Kernel Crittenden
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
If you're going to put John Boyd and his ilk on a pedestal, it's probably your wisest move.
What is your all time favorite military fighter jet?
- Thread starter mojave30cal
- Start date
If you're going to put John Boyd and his ilk on a pedestal, it's probably your wisest move.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Well, zzzippper, you obviously have more experience than I do with these aircraft. So, if you say one is better than another, it must be true.
However, this is a little over the top:
Now, those values are just what I found on the internet and we know how trustworthy that is. So, if you say it cost more, I believe you, but that's no reason to tell me I'm on drugs. It costs nothing to discuss this without resorting to insults.
However, this is a little over the top:
I wasn't part of the acquisition team for either of these, but I can read. The cost I found for a F-14 was about $38M. I found a price for the F-18 of $57M. I'm no rocket scientist, but 57>38 last time I checked.
Now, those values are just what I found on the internet and we know how trustworthy that is. So, if you say it cost more, I believe you, but that's no reason to tell me I'm on drugs. It costs nothing to discuss this without resorting to insults.
Cpo1944
Member
My wife and I were watching a show on Naval avaition and a beautiful aircraft was shown, and we both remarked how pretty and way before it`s time it was . I googled it and found it was a Douglas Sky-Ray. It only served for a few years in the early 1950`s . Google it and see what an amazingly neat little bird it was.
olcop
Member
Favorite Aircraft
F-8-U Crusader, a unique and wicked looking plane,it had an wing that could be raised and lowered to change the angle of attack.
olcop
F-8-U Crusader, a unique and wicked looking plane,it had an wing that could be raised and lowered to change the angle of attack.
olcop
M E Morrison
Member
IIRC, the Air Force did use/consider it for airfield defense. It could be airborne & up to altitude very quickly, much quicker than other aircraft thus having a shorter scramble time.
A-10, second choice B-52
M E Morrison
Member
Double-O-Dave
US Veteran
If I recall correctly, BG Chuck Yeager was involved with the F-5 (later became the F-20 Tigershark).
Regards,
Dave
Rastoff
US Veteran
He may have been, but his input was negligible.
Correct, he was hired as a public relations spokesman and flew the airplane a few times but had no input to the design.
Kernel Crittenden
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
That was was a really cool airplane. Today little known, in 1953 the Douglas F4D Skyray held the absolute speed record of 752 mph, making it the first Navy plane that could exceed the speed of sound in level flight. In it's day it held a number of time-to-height records including from a standing start flying to 49,221 ft in 2 minutes and 36 seconds. Add to this an incredible 55,000 ft altitude capability, 5,000 ft higher than a F/A-18 of today.
X-ray of a Skyray. This had to be one of the last American planes built with guns in the wings.
Skyray production line in El Segundo, CA, c. 1956. This picture, I think, makes them look futuristic, like Star Wars X-Wing fighters.
The Skyray used the Pratt-Whittney J57 turbojet engine. The same engine used in the North American F-100 Super Sabre, Vought F-8 Crusader, and McDonnell F-101 Voodoo. A non-afterburn version of the J57 was used to power the Boeing B-52 Stratofortress. Suffice to say, for it's time, it had a really good engine.
The Skyray had an advanced Westinghouse APQ-50 (Aero 13) modular fire control radar system, the same radar used in early F-4 Phantoms. The Aero 13 lead to a family of "plug-in" open architecture radars, upgraded and improved over the decades, culminating in the AN/APQ-120. Direct decedents of which are still in use with the US Navy and other air forces to this day.
Early Westinghouse Aero 13. Note the vacuum tubes.
There were three flaws that caused the Skyray to be withdrawn after only about 8 years in fleet service. One, it was built with no provisions for aerial refueling. In 1947 Douglas didn't anticipated how critical this feature would be. Two, it had a reputation as being difficult to fly. The plane was naturally unstable, which gave it great maneuverability, but it had too many "watch outs" and "don't go theres" in it's flight envelope. It was tiring to fly and required constant inputs from the pilot. Three, it was a dedicated interceptor and the Navy was moving to multi-role aircraft. Though it had six hard-points, with Vietnam on the horizon, the Navy elected to replace it with newer designs that were better adapted to multi-role uses.
Last edited:
Texas Star
US Veteran
I built a model of that Skyray. I remember it well.
jtcarm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,422
- Reaction score
- 4,317
jtcarm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,422
- Reaction score
- 4,317
And a Vought F4u (Corsair) took down a MIG15 in Korea.
Big Cholla
Member
Kernel: My compliments;........ for an Army guy, you sure do know your AF airplanes and history. Also, my profuse thanks for posting the link to Mr. Marshall L. Michel's doctoral thesis. I read every word of it and was both impressed and horrified at the goings on within the USAF's upper ranks. I have read extensively of the infighting between the upper ranks of our Navy and our Army during the WW II and then the destructive competition between the Army and Navy in the Pacific Theater. Given the namby-pamby workings of our Congress vs. Executive Branch and vice versa, I am surprised that the USA has prevailed in any armed conflict that it has been involved. ................
Kernel Crittenden
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
Thanks. I grew up as an Air Force brat. I've been interested in airplanes, in more than superficial ways, from a very early age. I encourage everyone on this tread to follow that link to Michel's doctoral thesis. It's an eye opener, and you don't have to buy anything from Amazon. It's totally free!
Marshall L Michel III is an impressive guy that REALLY knows what he's talking about. He's a graduate of Georgetown University with a BA in English. Has an MA in International Relations from Catholic University, and a PhD from Auburn University. Most recently he's been teaching as a Visiting Fellow at MIT in the National Security Studies Program.
This is a serious guy, and if that wasn't enough, previously Marshall was a career Air Force pilot flying the F-15 and F-4. He flew 321 combat missions during the Vietnam War. He later served as the American Air Attaché at the US Embassy in Tel Aviv.
But there are some things he's never done. He never testified before congress in order to support corrupt politicians wanting to cut the defense budget during the most critical periods of the Cold War. He's never written a self aggrandizing book claiming to be the greatest jet pilot and tactician that ever lived. He's never taken credit for things he's never done. He's never been quoted by editorial writers at the New York Times and Washington Post when they unfairly criticize the Air Force's weapon systems and purchasing practices. He's never done any of that stuff.
Last edited:
jtcarm
Member
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2011
- Messages
- 4,422
- Reaction score
- 4,317
As usual, I'll be the kid who targets the hornet's nest with his slingshot:
The A10, A4, et all are really cool, but that A means "Attack".
Pieces of trivia:
The names we know Soviet aircraft by such as Foxbat, Flanker, Fishbed (a somewhat disrespectful title for the highly-successful MiG-21) were assigned by NATO. I don't think the Soviets ever gave them official names.
The F-111 was never officially christened, thus the uninspiring name "Aardvark", probably thanks to it's awkward looking nose. From what I've read, pilots were none to fond of it, which may also have contributed to the not so flattering name.
The A10, A4, et all are really cool, but that A means "Attack".
Pieces of trivia:
The names we know Soviet aircraft by such as Foxbat, Flanker, Fishbed (a somewhat disrespectful title for the highly-successful MiG-21) were assigned by NATO. I don't think the Soviets ever gave them official names.
The F-111 was never officially christened, thus the uninspiring name "Aardvark", probably thanks to it's awkward looking nose. From what I've read, pilots were none to fond of it, which may also have contributed to the not so flattering name.
M E Morrison
Member
Kernel Crittenden
US Veteran, Absent Comrade
The F-111 just wanted to be first in the phone book. Any competitive advantage, however small....
Bob R
US Veteran
For you guys who like the F/A18 here is about 5 minutes of video that is not too bad.
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfOD2y_AD_w[/ame]
bob
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfOD2y_AD_w[/ame]
bob
Similar threads
