CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Cornfield Bomber

accident involving a F-106 of the U.S. Air Force in 1970

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 16, 2026
Entity authorityQ5171725
Source-derived summary

The "Cornfield Bomber" is the nickname given to a Convair F-106 Delta Dart of the United States Air Force's 71st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron which made an unpiloted landing in a farmer's field in Montana in 1970. Suffering only minor damage after the pilot had ejected from the aircraft during a training mission gone awry, the aircraft was recovered, repaired, and returned to service. It is currently on display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base near Dayton, Ohio.

History

The aircraft was manufactured by Convair in 1958 and given the tail number 58-0787. It served with the 71st Fighter-Interceptor Squadron based at Malmstrom Air Force Base adjacent to Great Falls, Montana. During a routine training flight conducting aerial combat maneuvers on February 2, 1970, the aircraft entered a flat spin. The pilot, First Lieutenant Gary Foust, deployed the aircraft's drag chute as a last resort while attempting to recover. When it failed, Foust ejected at an altitude of 15,000 feet (4,600 m).

The reduction in weight and change in center of gravity caused by the removal of the pilot, coupled with the blast force of the ejection seat pushing the nose of the aircraft down, which had been trimmed by Foust for takeoff and idle throttle, caused the aircraft to recover from the spin. The previously set trim then helped stabilize the attitude of the plane after the initial nose down.

Editorial summary

“Cornfield Bomber” enters the record as accident involving a F-106 of the U.S. Air Force in 1970. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Cornfield, Bomber and accident can confirm, complicate or overturn.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1970, 1958—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its strongest next move is a source search built around Cornfield, Bomber and accident.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

“Cornfield Bomber” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Cornfield, Bomber and accident provides the most credible route into that argument.

Evidence profile

Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 16, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q5171725. Authority coordinates are 48.178, -110.115. 1 of 1 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1970 and 1958.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Cornfield Bomber”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Cornfield Bomber primary sources, Cornfield Bomber archive and Cornfield research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cornfield Bomber”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Cornfield Bomber” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.