Aviation Geeks unite?! Anybody else care about planes here?

[Kamen Rider Blade]

I'm interested in your idea of what the requirements were, and what mid-1950s aircraft could have met them.

The 1950's wasn't the right era to try to force a "Multi-Role" fighter.
But they did, and via brute force.

But now that we're in the age of Multi-Role fighters, you're not going back for numerous logistics & economic reasons along with the nature of air warfare changing thanks to "Stealth" being the dominant requirement.

The F-5 was never a good all-weather option, and would not stand up to one carrier trap. The F/A-18 had 20 years of advancements over the F-4, but they had to make a second try with the Super Hornet to get it a more respectable combat radius.

I guess elegance is in the eye of the beholder. For design and engineering, the Phantom wings were a very sophisticated achievement, incredibly strong with only about a 5% ratio. The tail stabilizers, of course, are a fascinating and distinctive solution.

The Phantom did everything it was created to do well, and was so much better than its contemporaries that it was eagerly snapped up for new roles. If that's not an elegant design, I'm sure any aeronautical engineer would be happy to take credit for whatever it is.

The F-20 TigerShark is what the F-5 should've been, but too little, too late.

The Super Honet as Congresses attempt to get a Multi-Role fighter by updating the F-18 platform.

For me, The F-35 family is elegance because they had to design it to meet so many damn requirements that congress set out for them to do, and they managed to do it.

 

[J.T.B.]

The 1950's wasn't the right era to try to force a "Multi-Role" fighter.
But they did, and via brute force.

No one was forcing a multi-role fighter. On the contrary, they were after a very specific single role fighter: An all-weather carrier interceptor that could climb really fast, had 250nm range, could patrol for two hours, and had the biggest radar and a load of the best AAMs available, to shoot the Soviet bombers as far away as possible before they launched a nuclear missile at the carrier group. That's the origin story. Everything else was just gravy.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

No one was forcing a multi-role fighter. On the contrary, they were after a very specific single role fighter: An all-weather carrier interceptor that could climb really fast, had 250nm range, could patrol for two hours, and had the biggest radar and a load of the best AAMs available, to shoot the Soviet bombers as far away as possible before they launched a nuclear missile at the carrier group. That's the origin story. Everything else was just gravy.

So that's how the origin story goes. Then they turned it into a "Mutli-Role" fighter that ended up doing a whole lot of other roles.

 

[J.T.B.]

So that's how the origin story goes. Then they turned it into a "Mutli-Role" fighter that ended up doing a whole lot of other roles.

But you're criticizing the F-4 as inelegant brute muscle. I'd like to know what better way you have in mind for a mid-1950s aircraft to accomplish that mission.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

But you're criticizing the F-4 as inelegant brute muscle. I'd like to know what better way you have in mind for a mid-1950s aircraft to accomplish that mission.

Keep the F-8 Crusader design and update it!

Give it a bigger & more powerful engine if possible.

The F-8 platform has had plenty of updates over it's life-time.

They could've integrated all of it for a upgraded platform.

The XF8U-3 Crusader III was on the right track, but the time table was too slow.

The F8U-3 program was cancelled with five aircraft built. Three aircraft flew during the test program, and, along with two other airframes, were transferred to NASA for atmospheric testing, as the Crusader III was capable of flying above 95% of the Earth's atmosphere. NASA pilots flying at NAS Patuxent River routinely intercepted and defeated U.S. Navy Phantom IIs in mock dogfights, until complaints from the Navy put an end to the harassment.

LOL

 

[Vger23]

I'm a novice aviation nerd. I'm mostly into millitary aircraft. Some of my favorites are:

F-14 Tomcat (heartbreaking that we'll never see one fly again)
AV-8B Harrier
A-10 Warthog
F-22 Raptor (such a shame they are a dying breed now...this may be the world's premier fighter)
A-6 Intruder
P-51 Mustang
F-4 Phantom

I'm getting a soft-spot for F/A-18 Superhornet after watching Top Gun: Maverick too many times. I know it's sort of a "jack of all trades, master of none" but it shows up well in the film.

I'm not sold on the F-35 Lightning II yet.

 

[Marc]

Concorde anyone?

This is tour of the Concorde prototype at the Imperial War Museum Duxford.

It never saw passenger service so there's still the testing equipment (well replicatas as some of original had to be removed for weight reasons when the jet was flow to the Musem).

No escape chutes, if somthing went pear shaped on the ground you threw out a rope ladder. In the air you had an escape hatch out the bottom but leaving at Mach 2 not recommended.

The videographer also has a video where he toured a TU-144 aka Concordski at Musuem in Germany. This also allow a direct comparison of the airframe with with Concorde as the location also had an Air France one. One noticiable difference is comparing the size of the turbofan engines one with the turbojet on the other.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[J.T.B.]

Keep the F-8 Crusader design and update it!

No question of keeping the F-8, they were in the fleet at the same time. Unless you can cram another engine, a ton or so more fuel and missiles, a bigger radar and an extra crew member into the Crusader frame, it can't make the spec. Not to mention the F8U hadn't even made it into squadrons when the F4H requirements went out.

 

[XCV330]

But you're criticizing the F-4 as inelegant brute muscle. I'd like to know what better way you have in mind for a mid-1950s aircraft to accomplish that mission.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

No question of keeping the F-8, they were in the fleet at the same time. Unless you can cram another engine, a ton or so more fuel and missiles, a bigger radar and an extra crew member into the Crusader frame, it can't make the spec. Not to mention the F8U hadn't even made it into squadrons when the F4H requirements went out.

The XF8U was literally designed to compete against the Phantom II.

It was just too late in terms of getting prototypes ready when the DoD made their decision.

Communications back then were far slower then they are today.

But look at the specs for the XF8U I linked above, it had everything you asked for except another engine.

It had a Bigger & more powerful engine, more fuel, more payload, etc.

 

[J.T.B.]

Great aircraft but coming aboard a carrier at 160 knots?

The XF8U was literally designed to compete against the Phantom II.

It was just too late in terms of getting prototypes ready when the DoD made their decision.

Communications back then were far slower then they are today.

But look at the specs for the XF8U I linked above, it had everything you asked for except another engine.

It had a Bigger & more powerful engine, more fuel, more payload, etc.

No GIB, either. The navy was clear that they wanted a second set of eyes for the Sparrow intercept.

 

[Marc]

Great aircraft but coming aboard a carrier at 160 knots? View attachment 34806



No GIB, either. The navy was clear that they wanted a second set of eyes for the Sparrow intercept.

I'm sure the "super stall" characterstic of the double delta wing would have made it a handful to land on a carrier

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

No GIB, either. The navy was clear that they wanted a second set of eyes for the Sparrow intercept.

Maybe Vought was too slow to get the message on the requirements or didn't follow through on making that prototype at the time.

Who knows what their engineering staff was thinking about not having the 2nd seat.

It probably takes alot more engineering time to make the 2nd seat version of a F-8.

 

[John Clark]

Nice aircraft, but I preferred the Viggen.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

Nice aircraft, but I preferred the Viggen.

Boeing / Saab are contracted to make the new T-7 Red Hawk.

It's quite the beauty in design for a "Trainer".

Hopefully it succeeds enough to become a export light fighter. like the F-5 before it.

 

[J.T.B.]

Maybe Vought was too slow to get the message on the requirements or didn't follow through on making that prototype at the time.

Who knows what their engineering staff was thinking about not having the 2nd seat.

It probably takes alot more engineering time to make the 2nd seat version of a F-8.

I believe what happened was: McDonnell was working on a twin-engine carrier attack bomber. The navy wanted a long range carrier interceptor. The navy VA guys told the VF guys, you might want to have a look at this beast McDonnell is working on. They showed interest and McDonnell was happy to commit to putting another seat and bigger radar nose on it. Meanwhile Vought was working on a next-gen, higher performing F-8. The navy had been burned by McDonnell by having to re-engine their F-3's, so to cover their asses they had fly-off between the YF4H and XF8U. But the Phantom did have the inside track.

And good thing too, the Crusader III would not have been able to expand into the fighter-bomber role the Phantom did so well and wouldn't have been as much interest to the Air Force, either.

 

[Kamen Rider Blade]

But the Phantom did have the inside track.

Ah favoritism

 

[J.T.B.]

Ah favoritism

In a way, maybe, but nobody else was offering what they wanted, either.

 

[publiusr]

I wish we could have seen the Mach 3 Phantom:
https://www.reddit.com/r/WeirdWings/comments/bxi55b/general_dynamics_rf4x_the_mach_3_phantom_that/

I think that was a Carrol Shelby design

Dragon drones
https://www.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsi...rq/part_of_the_drone_show_at_the_dragon_boat/

Multi-drone
https://techxplore.com/news/2023-06-bioinspired-robot-flies.html
https://techxplore.com/news/2023-06-energy-consumption-flapping-wing-flying-robots.html

Boundary layers
https://phys.org/news/2023-08-sudden-generation-boundary-layer.html
"Not only were we able to identify a new internal boundary layer, but we were able to systematically track its height so we can understand its growth rate. We also noticed that it only formed if our pressure grading, our acceleration, was sufficiently strong. There was a threshold under which we didn't see this phenomenon occurring, something that wasn't known before," said AE Professor Theresa Saxton-Fox.

For surfaces?
https://phys.org/news/2023-07-scientists-approach-energy-4d.html

 

[XCV330]

Boeing / Saab are contracted to make the new T-7 Red Hawk.

It's quite the beauty in design for a "Trainer".

Hopefully it succeeds enough to become a export light fighter. like the F-5 before it.

I could see that happening. It's a rare success story for Boeing lately, and depended on the SAAB partnership. Amazingly quick development time.

I wonder if that's one reason why DoD backed away from the Super Tuacano program. The Red Hawk will give USAF the light attack craft it needs, and for longer loiter/counter insurgency work they now have the tractor I mean the OA-1K