# best fighter of the 50s



## pbfoot (Oct 26, 2005)

my personal choice would be the canadair sabre mk VI (6)


----------



## syscom3 (Oct 26, 2005)

The F100 Super Sabre looked cool. Even saw combat in the early days of the Vietnam War


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 26, 2005)

its gotta certain edge and it even influenced cars with it's looks (cadilacs with the fins) and was pretty fast i read about mk6 sabre that light on fuel passed a hun in the climb much to pilots chagrin


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 26, 2005)

HANDS DOWN THE SABRE! Mig Killer, exported, built under license, first aircraft Sidewinder armed (and to use them) re-engined, re-armed, navalized, it's a 50's icon, LIKE ELVIS!!! The Mig 15 and 17 had some advantages, but bottom line, the Sabre is King of the 50s!!!!!


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 26, 2005)

FLYBOYJ said:


> HANDS DOWN THE SABRE! Mig Killer, exported, built under license, first aircraft Sidewinder armed (and to use them) re-engined, re-armed, navalized, it's a 50's icon, LIKE ELVIS!!! The Mig 15 and 17 had some advantages, but bottom line, the Sabre is King of the 50s!!!!!


 yeah but you gotta have the best variant and i feel thats the mk 6


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 26, 2005)

pbfoot said:


> FLYBOYJ said:
> 
> 
> > HANDS DOWN THE SABRE! Mig Killer, exported, built under license, first aircraft Sidewinder armed (and to use them) re-engined, re-armed, navalized, it's a 50's icon, LIKE ELVIS!!! The Mig 15 and 17 had some advantages, but bottom line, the Sabre is King of the 50s!!!!!
> ...



I could agree since I worked on one! 8)


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 26, 2005)

F-86 Sabre, and I also agree.......


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 27, 2005)

lesofprimus said:


> F-86 Sabre, and I also agree.......


Me too, the Sabre wins it hands down.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 27, 2005)

I also agree...

(But I like MiG-17 more  )


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 27, 2005)

I like the Mig-17, it looks cool with it's rounded wingtips - I also like it from this view too...


----------



## evangilder (Oct 27, 2005)

I agree, the Sabre was a kick butt plane for it's day.


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 27, 2005)

no brits for the hunter or javelin and heres an interesting link comparing the mk 6 versus f86 f http://www.spaads.org/canadair.htm


----------



## trackend (Oct 27, 2005)

I'll go with that Eric Sabre for sure
Proven record does it for me pb


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 27, 2005)

It was also the first plane to go through the sound barrier (twice before the X-1 although they where both in dives).

http://home.att.net/~historyzone/Welch2.html


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 27, 2005)

Ole "Wheaties" punched Mach 1 just to piss off Yeager - apparently they didn't like each other... :agrue:


----------



## cheddar cheese (Oct 27, 2005)

Well the first plane to be recognised to go through it - I think there are a few claims it happened late in WW2 in dives.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 27, 2005)

I just saw a documentary where a -262 pilot said he did it....


----------



## Glider (Oct 28, 2005)

Well I will go for the Hunter. Speed, Flexibility, Weapons, Responsiveness, ease of Handling, Range.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 28, 2005)

I think the Hunter was a good aircraft and a clsoe second to the Sabre. One thing I know about the Hunter, it wasn't as maintainer friendly as the Sabre...

I know they fought each other when India and Pakistan went at it - I don't have stats, but I know there were kills on both sides....


----------



## Glider (Oct 28, 2005)

You will forgive me if I consider the F86 a close second to the Hunter.

Your right about the Sabre being harder to maintain but it one important aspect it did have an advantage and that was in turn around time in a surge situation.

I will dig into my India / Pakistan records and see what I can find.


----------



## Glider (Oct 28, 2005)

Typo Hunter being harder to maintain. However it wasn't a total disaster in that area


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 28, 2005)

Glider said:


> Typo Hunter being harder to maintain. However it wasn't a total disaster in that area



No - lots of screw panels in lieu of cam-locks or Dzus panels...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 28, 2005)

Got info on Sabre vs. Hunter during India/ Pakistan conflicts...

According to the site ACIG, theses are the numbers...

PAF Sabres

12 confirmed kills
15 claimed/ unconfirmed

IAF Hunters

15 confirmed
5 claimed/ unconfirmed


----------



## evangilder (Oct 29, 2005)

Interesting.


----------



## Glider (Oct 29, 2005)

FJ comparing the figs I have the F86 claimed the following aircraft.
5 x SU7 
6 x Hunter
1 x Mil 8
1 x Gnat
1 x Krishak (army AOP plane)
1 x Mig 21

I am afraid that my sources on the IAF are more vauge. They talk about X planes brought down by IAF fighters but don't tell you by what.

Gnats seem to have done very well claiming at least one Mirage and a number of other planes when outnumbered.


----------



## Glider (Oct 29, 2005)

FJ Can I ask for the name of this ACIG site as it sounds interesting. All I get in an Insurance Company


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 29, 2005)

Glider said:


> FJ Can I ask for the name of this ACIG site as it sounds interesting. All I get in an Insurance Company



here ya go;

http://www.acig.org/


----------



## Glider (Oct 29, 2005)

Thanks


----------



## Supraman (Nov 6, 2005)

The unfortunate thing about my pick is that 6 were made 5 destroyed. The Avro Arrow was the best plane in the 50's hands down nobody can deny that fact. It was so good that Eisenhower was scared poopless of it and cohorced our PM to erase it from Canada's air force.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 7, 2005)

Supraman said:


> The unfortunate thing about my pick is that 6 were made 5 destroyed. The Avro Arrow was the best plane in the 50's hands down nobody can deny that fact. It was so good that Eisenhower was scared poopless of it and cohorced our PM to erase it from Canada's air force.



The Arrow was indeed a great aircraft that didn't reach it's potential, but it had many teething problems, cost over runs and was quickly outclassed. Based on evidence in other threads it would of not been a good dog fighter and something like an F-5 would of had it for lunch. Don't give me that crap about Eisenhower influencing it's demise, that decision was made by the Diefenbaker Government and only those responsible for its demise are responsible for the mass exodus of skilled aerospace workers to the US in the 1960s. You need to get educated because you're holding on to a myth! Blame USA, a Canadian SOP!


----------



## evangilder (Nov 7, 2005)

Agreed, and why would an American president be scared of an aircraft that was being flown by _an ally_?


----------



## syscom3 (Nov 7, 2005)

Evans, your correct. If it was that good, one of the US airframe manufactorers would build it on liscence.

In my opinion, it was killed because of the cost, and the changing strategy of the cold war.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Nov 7, 2005)

Supraman said:


> The unfortunate thing about my pick is that 6 were made 5 destroyed. The Avro Arrow was the best plane in the 50's hands down nobody can deny that fact. It was so good that Eisenhower was scared poopless of it and cohorced our PM to erase it from Canada's air force.


Christ, another one. 
Do you honestly believe that crap? Nobody killed the Arrow except John Diefenbaker. This US conspiracy garbage is really starting to wear pretty thin. _We_ killed the Arrow, not the United States. I've seen the theories, and read some interesting "expert" testimonial on why the project was axed, but let's be sensible here. It was falling way behind schedule, it was running into development problems, and it was just too damn expensive. That's all. 

I wish people who make these brazen claims would come on here with something like proof. 
Why would the US fear us of all people? They were willing to give us nukes, for Christ's sake.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 7, 2005)

Nonskimmer said:


> Christ, another one.


----------



## Gnomey (Nov 7, 2005)

LOL NS


----------



## HealzDevo (Nov 7, 2005)

MiG-15 I reckon. One of those truely amazing applications of German Technology into a new fighter (even if the Soviets deny it). There are just too many similarities for a coincidence and the look of the aircraft gives away its potential inspiration.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 7, 2005)

The Mig-15 was a great aircraft in as much, it was simple. As good as the areodynamics applied into were, it's slow speed handling was poor, the thing snakes on landing. The 86 was much more complex but yet more stable. Even though the Korean War Totals are inaccurate, the 86 walked away with at least a 4 to 1 kill ratio over the Mig-15. Over Taiwan it didn't fare much better especially when Taiwan were given early Sidewinders.

The F-86 shot down Mig-21s during India/ Pakistan clashes....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 8, 2005)

Supraman said:


> The unfortunate thing about my pick is that 6 were made 5 destroyed. The Avro Arrow was the best plane in the 50's hands down nobody can deny that fact. It was so good that Eisenhower was scared poopless of it and cohorced our PM to erase it from Canada's air force.



You keep telling yourself that. The Sabre and the Mig-15 were better in my opinion.

Oh and please take your anti americanism someplace else or atleast use the Polotics threads. This thread is not for bashing other nations it is about talking about aircraft.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 8, 2005)

what about bashing annother nation's aircraft


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 8, 2005)

Not bashing thre Arrow - I think it WOULD OF made a great aircraft. Bottom line the US as as much responsible for it's demise as for the cancellation of the TRS.2...


----------



## evangilder (Nov 8, 2005)

Hmmm, maybe when I don my tinfoil hat...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 8, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> what about bashing annother nation's aircraft



Thats okay Lanc, especially when we are bashing British planes like the Lancaster!


----------



## Supraman (Nov 9, 2005)

Wow, I seemed to hit a nerve there, and I'm truely sorry to our American friends.  Just like anyone else I can say and do dumb things. We are all entitled to our opinon, and this is mine. Now Nonskimmer you should know better with a tory government that they are stupid and crazy look at the GST


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 9, 2005)

Supraman said:


> Wow, I seemed to hit a nerve there, and I'm truely sorry to our American friends.  Just like anyone else I can say and do dumb things. We are all entitled to our opinon, and this is mine. Now Nonskimmer you should know better with a tory government that they are stupid and crazy look at the GST



No problem Supra - you will find that we're all here actually non-biased however there a few guys here that really know their stuff and will challenge statements with hard facts.

There's a site about the Arrow where the author makes all these acquisitions but provides little or know references to back up his claim, in this forum we have those types of folks for lunch!  

http://www.avroarrow.org/Cancellation.htm


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 9, 2005)

> you will find that we're all here actually non-biased



well that's not strictly true


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 9, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> > you will find that we're all here actually non-biased
> 
> 
> 
> well that's not strictly true



Oh yea, I forgot about you!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Nov 9, 2005)

well someone's gotta stick up for the british, the second most superior race on earth (after the cornish).........


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 9, 2005)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> well someone's gotta stick up for the british, the second most superior race on earth (after the cornish).........



Cornish?!? Oh you mean the "hen people."


----------



## Nonskimmer (Nov 9, 2005)

Supraman said:


> Now Nonskimmer you should know better with a tory government that they are stupid and crazy


Oh, please. As opposed to whom, the Grits? Are you actually suggesting that the Liberals would have even given an ambitious project like the Arrow a _chance_, much less have seen it through to fruition? A Conservative government was the best chance the Arrow had for development, and even they'd eventually had enough of the delays and increasing cost overruns. It had to give, as much of a shame that it was. Besides, Diefenbaker was what they call a "Red Tory". He was a Conservative with more leftist leanings, not that I really think that the final outcome would have been much different anyway.

In any event, I think it's high time that we as Canadians finally stop looking south for our scapegoats and accept responsibility for our own problems. Shaking an angry fist across the border is getting us absolutely nowhere. We create our own problems in this country, and trying to blame Americans, Brits, or little green men is useless.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 9, 2005)

Nonskimmer said:


> In any event, I think it's high time that we as Canadians finally stop looking south for our scapegoats and accept responsibility for our own problems. Shaking an angry fist across the border is getting us absolutely nowhere. We create our own problems in this country, and trying to blame Americans, Brits, or little green men is useless.


----------



## pbfoot (Nov 9, 2005)

its good to have a country with 3 languages english french and illiterate


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 10, 2005)

Nonskimmer said:


> In any event, I think it's high time that we as Canadians finally stop looking south for our scapegoats and accept responsibility for our own problems. Shaking an angry fist across the border is getting us absolutely nowhere. We create our own problems in this country, and trying to blame Americans, Brits, or little green men is useless.



Very well said.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Nov 10, 2005)

Supraman said:


> Wow, I seemed to hit a nerve there, and I'm truely sorry to our American friends.  Just like anyone else I can say and do dumb things. We are all entitled to our opinon, and this is mine. Now Nonskimmer you should know better with a tory government that they are stupid and crazy look at the GST



It is not that people are against you opinion. As you said you are entitled to it. It just seems that an aweful lot of people seem to blame the US for there own countries problems, and some people are pretty tired of it. 

If someone is just to ashamed to admit that there country has problems that might be there own, then they need to learn to deal with it.

There is a polotics area that was made for this reason. If anyone feels the need to discuss polotics or blame other people countries for some odd reason then that is the place to do it, not in aviation threads. Aviation threads are for aviation! Wow what a concept huh. Just a warning prepare to feel heat when you go into the Polotics section, anything goes.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 13, 2006)

I say the F-86 and derivitives was the best of the 50s A/C. It was the last "honest" pilots' fighter with no vices. It was built in large numbers by us and our Allies and supplied to many governments to kick start their jet squadrons up from prop planes. It was simple enough and inexpensive enough to be owned and fielded by any country.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 14, 2006)

I agree with you. The Sabre is the best aircraft of the 1950's.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 14, 2006)

Many people I know who own private F-86s easily transitioned into them with some time in a T-33 or L-29, just like in the 50s. 

Canadair Sabers seemed to be built a little better when compared to NA built ones. My only vice with them (as a maintainer) is they leak easily, especially from actuators....


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 14, 2006)

I "crewed" this aircraft for Al Hansen in Mojave - had to post them again...


----------



## evangilder (Feb 14, 2006)

It's a beauty!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 14, 2006)

If I ever get my LOA done in the L-29, I'm going for a checkout in that. I may have to hit a small lotto for the first few flights!!


----------



## evangilder (Feb 14, 2006)

Probably! Dream big Joe, hit a major lotto, then you can get the checkout and buy the plane!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 14, 2006)

Shoot - I wish!

Actually they could be had for between 50 - 100K. Operating costs and maintenance are the killers....


----------



## evangilder (Feb 14, 2006)

I'll bet. I would guess insurance is not cheap on that either. 

I ran a quick quote through AOPAs website for me as a student pilot for the 1M policy with ground and flight hull damage policy, pretty basic stuff based on a Cessna 150 with a $20,000 purchase price. For me, it would be $780.

That doesn't sound too bad, but that is a 150. I then ran the numbers for a Beech Bonanza (1947-1965 vintage) with a $105,000 purchase price and the same coverage. Now it goes way up, $3,119!

I could only imagine that it gets worse from there.


----------



## Twitch (Feb 14, 2006)

Like me, you guys better win that damn lottery pretty soon to fuel our desire for toys!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 14, 2006)

Good looking plane Joe.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Feb 14, 2006)

My father in law has been debating buying an L-29. The problem here is the altitude, the thing is basically a dog at SL during takeoff, I could imagine the way it would behave on a summer's day at 5500 feet! Although the guy who previously owned Doug Gilliss' L-29 had it in Big Bear - 6748 MSL!!!!


----------



## R988 (Apr 4, 2006)

I'd say Hunter is like a Spitfire and F-86 like a Mustang, both are at the top of the game and real pilots aircraft, but it would be difficult to seperate them on performance alone, however I'd say the F-86 nudges ahead by being more significant in history.


----------



## pbfoot (Apr 4, 2006)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Many people I know who own private F-86s easily transitioned into them with some time in a T-33 or L-29, just like in the 50s.
> 
> Canadair Sabers seemed to be built a little better when compared to NA built ones. My only vice with them (as a maintainer) is they leak easily, especially from actuators....


yeah but the Canadair Sabres would fly circles around the North American ones


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 4, 2006)

pbfoot said:


> yeah but the Canadair Sabres would fly circles around the North American ones


 Because of the engines.....


----------



## Nonskimmer (Apr 4, 2006)

pbfoot said:


> yeah but the Canadair Sabres would fly circles around the North American ones


As you've said, the Mk.6 with the Orenda 14 engine was probably the best of the "standard" variants out there. The Aussie Avon engined, cannon armed variant however was probably far more lethal in the right hands.


----------



## Glider (Apr 4, 2006)

Hunter has to be the best of the fighter of the era. Speed, agility, ease of handleing, flexibility and firepower. One hit with those Adens and you are history, and I don't care what your flying.

It was also good in hot conditions where most of the early jets struggled.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 4, 2006)

Glider said:


> Hunter has to be the best of the fighter of the era. Speed, agility, ease of handleing, flexibility and firepower. One hit with those Adens and you are history, and I don't care what your flying.
> 
> It was also good in hot conditions where most of the early jets struggled.


 Hunter was a good aircraft - I still think the Saber (Especially Canadiar or Avon) will eat it for lunch!!


----------



## Glider (Apr 4, 2006)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Hunter was a good aircraft - I still think the Saber (Especially Canadiar or Avon) will eat it for lunch!!



And choke on it,


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 5, 2006)

Glider said:


> And choke on it,


----------



## Smokey (Apr 5, 2006)

The Folland Gnat. This is the Ajeet, which was based on it.

This aircraft was actually significantly smaller than the Me 109 and its wingspan was smaller than a Fokker Triplane or Sopwith Camel.

It also starred in Hot Shots, presumably as it looks like a toy jet fighter

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folland_Gnat

http://pages.intnet.mu/warbirds/iaf.htm


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 5, 2006)

I knew a guy who owned 2 (they were both used in Hot Shots). He told me it was a little difficult to fly and landed fast.....


----------



## Glider (Apr 5, 2006)

Did anyone warn him about the rudder. The RAF didn't want to sell them when they were taken out of service as you had to be carefull about the power assistance on the rudder. There was a tendancy for it to run away which isn't good news. 
The RAF knew how to look after it but were worried about being taken to court by american lawyers in case of an accident.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Apr 5, 2006)

Glider said:


> Did anyone warn him about the rudder. The RAF didn't want to sell them when they were taken out of service as you had to be carefull about the power assistance on the rudder. There was a tendancy for it to run away which isn't good news.
> The RAF knew how to look after it but were worried about being taken to court by american lawyers in case of an accident.


 I heard something about that - I think they actually crashed one during the making of the movie Hot Shots...


----------



## Glider (Apr 5, 2006)

But is there anyone here who wouldn't like to go for a ride in one. We used to see them a lot training pilots in GA in the Welsh Valleys. Perfect day on the hills taking a break during a cross country walk, sitting on the grass in the sun watching these go past below you.
Remember seeing one being chased by a Phantom. The Gnat going down the vally like a whippet jinking all over the place, turning at the last second where the valley forked into two before going down the right hand fork. The Phantom banking, banking a lot more, I knew he wasn't going to make it and its funny how detatched you are at times like this. Then with little or no time to spare he leveled out stuck the nose up and climbed like stink. Wouldn't like to guess how close he was to the side of the mountain.


----------

