# North American FJ Fury



## swampyankee (Apr 9, 2017)

The FJ Fury was a close sibling to the F-86 Saber. Given that this was early in the development of jet aircraft, and the handling of swept wing aircraft at low speeds was still being learned about, how well did the FJs operate from carriers?


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 10, 2017)

Hard to say. Of the over 1100 Furies built only 31 had the straight wing and were powered by J-35 engines. 4000lbs thrust
The FJ-2 had a swept wing and had the J-47 engine. 6000lb thrust
The FJ-3 had the Wright J-65 engine (Bristol Sapphire ) 7,650-7800lbs thrust (and the largest number built,732)
The FJ-4 had the Wright J-65-16 engine 7700lbs thrust and a massive increase in internal fuel.






FJ-1






FJ-4
Fatter fuselage than most F-86s helped hold more fuel.


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 10, 2017)

A drawing





According to Wiki the FJ-2 was not satisfactory for carrier use but the FJ-3 was.

see: North American FJ-2/-3 Fury - Wikipedia

The FJ-4 got a whole new wing unrelated to to the earlier FJ wings or any F-86 wing with an additional 50 sq ft of wing area.


----------



## swampyankee (Apr 10, 2017)

Shortround6 said:


> A drawing
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm not so much asking about the FJ-1, which was certainly not much more than one of the Navy's early-generation jets, but thank you. The FJ series doesn't seem to be as well known as the other USN fighters of the era, such as the F9F. I was wondering if part of the reason was that it wasn't well-liked by the Navy's carrier aiators.


----------



## Shortround6 (Apr 10, 2017)

I think part of the lack of "stardom" was that it actually belonged to a later era than the Grumman F9F Panther or F9F Cougar.
Between the landing gear and the Wing the FJ-2 was never really cleared for carrier use and in any case it dribbled into service (with Marine squadrons) after the Korean war was over. Only 7 production examples being delivered by the time of the cease fire. 
The FJ-3 had at least two if not 3 different wing setups and in any case didn't show up on carriers until late 1955/early 1956.
The FJ-4 only had 17 planes completed in 1955, last FJ-4B was delivered in May of 1958. 
Please note that 1950s peace time training added considerable delay to the time from first production examples being built to squadron carrier deployment compared to WW II or Korean war time tables.


----------



## swampyankee (Apr 10, 2017)

Thank you. Since I agree with the popular opinion that the F-86 was one of the greats of all time, I had just thought its naval sibling was just forgotten, but never thought to check a calendar (dope slaps self) I have always thought the Furies were interesting aircraft and a rare instance of an airplane designed for the Air Force and successfully (well, somewhat) from carriers. 

It's fun seeing how quickly aircraft changed in that era -- the Vigilantes were operating beside F3Ds and ADs -- and also how some aircraft that reached service were so, hmm, marginal, like the 
F7U


----------



## Zipper730 (Apr 12, 2017)

swampyankee said:


> The FJ Fury was a close sibling to the F-86 Saber. Given that this was early in the development of jet aircraft, and the handling of swept wing aircraft at low speeds was still being learned about, how well did the FJs operate from carriers?


Firstly: The FJ Fury wasn't really a close sibling to the F-86; it was more of an ancestor.

The FJ-1 was based on the P-51 of all things: The forward fuselage was shorter because it had no inline and lacked a radiator on the bottom for the same reason; it was fatter because it had a hole running though the middle of it to feed a jet-engine (J35), as well as the fact that the guns were not mounted in the wings, which were also thinner and a little smaller for high speed flight; the canopy was redesigned for streamlining and possibly to stuff an ejection seat in it (the USN was keen to adopt that), and the tail-surfaces were redesigned either due to speed requirements, the shape of the fuselage, or both.

The aircraft had a tricycle landing-gears, as had become a trend (and now practically universal) on aircraft, and an interesting kneeling gear. This in theory, allowed for the removal of the folding-wings, as the nose-gear could be lowered without raising the main landing-gears, and the kneeler would be brought down, allowing the nose to rest upon it: The tail would be sticking up in the air, the nose of one plane could be parked under another aircraft, and reduce parking space on the carrier-deck (The idea was entertained in a Grumman fighter known simply as "Design 71", and early drawings of the F7U also had it, though it was deleted before the plane was built).

As for the ability to operate off carriers: It's takeoff run was a little long and it might have dropped off the deck a little (not enough to hit the water); then started climbing at a relatively high AoA initially until it accelerated a little: For the most part, the catapults were to be used by in large when launching this aircraft off the deck.

The F-86 started from an evolutionary offshoot of the FJ-1 design, which was built to a USAAF specification: They wanted a bomber-escort and a fighter-bomber in their plane. It was already different in a number of ways (not including the lack of the kneeler and arrester hook). For starters: The nose already looked like the F-86 did, it had a longer fuselage, wings with a higher aspect-ratio, and larger tip-tanks.

As time went on, the decision was made to add swept wings to the design. Other additions included stabilizer trim, and an automatic slat system similar to the Me-262, and power-boosted flight-controls.

The FJ-2 was proposed initially as an F-86E with a wing-fold, but developed as an F-86F with 20mm cannon in the nose. It should have been called the F2J-1, but it was a political decision as Congress usually is more willing to approve an evolution of a design than a new design altogether. There had been some thought of calling it the "Sea Sabre" but they went with Fury instead.


----------

