Jimmy Petruzzelli Central Islip, NY | I worked out in Grumman Calverton,N.Y., in the Security Dept. And saw the A 6F test fly many times and knew the Navy test pilots that flew it in the late 80's. It was a great all weather jet. It's shame the program ended. It was a great time. 02/29/2008 @ 06:43 [ref: 19812] |
| Adam Hodge Marietta, GA | (Not sure exactly what A-6 Variation Section to put this one in)
Hey Guys, I'm a big Intruder fan (Didn't get to see it fly much as was only seven when VA-75, The Last Intruder Sqn, Flew into the history books) and I'm trying to start up a collection of original VA and VMA Patches (Squadron,Shoulder,Decomm, Anything) and was wondering if anyone had anything they could offer? I have very,very little as far as Intruder Squadron Patches go and anything anyone could help me with, I'd appreciate it tons (Will even shoot a little $$ over if need be). I'm trying to do it as a keepsake along with Sluff squadrons. If anyone can assist me, Please email me at HODGETCA@aol.com Thanks So Much in Advance and Fly Navy Always! 02/03/2008 @ 03:14 [ref: 19536] |
| Mac , WA | I worked on them bad boy's for 3 years, I loved it! The A-6F would have been KICK BUTT jet. Had an opportunity to go back, but got stuck working I-Level Maintenance. I'll give up working in an A/C Shop to work on that ALL WEATHER ATTACK in any weather any day. VA-165 RULES!!!
Please stop bad mouthing them F/A-18's, I work for Boeing. Grumman A-6 and F-14 still #1. 07/06/2007 @ 16:52 [ref: 17028] |
| Steve Graham Raleigh, NC | When I served in the USN, our squadron, VA-176 flew A-6A's. Yep, A models. When I got out of the Navy in '73, the C models were beginning to hit the fleet and tales of how great the E models would be were common. I hated to see the Intruder replaced by an inferior aircraft. The Hornet simply can't carry the ordnance that the A-6 could. I served aboard USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVA-42) along with our Intruders. It was a fantastic aircraft. 11/25/2006 @ 13:49 [ref: 14843] |
| ralph maccio Adelaide, OTH | Seems like such a waste. I mean I guess there is some validity in saying that using a multirole plane is more ecconomical but having a "jack of all trades" means its a master of none. Would have been good to see a re-engined, re-winged intruder...
And for the regimental record, flight of the intruder sucked. Even if it did have Willem Dafoe. :) 03/03/2006 @ 21:24 [ref: 12694] |
| Ed Tempe, AZ | Remembering so well all the aircraft that Grumman produced. The lunar module and it's command performance on Apollo 13! Nothing ever could top the great machines Grumman made. 20 great years working for them on the A-6, E2C, F-14, EF111, etc. Even worked on the space shuttle wing assembly. Great time in my life! 03/02/2005 @ 21:43 [ref: 9594] |
| Jon Bryan various, NH | I agree with Joe. the A-6F and the Super Tomcat would of been awesome as a team, just as the earlier models were. We still find the the hornets (all models) still need to carry external fuel tanks. When they made the super hornet they also superfied the original problems. Too bad politics interfer with the military. 08/19/2002 @ 00:59 [ref: 5507] |
| tony stubblefield snohomish wa, WA | the a-6f wasn't the last model of the a-6 indruder . i herd on a website it was the a-6g for the marines, navy and the air force .and the a-6 is such a hot ataack aircraft. all of you guys should see 'flight of intuders'. 11/05/2001 @ 15:53 [ref: 3566] |
| Mike , NJ | The A-6F was sacrificed in hopes of procuring the A-12,
a fighter that was doomed from the start by its mutually contradictory design objectives and impossible timescale. Perhaps it was only right to that a plane which was designed before the application of the area-rule to transonic aerodynamics should be put aside as a long term production item. Keep in mind that even the Intruder's contemporary, the Buccaneer Mk2, was altogether superior in the low-level regime and had a longer range to boot! The subsequent failure of an A-FX, or naval ATF to materialize meant that the Super Hornet was chosen by default. Single role interdictors have been out of vogue since the 1960's, largely because MANPADS have made low-level penetration too dangerous. An air superiority fighter is just the thing for the modern, medium altitude groud attack environment, thus the death of the Intruder. 09/09/2001 @ 14:00 [ref: 3148] |
| Joe , OH | The A-6F Intruder II/F-14D Super Tomcat Combo would have been better overall then more expensive F/A-18E/F Super Hornet. By not selecting these two great aircraft, the Navy's carrier force is now less flexable and must be closer to the enemy cost to strike targets inland. The F/A-18E/F simply can't carry the same ammount of weapons of the same distances as the A-6F. 01/28/2001 @ 02:01 [ref: 1483] |
Recent photos uploaded by our visitors
