# Best Jet Fighter 1947 -1957



## pbfoot (Oct 3, 2011)

I'm trying to make a fair poll in relation to era and type of aircraft and decided 47-57 ( in service)with no all weather interceptors as that was a different breed, I hope I didn`t miss anything


----------



## Rogi (Oct 3, 2011)

I'm not that into this type of stuff but I'd just like to point out, the Avro Arrow, even if she wasn't in service she deserves to be on that list! Come on your Canadian you should make a small exception for such a awesome aircraft  please!


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 3, 2011)

Rogi said:


> I'm not that into this type of stuff but I'd just like to point out, the Avro Arrow, even if she wasn't in service she deserves to be on that list! Come on your Canadian you should make a small exception for such a awesome aircraft  please!


it never was in service and its would of, could of, should of 
it was also an interceptor


----------



## Rogi (Oct 3, 2011)

Alright then my vote goes for the mig-15


----------



## Lighthunmust (Oct 4, 2011)

What the #%[email protected]! Why isn't the @%$*$ Folland Gnat on the [email protected]$* poll? Joe will be so #@$%[email protected] disappointed! Other than that major #$%@^ - $%, you have a good idea here Pbfoot. I promise not to "Sabre Dance" with Joe here, even though we are such a cute couple on the dance floor.


----------



## parsifal (Oct 4, 2011)

I would argue that the English Electric/BAC Lightning should be in this Poll. Specification issued 1949, first flight 1954, service delivery 1957. Designed as a fighter, had limited, but mostly not, all weather capability. That would be where my vote would go out of this gaggle


----------



## Lucky13 (Oct 4, 2011)

If I remember correctly, our (Sweden) SAAB J 32 went in service in 58....all weather and nightfighter with 100+ built, could be wrong though.....


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

I used two different books to compile this list and the in service date they provided, I also chose the in service date to include 57 and did not include all weather interceptors as it was a different breed .The lightning entered service according to my limited resources in 59 and the Lansen in 55 and the Gnat in 59 that may be the next poll


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

Lighthunmust said:


> What the #%[email protected]! Why isn't the @%$*$ Folland Gnat on the [email protected]$* poll? Joe will be so #@$%[email protected] disappointed! Other than that major #$%@^ - $%, you have a good idea here Pbfoot. I promise not to "Sabre Dance" with Joe here, even though we are such a cute couple on the dance floor.


That just got a permanent dunce cap. We warned you your time was short. Next time pull your dictionary out of your butt...

OK folks back to work...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

F-100. The Hunter is a good second. Both were multi-role capable and were able to hold their own in the air. Should the MiG-19 been there?


----------



## Messy1 (Oct 4, 2011)

What about the F102 Delta Dagger? Should it be on this list as well? Served into the mid 70's.
Also forgot about the F106 Delta dart too.


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

FLYBOYJ said:


> F-100. The Hunter is a good second. Both were multi-role capable and were able to hold their own in the air. Should the MiG-19 been there?


I'm wrong on that the Mig 19 should be included .I also opted for Grumman Tiger with a 2nd place for the Sabre or Mig 17


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

Messy1 said:


> What about the F102 Delta Dagger? Should it be on this list as well? Served into the mid 70's.
> Also forgot about the F106 Delta dart too.


Both are All weather interceptors which was a very different class of fighter at that point in time besides the 106 did not enter service until later. 1947-57 and in service . If I was to include AW Interceptors the list woulbe very lengthy . Meteor, F89,F94,F102, Cf100 to name a few. Most interceptors were a 2 man crew because the AI radar


----------



## tyrodtom (Oct 4, 2011)

The F-101 deserves to be on there too, it makes the timeline, barely. Thou it was never used as a fighter, it was origionally designed as a long range escort fighter.
Maybe the F-102 also, makes the timeline, but was designed as a interceptor, but was used as a interceptor in Vietnam, but also saw some use in the fighter role over the Ho-Chi Minh trail.


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> The F-101 deserves to be on there too, it makes the timeline, barely. Thou it was never used as a fighter, it was origionally designed as a long range escort fighter.
> Maybe the F-102 also, makes the timeline, but was designed as a interceptor, but was used as a interceptor in Vietnam, but also saw some use in the fighter role over the Ho-Chi Minh trail.


It was an all wethaer interceptor, like the F86d ,Yak 25,


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

Now I would have to go with the MiG-19. The PAF made good use out of them and loved the Martin Baker seats with Sidewinders.


----------



## woljags (Oct 4, 2011)

what about adding a Hawker Sea Fury to your list,they were quick enough to shoot down Mig 15's


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

woljags said:


> what about adding a Hawker Sea Fury to your list,they were quick enough to shoot down Mig 15's



"Best *Jet* Fighter 1947 -1957."


----------



## Messy1 (Oct 4, 2011)

I see where I was wrong. F100 is my choice off of the list available.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 4, 2011)

Rogi said:


> I'm not that into this type of stuff but I'd just like to point out, the Avro Arrow, even if she wasn't in service she deserves to be on that list! Come on your Canadian you should make a small exception for such a awesome aircraft  please!



If it was never in service, how can it be the best?

Seriously...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

Rogi said:


> I'm not that into this type of stuff but I'd just like to point out, the Avro Arrow, even if she wasn't in service she deserves to be on that list! Come on your Canadian you should make a small exception for such a awesome aircraft  please!





DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> If it was never in service, how can it be the best?
> 
> Seriously...



Yep!!!!

Not to go off topic here but "if" the Arrow entered service it "would have" been a tremendous high altitude interceptor and may have had the capability to perform a strike role with modification. As a dogfighter it would have been a pig especially in close quarters.

No nationalistic bias, no conspiracy theories, just the plain truth...

Back to work!


----------



## fastmongrel (Oct 4, 2011)

I went for the F 86 because all round it was the best of its generation. If I could have had a 2nd vote it would be the Mig17 because it fixed a lot of the problems of the Mig 15 and gave the US a nasty shock in the early years of Vietnam and was still a useful fighter for 3rd world countries well into the 80s .


----------



## The Basket (Oct 4, 2011)

Astonished anyone could vote F-100 best fighter....really?

Would go for the MiG-17 myself. Was the F-8 Crusader operational in the 50s? If it was then it wins.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

The Basket said:


> Astonished anyone could vote F-100 best fighter....really?


Why? It served well even though it did have a high attricion rate. Could carry lots of bombs and was easy to maintain (I actually worked around one for a short spell). The C models had no flaps and landed fast.


----------



## The Basket (Oct 4, 2011)

The Crusader can be included...huzzah. F-100? It said best jet fighter...and the Hun would be up against it versus a MiG.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

The Basket said:


> The Crusader can be included...huzzah. F-100? It said best jet fighter...and the Hun would be up against it versus a MiG.


I think a Hun shot down a MiG-17 early Vietnam. I'll have to check sources. Include the F-8 and it takes it.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 4, 2011)

From Wiki...
_
"On 4 April 1965, as escorts protecting F-105s attacking the Thanh Hoa Bridge, F-100 Super Sabres fought the USAF's first air-to-air jet combat duel in the Vietnam War, in which an F-100 piloted by Capt Donald W. Kilgus shot down a North Vietnamese Air Force MiG-17, using cannon fire, while another fired Sidewinder missiles. The surviving North Vietnamese pilot confirmed three of the MiG-17s had been shot down. *Although recorded by the US Air Force as a probable kill, this represented the first aerial victory by the US Air Force in Vietnam."_

*Toperczer, Dr. Istvan, Air War Over North Viet Nam; The Vietnamese People's Air Force 1949-1977, Squadron/Signal Publications, 1998


----------



## drgondog (Oct 4, 2011)

F-8 first flew in 55 and deployed with the fleet operationally in 57. It certainly gets my vote with the MiG-19 probably second.


----------



## Ratsel (Oct 4, 2011)

F-104 Starfighter.


----------



## woljags (Oct 4, 2011)

sorry flyboyj i read the poll header not the topic header call it a senior moment


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

Ok so I missed 2 just change the poll to mid 57 and all is good. 
If I wanted to really finesse this poll we could bet into the various marks and variations . I heard that the F100's didn't really out perform the Sabre as a dogfighter and it was somewhat of a wash. Mind you the F86 guys used to wait until they were light on fuel to tackle the F100


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 4, 2011)

Ratsel said:


> F-104 Starfighter.


when did it go in service


----------



## Ratsel (Oct 4, 2011)

Feb/58, first flown in 1951. So it meets the criteria.


----------



## tyrodtom (Oct 4, 2011)

F-104 first flew in 1954, it wasn't even a proposal till 52. I understand it has to go into service 1957 or earlier.


----------



## Ratsel (Oct 4, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> I'm trying to make a fair poll in relation to era and type of aircraft and decided 47-57 ( *in service*)with no all weather interceptors as that was a different breed, I hope I didn`t miss anything


You are correct. It dosn't meet the criteria. But for any a/c in service or not, I still choose the F-104 Starfighter.

Kindest Regards.


----------



## Glider (Oct 6, 2011)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Now I would have to go with the MiG-19. The PAF made good use out of them and loved the Martin Baker seats with Sidewinders.



I have this picture in my mind of a pilot flying through the air on his MB seat with a couple of Sidwinders attached.

And I agree with this choice a Mig 19 with these enhancements are a better match than any of the others on the list.


----------



## Lucky13 (Oct 6, 2011)

Looking at these, I think that SAAB 29 Tunnan, would fit in as well....


----------



## razor1uk (Oct 6, 2011)

Supermarine Swift or Attacker to be added anyone? 'fleet' based fighter(s). 

As Fighters they were multiple (generaly quad+) hmg/cannon armed as primary with unguided rockets, bombs naval munitions etc as secondary weapons afaiu; but naval 'fleet' fighters are normally multi-role, doulbling as interceptors/bombers/recon too but without either as large a fuel load /or general class leading/top10 max acceleration of true interceptors..


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 6, 2011)

Lucky13 said:


> Looking at these, I think that SAAB 29 Tunnan, would fit in as well....


Great aircraft - used in the Congo Uprising, I did a modle of one years ago in UN markings.


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 6, 2011)

razor1uk said:


> Supermarine Attacker to be added anyone? 'fleet' based fighter


anyone for Cougar, Panther,J29, Attacker,Demon,Ouragan.Skyknight,Phantom,Mig9,Fury,Cutlass,Yak23 , now lets move to interceptors


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 6, 2011)

pbfoot said:


> anyone for Cougar, Panther,J29, Attacker,Demon,Ouragan.Skyknight,Phantom,Mig9,Fury,Cutlass,Yak23 , now lets move to interceptors


Yep!


----------



## razor1uk (Oct 6, 2011)

Yep too, if 8) 

Although I think the early EE/BAC Lightnings without the belly gun pack, might not be seen as just 'fighters' which tend to have to lead their nose over their targets path/trajectory to hit with cannons.

An British interpreted of some slanting music inspired weapon angles, has that the earlier models had their nose cockipt shoulders flanking cannons are fixed, mounted at above borsight, around 11.5 or 15 degrees iirc up/skyward from horizontal to help shoot 50's Soviet heavy bombers at higher altitudes. 
Matching that to firing cannon ballistics aerodynamic variations between muzzle locations, convergences excetera for a long range 'howitzer' styled arcing shot.
Minimising exposure to enemy tail gunner; that due to UK defence opinions of the day, we'd lost the initative if the enemy bomber needed being intecepted with Ligntnings, which could be playing catch up, why waist time trying to get to a near equal altitude before aiming a straight tail on shot, shot from below gives more possible impact area...

In air to ground training in the older models required sometimes upto a further 24 deg nose down to keep the target 'sighted' and hit it on the gun range - diving further at the terrain below does encourage spending less time spent aiming but also better accuracy or risk becoming a plough.

Those with the missle packs and later on belly weapon packs were more 'fighterable'; the equipment of the belly/love'handles gunpack moved the guns closer to aero/flying attitude bore sight angle, for easier aiming at the ground at lower alts' against other fighters
Also later upgrades to avionics and inclusion of missile system related avionics and design improvements/changes deleted the shoulder cannons; using the empty spaces for (each) weapon its ammo, for installing some of those componants and other systems.


----------



## Glider (Oct 6, 2011)

razor1uk said:


> Supermarine Swift or Attacker to be added anyone? 'fleet' based fighter(s).
> 
> As Fighters they were multiple (generaly quad+) hmg/cannon armed as primary with unguided rockets, bombs naval munitions etc as secondary weapons afaiu; but naval 'fleet' fighters are normally multi-role, doulbling as interceptors/bombers/recon too but without either as large a fuel load /or general class leading/top10 max acceleration of true interceptors..



The attacker was replaced as quickly as possible and the Swift was clearly outshone by the Hunter, I don't think there worth adding to the list.


----------



## renrich (Oct 8, 2011)

If the F8U is eligible it takes the cake.


----------



## N4521U (Oct 9, 2011)

Skyray..............
It's a silly vote, you can discount it if you like.
I always thought it looked like a big styrofoam plane....

Wasn't the F-100 a pickup truck????


----------



## Lucky13 (Oct 10, 2011)

The Cutlass was a bit of a failure, right......could anything have been done to make it a halfdecent jet?


----------



## Glider (Oct 10, 2011)

A redesign maybe?


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 10, 2011)

as a dogfighter I still think the F86 ruled , it was proven over and over again in all NATO gunnery meets and the simple fact they were the target of all various other types in the skies over Europe during this period


----------



## razor1uk (Oct 10, 2011)

Lucky13 said:


> The Cutlass was a bit of a failure, right......could anything have been done to make it a halfdecent jet?



I think this design appeared maybe 5 - 10 years early for its Westinghouse engines, which I believe was amongst its biggest flaws - leaving it relatively underpowered for the parasitic surface drag of its design layout.
Rattleing my brain box about, otherwise it was supposedly well liked by its pilots for its ride and responsiveness - apart from its powerplant(s) related limitations the 'plumbers nightmare' of hydraulic pipework within (I think it was one of the 1st USN planes with hydrualicly boosted controls). 
If it were possible to rebuild one with say engines from the mid 60's of a similar diameter size, it'd probably go as it was originally intended.


----------



## Glider (Oct 10, 2011)

My understanding was that the engines were but part of the problem. The Hydraulics were a major factor and the weakness of the nose landing gear didn't do it any favours. Its crash record was very poor alost dreadfull and it killed a number of pilots in a very short time. Its ability to take part in air to air combat must be questioned as the Blue Angels deemed it to be unsuitable for demonstration flying.


----------



## oldcrowcv63 (Jan 21, 2012)

The Cutlass had some interesting nicknames: Flying toaster (the GE engines were said to put out less heat than the manufacturers toasters), Ensign Killer, Gutless Cutlass. 

In Contrast the Ford (F4D) Skyray had notable climb performance and level flight speed but was apparently ill suited to multirole development after its introduction, despite the promise of its updated F5D intercepter development which apparently just lost out to the Vought F-8. F5D first flew in 1956. beautiful airplane.


----------

