# Most Beautiful Aircraft



## schwarzpanzer (Feb 22, 2006)

Mine is the Valmet Myrysky.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 23, 2006)

is that the same Valmet that now make tractors?

and for me it's either the lanc, spit or if all time eras are allowed, the the vulcan............


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

Hurricane, G.56, B-29, B-1, F-14, G.91...


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 23, 2006)

Spitfire, FW190, B-29, B-1, Vulcan, SR-71, Eurofighter, F-22


----------



## markoes (Feb 23, 2006)

fokker g1


----------



## Smokey (Feb 23, 2006)

Heinkel He.112 B1

http://www.ares.cz/hobby/classic/picture/421.jpg






1912 - Deperdusin Monocoque

http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/AC/aircraft/Deperdussen-Racer/info/info.htm






http://www.chicagocentennialofflight.org/aircraft_deperdusin.htm






Dassault Rafale

http://www.ef2000.de/rafale.htm






BAC 221, looks ugly with gear down tho

http://www.testpilot.ru/uk/bac/221/bac221.htm






Fairey Delta 2, on which the BAC 221 was based. Fairey's only up to date aircraft?

http://prototypes.free.fr/fd2/imagewof/fd2_02.jpg


----------



## MacArther (Feb 23, 2006)

P40, P40Q, P63, F86, F4 Phantom


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

Mustn't forget the wonderful Mig-17 either!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 23, 2006)

well she's no MiG-21 in the looks department is she  mind you as far as the eastern block goes you aint gonna get any better than a Su-27 or Tu-142...........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

The MiG-21 is brutish not beautiful  And the Su-27 looks all wrong. Just been looking at the Rafale though and it is a nice looker.

I like the G.59 too.


----------



## evangilder (Feb 23, 2006)

Nice pics CC. I'd go with the XB-70 Valkyrie


----------



## Erich (Feb 23, 2006)

Arado 234 C variant Nachtjägers. more weird than beautiful, but I guess a beauty all their own ~ sleek ~


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 23, 2006)

how the hell are the looks of the Su-27 all wrong?





source on right click

damn she's hot....


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

Well done for choosing biased pics that dont show the bad bits. Look! Its all bent and out of proportion!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 23, 2006)

you kidding me, i love the fact the nose dips downwards........


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 23, 2006)

But you also like pre-war French Bombers...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

Perhaps its a dipping nose thing. He likes the dipping nose of the Su-27 but he also likes the dipping nose of a crashing French bomber.


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 23, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> Perhaps its a dipping nose thing. He likes the dipping nose of the Su-27 but he also likes the dipping nose of a crashing French bomber.


Maybe... I think he just likes the idea of a flying greenhouse...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 23, 2006)

Must be a farmers thing


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 23, 2006)

great for catching those rays 8) hard to spot too..........


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 23, 2006)

Probably


----------



## trackend (Feb 23, 2006)

I have to say although I'm not a jet fanatic I do like the BAC 221


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Feb 23, 2006)

Bugatti P100P/110P
Re2005, Su-27, Su-35


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 23, 2006)

Bugatti made an airplane?! do tell!

I'd have to go with P-40, spitfire, f-14, and f-16. 

And what's wrong with the Flanker? I think it looks pretty slick.


----------



## Glider (Feb 23, 2006)

I do obviously have a preferance but you have to go some way to beat this.

What initially attracted me to gliding were the gliders themselves.


----------



## pbfoot (Feb 23, 2006)

my choices are p 26 and the hunter


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 24, 2006)

hunter yes, but i would never call the P-26 beautiful...............


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Feb 24, 2006)

ya, the one you fly with "cojones da hacero"


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 24, 2006)

Still prefer my choices...but then again I would.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 24, 2006)

i'd rather have a Tu-160 than a B-1 and there's nothing special about the tomcat's looks, i will admit that's a good pic of the MiG-17 though.........


----------



## Smokey (Feb 24, 2006)

MiG 5

http://www.fortunecity.com/marina/manatee/272/mig-5.html






MiG 3

http://www.ctrl-c.liu.se/misc/ram/mig-3.html






Lockheed YP 38

http://images.google.co.uk/imgres?i...ages?q=yp-38&start=20&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&sa=N






http://www.sitestories.com/aviation/daily-aviation-photos-12-04.htm


----------



## cheddar cheese (Feb 26, 2006)

Ah forgot about the MiG-3, thats a stunner. Prefer later P-38's though for looks.


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Mar 1, 2006)

I didn't mean anything other than WW2 when I originally posted, but I like the way people have included jets.

As far as modern jets go; call me perverted if you will, but I just lurve the MiG 25 Foxbat.


----------



## JonJGoldberg (Mar 2, 2006)

For Me the most 'beautiful' aircraft ever created were built for the Schneider Trophy; Of which by the most narrow of margins I choose the Gloster IV-B.

Images from >>> 

http://www.rafmuseum.org.uk/milesto...mage=1926-pc74-41-55-Gloster-IV.jpg&Year=1926

http://www.hydroretro.net/coupeen/avions/british27.html

From the NACA archive, download this very very informative article if you wish, a sample of which is posted. It was written in 1933, it touches on so many interesting points it is just killer, especially if you consider when it was written... http://naca.larc.nasa.gov/digidoc/report/tm/12/NACA-TM-712.PDF


----------



## MacArther (Mar 2, 2006)

An imaginary plane, but one that could have ruled the skies: A 1970 SS El Camino with wings and a jet engine. I mean, who can deny the sleek lines on the car, it would make a great aircraft.


----------



## kiwimac (Mar 2, 2006)

Ta.152; Re 2005; Sm 92; Spitfire, Hurricane, Me-109, Me-410 ; Heinkel He-100 112; He 219; Do 335.

Kiwimac (who likes the Mig 25 too)


----------



## GregP (Mar 2, 2006)

The fuselage is above the air intakes as a design attribute .... allows GOOD airflow at high angles of attack. The cockpit is up and bubbled for visibility.

I think the Flankers are beautiful! But, that's just me ...


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Mar 2, 2006)

GregP said:


> The fuselage is above the air intakes as a design attribute .... allows GOOD airflow at high angles of attack.



That makes sense, boundary layer etc. - What plane are we talking about here?  



Kiwimac said:


> Kiwimac (who likes the Mig 25 too)


----------



## Smokey (Mar 3, 2006)

F9F-6 Cougar, Mt. Fuji Japan, Pilot Jim Morin

http://tradecorridor.com/sundowners/1950.htm






Rumpler-Taube in flight

http://www.flugplatz-welzow.de/fpl/geschichte_flugplatz_2.html


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 4, 2006)

I'll back you up on the Foxbat, I think it looks mean.


----------



## Gemhorse (Mar 4, 2006)

De Havilland's Mosquito Hornet... - they were extremely effective too.....


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Mar 5, 2006)

Thanks Aggie!

Could I be wrong, but if the SR-71 Blackbird is now retired(?) - that makes the Foxbat the fastest plane now in service?

- Though the F-15 runs it close.


----------



## Mongo (Mar 17, 2006)

Surprised no one has mentioned this beauty, the Lockheed constellation/super constellation.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 17, 2006)

That is a damn pretty plane...


----------



## evangilder (Mar 17, 2006)

Welcome aboard Mongo. Great choice!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 17, 2006)

Also like the F-106.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 17, 2006)

ooh pointy


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 20, 2006)

no better looking than the Avro 707B...........






source on right click........


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 20, 2006)

But not as good as the Vulcan...










Sources on right click.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 20, 2006)

well the Avro 707B was just a 1/3 scale "model" of the vulcan, but with the air intake in a different place.......


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 20, 2006)

Yeah but it still isn't as good looking as the Vulcan...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 20, 2006)

i think it is.........


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 20, 2006)

You like French bombers...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 20, 2006)

so you don't think the 707's attractive?


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 20, 2006)

It is not bad but I think the Vulcan is better...


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 20, 2006)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> so you don't think the 707's attractive?



Nope, its got a fuck off huge bulge at the top...the F-106 is smooth and simple. Much better looking.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 21, 2006)

plain simple and exceptionally booring, maybe someone should introduce to its designer the concept of a curve! and i like the air intake on the back, i think it'd look stupid on the vulcan but it works on the 707.........


----------



## Smokey (Mar 24, 2006)

Travel Air (Model R) "Mystery S"











http://www.aviation-history.com/travelair/mystery.html


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 24, 2006)

Or my personal favorite the Beech 17 Staggerwing


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 24, 2006)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> plain simple and exceptionally booring, maybe someone should introduce to its designer the concept of a curve! and i like the air intake on the back, i think it'd look stupid on the vulcan but it works on the 707.........


u said ur tired of curves thats why you like french bomers


----------



## Nonskimmer (Mar 24, 2006)

loomaluftwaffe said:


> the lancaster kicks ass said:
> 
> 
> > plain simple and exceptionally booring, maybe someone should introduce to its designer the concept of a curve! and i like the air intake on the back, i think it'd look stupid on the vulcan but it works on the 707.........
> ...


Ooooooh, fightin' words.


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 25, 2006)

Nonskimmer said:


> loomaluftwaffe said:
> 
> 
> > the lancaster kicks ass said:
> ...


It is true though that is Lanc's sole reason for liking them...


----------



## Bachgyn Bach (Mar 25, 2006)

IMHO the most beautiful aircraft ever is Spitfire.I have admit that Mitchell created the plane with feminine "body". Have to mension Dewoitine D.520, MB-5, Mosquito, DH Hornet, G.55, "Yankee Pony", Polish PZL-37 Łoś (Elk) bomber, Hawker Sea Fury and Foce Wulf "Butcher"FW-190.
Modern "Hairdryers" are ugly. I don't like any.


----------



## Wildcat (Mar 25, 2006)

Here are two of my choices.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 25, 2006)

Ca.310 is nice as well...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 25, 2006)

good lord look at that landing gear...........

and i only get boored of curves sometimes, i could look at the lanc's curves all day, and frequently do.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 25, 2006)

By curves do you mean that big ol' wart on the nose?


----------



## davparlr (Mar 25, 2006)

Love this topic. Some planes I've thought were great looking. Sorry if they are mostly USA. I don't know too much about other countries.

by category.

WWI

SPAD
Albatros

Biplanes

Boeing P-6E

Pre-War

Hughes H-1

WWII

He100
FW190 (some claim inspired by H-1)
Zero (some claim inspired by H-1)
XP-67

Jets

F-106 Delta Dart
B-58 (without pod) Hustler
A-5A Vigilante
T-38 Talon "White Rocket"

And my favorite from my childhood model making days

F8U Crusader

And, if beauty is carrying one through a tour of duty safely (this is definitely subjective!)

C-141A Starlifter


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 25, 2006)

Nice choices! 

In terms of WWI aircraft I think the SE5a looks great as well.


----------



## davparlr (Mar 25, 2006)

Yeah, the SE5a was always one of my favorite planes. A functional beauty. To me, It kind of falls in the category of the F-4 phantom and F-15 Eagle, "Don't call me beautiful, let's just go and fight!"


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 25, 2006)

German WWI planes are beautiful, especially the albatross-type


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 25, 2006)

Yep, most WW1 planes are good looking, then things got worse during the interwar years (although fighters generally look good all the time) before getting better during WW2 and generally staying level after that...


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 25, 2006)

Ive heard of the "pullman", what looks like a buss in the middle of triplane wings, and four WWI-style landing gears, it took like around a few prototypes before it could (barely) fly


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 26, 2006)

CC said:


> By curves do you mean that big ol' wart on the nose?



i prefer to think of it as a beauty spot...........


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 26, 2006)

you like big old warts on noses? including people's?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 26, 2006)

it's not a wart, a wart implies it is unwanted and ugly, which it most cirtainly is not........


----------



## SpitTrop (Mar 27, 2006)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 27, 2006)

Ki-46 is a good looking plane too...


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 27, 2006)

Yep, especially the later versions...

Early





Late


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 27, 2006)

i've always thought she looks wrong.........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 27, 2006)

The rounded nose one does but the top one is very pretty.


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 27, 2006)

I prefer the rounded nose one...


----------



## wmaxt (Mar 27, 2006)

To me there are only a few ugly planes but for proportions and clean lines the B-29 has got em all beat esp if its a striped plane (without turrets). 

wmaxt


----------



## davparlr (Mar 27, 2006)

A few I forgot:

of course

Spitfire

Mosquito

and a couple with pure beautiful form

Bell X-2

Douglass D-558-2 Skyrocket


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 27, 2006)

To me the most beautiful aircraft of WW2 were the Spitfire, Bf-109, Mosquito, and the Me-262. Each in there own way. I really like the sleakness and all around shapes of the Spitfire and I like the evil looking beauty of the Bf-109.


----------



## davparlr (Mar 27, 2006)

I like the evil looking beauty of the Bf-109.

I appreciate your view. The F-4 has a similar functional beauty.

As I said before, it's a "I don't care about any beauty contest, I want to go out and fight".


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 28, 2006)

Yeap


----------



## cheddar cheese (Mar 28, 2006)

wmaxt said:


> To me there are only a few ugly planes but for proportions and clean lines the B-29 has got em all beat esp if its a striped plane (without turrets).
> 
> wmaxt



And I agree 100%...


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Mar 29, 2006)

the 109 really is symbolic... "here come the bad guys" I agree with that evil beauty...

McDonnell XP-67

talk about sleek









found these pics in the Advanced a/c thread... post by JonJGolberg


----------



## Chocks away! (May 28, 2006)

I love the bf 109 F, late G and K models, the Ki-61 is a good looking plane, the Tempest looks powerful, the mig-15 is classic, and so is the Me-262 with it's shark like lines


----------



## Chocks away! (May 28, 2006)

Here are some more I like. The Saab 35 Draken, theFiat G-55, the Heinkel He-100, Fw 200 and the insane lookin B-36


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 28, 2006)

I too have allways like the B-36. I like how she was a large peace maker! Ugly but with a purpose.


----------



## Dac (May 28, 2006)

There's not many aircraft you can fit a nuclear reactor onboard. 

I'm with Gnomey and cheddar cheese, the late model Dinah is nice to look at.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 29, 2006)

no, really, it's not


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 29, 2006)

If it does not look like a Lancaster or a French Bomber, Lanc does not like it.


----------



## Gnomey (May 29, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> If it does not look like a Lancaster or a French Bomber, Lanc does not like it.


Very true Adler!


----------



## Dac (May 29, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> If it does not look like a Lancaster or a French Bomber, Lanc does not like it.



Some people think "chunky" is beautiful.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (May 29, 2006)

No it is more like Butt Ugly....


----------



## davparlr (May 29, 2006)

How's this for a beautiful aircraft. The father of the B-2, Tacit Blue!


----------



## plan_D (May 29, 2006)

It's so fugly I think lanc will love it.


----------



## davparlr (May 29, 2006)

plan_D said:


> It's so fugly I think lanc will love it.



They didn't call it the "Whale" for nothing!


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (May 30, 2006)

I like the looks of the P-39. But I mention it because it is a underdog.


----------



## Gnomey (May 30, 2006)

plan_D said:


> It's so fugly I think lanc will love it.


So true, lets wait and see....


----------



## timshatz (May 30, 2006)

I've got a vote for the Curtiss SNC. Two seater version of the Curtiss Demon, it was supposed to do the same job for the navy that the SNJ actually ended up doing. Stream lined, very 30s design. 

Another would be the Hawker Fury Biplane. Both it and the SNC had polished aluminum skins that were truely beautiful. 
Definitely peacetime aircraft, showed the affects of the Modernist Movement in the streamlining. Very cool.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (May 31, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> If it does not look like a Lancaster or a French Bomber, Lanc does not like it.



that's not strictly true, any British plane carrying RAF markings has a very high chance of being beautiful 

and that tacit blue aint that bad


----------



## Smokey (Jun 1, 2006)

The Heinkel He 111 looks very sleek. 

Although it never flew, so doesn't really count, the XF108 rapier was quite well advanced before it was cancelled. It was going to be a mach 3 interceptor and was also proposed as an escort fighter for the xb70. It looks very Thunderbirds.
It would have been interesting to see how the F108 stacked up against the MiG 25. The MiG 25 doesnt look very agile, but it seems more maneuvrable tha the F108, while the F108 may have been faster

http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal4/3501-3600/gal3592_He-111_Ulgur/gal3592.htm

http://www.testpilot.ru/usa/northam/xf/108/xf-108.htm

http://hsfeatures.com/f108pb_1.htm


----------



## paaln (Jun 1, 2006)

[br]




"stolen" from Camera above the clouds 2, Charles E. Brown.


----------



## pbfoot (Jun 1, 2006)

It doesn't have a tailwheel?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 6, 2006)

I think the Tacit Blue looked as ugly as a Lancaster or French Bomber! Just kidding on the Lancaster, Lanc!


----------



## timshatz (Jun 6, 2006)

paaln said:


> [br]
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sweet. 

Nice pic Paaln


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 7, 2006)

well you know how the old saying goes, the British make the most beautiful aircraft in the world


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jun 8, 2006)

never heard of that saying


----------



## timshatz (Jun 8, 2006)

the lancaster kicks *** said:


> well you know how the old saying goes, the British make the most beautiful aircraft in the world



Heard that saying. Also heard the second part of it, "British planes are a ***** to work on". 

Heard the same thing about Japanese planes too. Well, at least the older ones.


----------



## schwarzpanzer (Jun 28, 2006)

I've changed my mind to Hawker Sea Fury - man I love this plane!


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 28, 2006)

she is exceptionally beautiful, like all British planes


----------



## Monique (Jun 28, 2006)

I'd have the say the JU 87 Stuka. :3 It's so ugly it's beautiful.





Well truthfully I'd have to say it was the Corsair F4U.​


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 28, 2006)

granded she's not ugly but that's not a very flattering picture..........


----------



## chris mcmillin (Jun 28, 2006)

pbfoot said:


> Or my personal favorite the Beech 17 Staggerwing



Mine too.
Chris...


----------



## Glider (Jun 28, 2006)

Something a little different


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 29, 2006)

I will never change my opinion on mine.

The beautiful aircraft were the and not in any particular order:

Bf-109G/K
Fw-190D
Ta-152
Spitfire 21
Mosquito
P-38
B-26
A-20


----------



## Smokey (Jun 29, 2006)

Polikaprov I 17

Polikarpov I-17 index

Untitled Document

http://armybook.com/im/big/491-big.jpg


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 29, 2006)

damn that is beautiful!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 29, 2006)

Not too bad...


----------



## Gnomey (Jun 29, 2006)

I agree CC, not to bad but there are better.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jun 29, 2006)

from the second picture it does resemble a spitfire........


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jun 29, 2006)

It does, and thats why im not too bowled over by it. Looks too dull...


----------



## Erich (Jun 29, 2006)

after readin and re-reading the text from W. Reschke to me I have to say that it must be the Ta 152H. Reschke hit over 750km in the bird in 45


----------



## Will Hunter (Jun 29, 2006)

Westland Whirlwind.

Will.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jun 30, 2006)

it's good at the other angles


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jun 30, 2006)

Great shots Will, that's one of my favorite planes.


----------



## hole in the ground (Jun 30, 2006)

I'm sorry but a pencil with engines.
The cockpit looks to...
... bulbous for the skinny fuselage
Give me a sec and i will show you a thing of beauty


----------



## Monique (Jun 30, 2006)

Yeah the engines stand out way to much on the plane. It looks like something that was scrapped together in a real haste. =) But it's still rather neat looking tough.​


----------



## Erich (Jun 30, 2006)

reminds me of a Me 262 with props, copycat


----------



## hole in the ground (Jun 30, 2006)

or even a glider with engines
like the U2


----------



## Smokey (Jun 30, 2006)

Napier Heston Racer

Project Napier Heston


----------



## hole in the ground (Jun 30, 2006)

hmm not sure that this counts but what the hell.







View attachment untitled.bmp









Dh 88 Comet
only three ever built (not including replicas) still has had a failry large impact on aviation. Can anyone spot the family resemblances to other Dhs?


----------



## Monique (Jun 30, 2006)

:O Ooh, pretty plane. It's design is very curved and sleek; not alot of sharp edges to it. =) The colours of it make it look even nicer.​


----------



## Erich (Jun 30, 2006)

still looks like a Me 262 wannabe


----------



## hole in the ground (Jun 30, 2006)

from 1934?  
impressive


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jun 30, 2006)

Nice pics of the Comet.


----------



## Camarogenius (Jun 30, 2006)

Some of my Favorites.
F-4U
FW-190 DORA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
P-40
B-17
Any flying boat
F-104
SR-71
And I know as soon as I click "Submit post" I'll think of a couple more


----------



## davparlr (Jun 30, 2006)

Erich said:


> still looks like a Me 262 wannabe



Except that it was a special built aircraft for the 1934 England to Australia air race, which it won. Second place went to a KLM DC-2 and third was a Roscoe Turner flown Boeing 247, both commercial passenger planes that stunned the world with their performance at that time.


----------



## Will Hunter (Jun 30, 2006)

hole in the ground said:


> Dh 88 Comet
> only three ever built (not including replicas) still has had a failry large impact on aviation. Can anyone spot the family resemblances to other Dhs?



It was made of wood, it was the first De Havilland 'Wooden Wonder'. I won one of the many of the Britain to Australia Air races back in the 'Golden Age' of aviation.

Will.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 1, 2006)

alright then who knows the aircraft on the ceiling above it?

and the Whirlwind is an exceptionally beautiful aircraft.........


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 1, 2006)

Is it a Flying Flea?


----------



## Monique (Jul 1, 2006)

It sure looks tiny. I'd never get into a plane that small. Hmmm, I have not a clue what it is.  Besides a little tiny plane that has a rather awkward and unaestheticaly pleasing look.​


----------



## hole in the ground (Jul 1, 2006)

mignet, flea.
I think thats how you spelt the guys name.
Some sources that i have read said that it was a death trap and some say it was very stable.
I have no idea myself.
However this is very off topic as it is a hideous


----------



## lancasterman (Jul 2, 2006)

The mosquito hands down just look at her!


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 3, 2006)

How can I not agree?

I'd have thought you'd put down the Lanc as your most beautiful


----------



## hole in the ground (Jul 3, 2006)

well although i am not going to change my mind about the comet,
mosquito man i believe that you are forgetting the Hornet perhaps?


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 3, 2006)

A close second


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 3, 2006)

Bf-109K, FW-190D or Mosquito.


----------



## pierre66 (Jul 3, 2006)

very nice all that!


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 3, 2006)

Actually I think the Yak-3 is a good looking plane as well, to me I think its the definitve shape for a single engined WW2 Fighter.


----------



## Dirty Ed (Jul 3, 2006)

How about the Lockheed Constellation? I believe it saw duty in WWII as a transport. It was designed to outrun the ZERO at altitude re-supplying the Chinese Army.

Navy Designation R7V, I flew them in VR-7A at Tachikawa AFB 1962-1985. We were primarily Med Evac, but handled troops and general cargo, including drums of Agent Orange.

I also flew them with TWA, and Seaboard, who farmed me out to Aer Lingus under contract for a year.

They were a very pretty bird. I met my future wife on a Dublin layover.


----------



## johnbr (Jul 4, 2006)

For me it the Ho 229 
Martin Baker/MB-5
Vought xf5u
Martin xb51 this would have been cool with the GE 412's


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 4, 2006)

Dirty Ed said:


> How about the Lockheed Constellation? I believe it saw duty in WWII as a transport. It was designed to outrun the ZERO at altitude re-supplying the Chinese Army.
> 
> Navy Designation R7V, I flew them in VR-7A at Tachikawa AFB 1962-1985. We were primarily Med Evac, but handled troops and general cargo, including drums of Agent Orange.
> 
> ...


 The C121 saw a few of them in the Goose they are a real pretty bird


----------



## Smokey (Jul 21, 2006)

The Arsenal series are nice

Sommaire

Arsenal Aircraft

" Battle of France and Low Countries" : Add-On for BOB - Topic Powered by eve community

Arsenal VG 33/39 Review by Dale Smith (Azur 1/48.)

Azur 1/72 Arsenal VG 33, by Brian Baker


----------



## cheddar cheese (Jul 24, 2006)

Pretty nice...


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 24, 2006)

A French Arsenal, isn't there one of those in London?


----------



## Smokey (Jul 25, 2006)

Hehe

Here is a photo of a VG 33 in luftwaffe markings

The Arsenal was also designed to use the Merlin (VG 40) and Allison V 1710 (VG 50), with the result that it was even more streamlined:

Arsenal VG-30 do VG-50

AVIAWEB - Monographie Arenal VG-33


----------



## evangilder (Jul 25, 2006)

Dirty Ed said:


> How about the Lockheed Constellation? I believe it saw duty in WWII as a transport. It was designed to outrun the ZERO at altitude re-supplying the Chinese Army.
> 
> Navy Designation R7V, I flew them in VR-7A at Tachikawa AFB 1962-1985. We were primarily Med Evac, but handled troops and general cargo, including drums of Agent Orange.
> 
> ...



I agree that the Connie was a real looker. We used to have 2 of them in Camarillo, worked on by a different outfit than the CAF. Sadly, there is only one left, an EC-121 that is being sold. But at least the 121 is not going far. The original Cannie was sold to Switzerland. 

It has quite and interesting history, starting in Army service as a C-69:
The Lockheed Constellation - USA


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 27, 2006)

For me, the P-38L, P-51D, B-17G, and the P-47.

I know it sounds biased, but american aircraft are beautiful.


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 27, 2006)

*Cough* No some are down right ugly...


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 27, 2006)

What the hell is that monstrosity?


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 27, 2006)

P-75 Eagle: P-75 Eagle Info


----------



## mosquitoman (Jul 27, 2006)

Thanks, sounds like it was thrown together


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 27, 2006)

It was bit. Here is another link for you: USAF Museum - Fisher P-75


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 28, 2006)

To me the most beautiful aircraft was the Bf-109G. That is biased for me because I love the aircraft. It could be as ugly as Lanc's French Bombers and I would still find it beautiful.

Now to be unbiased this is my list:

1. Bf-109G
2. Spitfire
3. Fw-190D
4. Me-262
5. Mosquito
6. B-17
7. P-47
8. He-100
9. Ar-234
10. P-38


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jul 28, 2006)

agreed Adler my list would pretty much be the same


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 28, 2006)

Mine would be similar, something along the lines of:

1) Spitfire
2) Ta-152/Fw-190D
3) Me-262
4) P-51
5) Mossie
6) Bf-109
7) P-38
8. Lancaster
9) B-29
10) Mc-205


----------



## JeffK (Jul 28, 2006)

The Westland Whirlwind (WW2 Fighter-Bomber, not the Helicopter!!)


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 28, 2006)

Ok, here's my list:

1.P-38
2.P-51
3.Mosquito
4. Fw-190D
5.B-25
6.B-17
7.Spitfire
8.P-47
9.He-111
10. Bf-109


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jul 28, 2006)

we all like the Fw-190D/Ta-152


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 29, 2006)

Nice siggy Gnomey, I really like it.


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 29, 2006)

Thanks Adler, I had it made by me by one of the graphics staff on a gaming forum I visit, I also have a similar Spitifire one (in my Sig thread). I was really pleased with the result.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jul 29, 2006)

It is an excellent siggy


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 29, 2006)

Agreed!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 30, 2006)

Gnomey said:


> Thanks Adler, I had it made by me by one of the graphics staff on a gaming forum I visit, I also have a similar Spitifire one (in my Sig thread). I was really pleased with the result.



Ask to make me one with a Bf-109G or K! I dont have the computer talent to make that stuff.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Jul 30, 2006)

coolness, if only i knew him


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 30, 2006)

Gnomey said:


> Thanks Adler, I had it made by me by one of the graphics staff on a gaming forum I visit, I also have a similar Spitifire one (in my Sig thread). I was really pleased with the result.



Does it cost anything or do you have to have a membership?


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 30, 2006)

Membership of the site is all you really need. The site is FeverGaming - The Pandemic is Coming go into the graphics section and start a thread (eg [Sig Request]P-38 Pilot) and then detail what you want and you should get it...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 30, 2006)

Okay cool thanks, I will check it out.


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 30, 2006)

Adler I see you got Bbob, he made mine and should give you a really good one.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 30, 2006)

Awesome. Thanks Gnomey. Ill check it out as well.


----------



## P38 Pilot (Jul 30, 2006)

Gnomey, sorry to ask you but I cant get on for some reason. If you can and you dont have to, could you check to see if they could make a P-38 signature? If you can I would really appreciate it!


----------



## 102first_hussars (Jul 31, 2006)

I would Say the Spitfire has gotta be the most beautifull plane ever made, im sorry, there are some nice planes but cant hold a candle to the sexiness of the Spitfire


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jul 31, 2006)

well done that man


----------



## plan_D (Jul 31, 2006)

Best thing you've ever said Hussars.


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 31, 2006)

P38 Pilot said:


> Gnomey, sorry to ask you but I cant get on for some reason. If you can and you dont have to, could you check to see if they could make a P-38 signature? If you can I would really appreciate it!


Should work fine... Try this link: FeverGaming



Plan_D said:


> Best thing you've ever said Hussars.


Agreed!


----------



## P38 Pilot (Aug 1, 2006)

Thanks Gnomey.


----------



## Smokey (Aug 1, 2006)

The Spitfire is beautiful, but one aircraft that comes close to it is one that I and others have mentioned before - the Heinkel He 112B, which also has an elliptical wing and was designed around the same time as the Spitfire

http://membres.lycos.fr/thierrymodele/images/he112_2.jpg

He-112B

Heinkel He-112B2  RS Models 1:72 von Jörg Schlegel


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 1, 2006)

no; just no........


----------



## Smokey (Aug 1, 2006)

Hehe, of course its personal opinion, but from some angles I prefer the Heinkel He 112B


----------



## Gnomey (Aug 1, 2006)

I prefer the Spitfire from all angles but the He-112 isn't bad either...


----------



## 102first_hussars (Aug 2, 2006)

The nose design reminds me of the Stuka, groooossssss


----------



## Smokey (Aug 2, 2006)

102first_hussars said:


> The nose design reminds me of the Stuka, groooossssss



Thats because the He 112 was lumbered with Jumo engines rather than Daimler Benz engines.

Heres an earlier version, the Heinkel He 112 V6. 

http://www.restmodels.com/pages/models/RM4809/he112v6_1.jpg


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Aug 2, 2006)

i like it, not the prototype but the He-112B


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 2, 2006)

both are ugly, the second even moreso......


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 2, 2006)

The canopy looks a bit wrong but other that that its ok. Nothing looks better than a black G.55 though and thats final.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 2, 2006)

you're going against millions of people that would argue the spit is one of man's most beautiful creations, second only to me..............


----------



## 102first_hussars (Aug 2, 2006)

I think youre just an example of just one of the many practical jokes god has played on the human race, much like how he set the Males sexual peak at around the age of 16-18 where he set the womans to 30-40, not cool.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Aug 3, 2006)

the lancaster kicks *** said:


> both are ugly, the second even moreso......


you like French Bombers


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 3, 2006)

the lancaster kicks *** said:


> you're going against millions of people that would argue the spit is one of man's most beautiful creations, second only to me..............



Its too boring. Apart from the elliptical wings, theres no real drama about its style. Its dull.


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Aug 4, 2006)

u exaggerated on ur statement


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 4, 2006)

dull?! what you see as being dull, i see as extreme grace


----------



## daishi12 (Aug 4, 2006)

Images sourced from Canit

Two of the most Beautiful aircraft ever, the SAAB Viggen and the SAAB Gripen


----------



## Marcin T (Aug 6, 2006)

That will be so original ----- P51D


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 7, 2006)

While I agree the Spitfire was a beautiful aircraft and one of the best looking of all time, I have to somewhat agree with CC on this that she really is quite dull except of the later marks such as the Type XXI which truely are beautiful.

Id say it would go something like this and this is just my opinion and is biased toward my love of the Bf-109.

1. Bf-109K-4
2. Spitfire (all marks)
3. Fw-190D-9
4. Me-262
5. P-51D


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Aug 7, 2006)

me too, although i like the stuka too, its ****in ugly

1. Bf-109F/G/K
2. Fw-190D/Ta-152H
3. Spitfire (HF and MK.XIV onwards (non bubble)
4. P-38
5. Bf-109E (i dono why)
6. B-17
7. He-111
8. Re.2005
9. G.55/56
10. M.C 202/205


----------



## Smokey (Aug 7, 2006)

Marek Rys's Ho 229 Luft Art Images


----------



## Ed Rees (Aug 21, 2006)

It's a tie between the Ho-IX and P39 for me.


----------



## Sabre (Aug 22, 2006)

WW2: Me-262
Cold war: Mig-29
Modern: F-22


----------



## Jank (Aug 22, 2006)

For me, the Cold War goes to the F-15 Eagle.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 22, 2006)

There's something about Italian planes that are just flat out fascinating.


----------



## cheddar cheese (Aug 23, 2006)

Yep, gotta love the G.50...


----------



## loomaluftwaffe (Aug 23, 2006)

yep, something about it just gets me even though it isnt that beautiful


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 23, 2006)

how can the cold war go to anything other than the EE Lighning? as for bombers it's the Vulcan or Tu-142......


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 23, 2006)

The F104 Starfighter for the production Cold War fighter and the Avro Arrow for the might have beens


----------



## Glider (Aug 24, 2006)

Seahawk by a country mile


----------



## Nonskimmer (Aug 24, 2006)

pbfoot said:


> The F104 Starfighter for the production Cold War fighter and the Avro Arrow for the might have beens


Not bad choices. They work for me too.


----------



## Ken812 (Aug 25, 2006)

Definitly my choice, what a beauty


----------



## evangilder (Aug 26, 2006)

While I will agree that the spit is a good looking airplane, the second canopy on that one just doesn't look right.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Aug 27, 2006)

bet you wouldn't be saying that if you were sitting in it going for a flight


----------



## Chocks away! (Aug 27, 2006)

Irrelevant-but it's remarkable how famous the He-112 is considering less than 100 were built!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 28, 2006)

It is only famouse because of the movies that it is been featured in and unfortunatly 90 percent of the people that see it think it is a Bf-109. That is why it is famous.


----------



## lonestarman63 (Aug 28, 2006)

T  hink it the best looking of all aircraft


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 29, 2006)

Sleek and nice but not overally attractive in my opinion.


----------



## The Jug Rules! (Aug 30, 2006)

Thunerbolt, Fw 190, KI-100(hope i got that right),And the G.55


----------



## Chocks away! (Aug 30, 2006)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> It is only famouse because of the movies that it is been featured in and unfortunatly 90 percent of the people that see it think it is a Bf-109. That is why it is famous.


I'm aware of it being used in german propaganda films-is that what you're reffering to?


----------



## Hot Space (Aug 30, 2006)

Smokey said:


> Marek Rys's Ho 229 Luft Art Images




I was gonna say the Late Marks of Spit's, but looking at this makes me think otherwise. That's a beautiful print of the Go-229 8)


----------



## Camarogenius (Sep 7, 2006)

P-40, because it's got character
B-17 G, again character
F4U If you don't understand, get your eyes checked.
FW 190-D See above
F 104 starfighter I'm not sure why, I just like it.
SR -71 It has the same beauty as a great white shark. It just looks menacing. I saw one in person at the smithsonian , and even whe you couldn't see the plane directly, you could look across the hangar and see where it's parked, because it literally sucks the light out of the area around it.


----------



## grumman-cats (Sep 14, 2006)

This is obvious guys. If you go on looks, it's got it. If you go on performance, it's got it. If you go on versatility, it's got it. On top of all that, it's a proven *KILLER*
The F4U corsair
Now if your looking at the jet side of things then you don't have to look any farther than the F-22 RAPTOR


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2006)

While I think the Corsair is a great looking aircraft there are so many aircraft that were better looking than the Corsair.

Spitfire
Fw-190D-9
Ta-152
Hell even the P-51D is better looking than the Corsair
Meteor
Me-262
P-38


If you want to go off of performance there were still aircraft that had better performance:

Late Spit marks
Fury
Ta-152
Me-262
Meteor
P-80

If you want to go versatility the Fw-190A was just as versatile maybe even more.

And on top of all of that if you want to go with proven _*KILLER*_ the Fw-190, Spitfire, Bf-109, P-51, P-38, P-47 were just as good.


----------



## grumman-cats (Sep 19, 2006)

I will admit that the FW-190 *A* is a beautiful plane but the D model is one of the ugliest airplanes I've ever seen. They completely ruined the looks of that aircraft with that model of it.
Now with that said. Every model of the corsair is just awsome, even the F2G model, not quite as nice but still looks good.
And as bombers go I really like the B-25, I think it's just a well rounded machine. The mosquito isn't to bad either.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 19, 2006)

> I will admit that the FW-190 A is a beautiful plane



well done that man


----------



## cheddar cheese (Sep 19, 2006)

Real men know the Dora is better looking.


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 19, 2006)

cheddar cheese said:


> Real men know the Dora is better looking.


Agreed. Hence the FW-190D in my sig rather than an FW-190A...


----------



## davparlr (Sep 19, 2006)

grumman-cats said:


> I will admit that the FW-190 *A* is a beautiful plane but the D model is one of the ugliest airplanes I've ever seen. They completely ruined the looks of that aircraft with that model of it.
> Now with that said. Every model of the corsair is just awsome, even the F2G model, not quite as nice but still looks good.
> And as bombers go I really like the B-25, I think it's just a well rounded machine. The mosquito isn't to bad either.



I agree with you on the Fw-190A. The Fw-190D looks lanky, like a basketball player. It is kind of like one of those new wide screen TVs, the kind that distorts the horizontal picture, and changes a perfectly proportioned aircraft into something longer.

I don't agree that the B-25 belongs in a pretty plane thread.


----------



## Soren (Sep 19, 2006)

In my opinion the Dora is one very good looking machine.


----------



## Henk (Sep 19, 2006)

I would agree with you Soren.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Sep 20, 2006)

i'm with dave and grumman, the -190A series is by far the better looking, a lot more imposing and looks more like it's out to get you.........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 20, 2006)

grumman-cats said:


> I will admit that the FW-190 *A* is a beautiful plane but the D model is one of the ugliest airplanes I've ever seen. They completely ruined the looks of that aircraft with that model of it.



Disagree the Dora is a beautiful aircraft. Much sleaker and better looking than the Anton. This is based off of opinion though...



grumman-cats said:


> Now with that said. Every model of the corsair is just awsome, even the F2G model, not quite as nice but still looks good.



And that is what we call opinion my friend. While I think the Corsair is a good looking aircraft she is not the most beautiful.


----------



## davparlr (Sep 20, 2006)

Soren said:


> In my opinion the Dora is one very good looking machine.





Henk said:


> I would agree with you Soren.



I agree with you both, it just doesn't make it with the following list which I have stated before. You might note that I like deltas

Biplane P-6E Hawk
Pre-war Hughes H-1
Spitfire Mk5
Heinkel He-100D-1
WWII Fw-190A
Mosquito
XP-67 Moonbat
Post War F-86
Bell X-2
Douglass Skyrocket
F-106 Delta Dart
B-58 Hustler
Marage IIIR
T-38 Talon

Here is some pictures.


----------



## abhiginimav (Jan 1, 2007)

Ok...here it goes
(not all of these are millitary)
_-=Concorde=-_
A340
A380
B737
A320
A330
Vulcan
Hawker Hunter
Folland / HAL Gnat
Haljet
Hawk
Tornado GR4
Tornado ADV
SEPECAT Jaguar
Harrier
X-35 JSF
MIg 29
SU27
SU33
J10
hercules
VC10
Apache
Lynx
TSR2
Spitfire
Mosquito
Canberra
Hornet
Falcon
Foxbat
Foxhound
-Gasp-
Seaking 
Merlin
Dominie
Tucano
Griffin
Huey
Havok
Hind
Halo
Wessex
Sea dart
AWACS (yes even the awacs)
Lancaster
Supermarine Scimitar
Supermarine Attacker
Supermarine Swift
Crusader
Thundercheif
eurofighter
embraer Sentinel
Chinook

WOW that was long....i dont think i got even half of the planes i like !!


----------



## Crow (Jan 4, 2007)

Spitfire VIII
Hornet
Hunter


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 4, 2007)

X


----------



## Bf109_g (Jan 4, 2007)

Avro Lancaster B.Mk.III


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 4, 2007)

More beautiful than a Spitfire, Bf-109, Fw-190D, Ta-152, Sea Fury, Tempest, or P-51?


----------



## davparlr (Jan 4, 2007)

Bf109_g said:


> Avro Lancaster B.Mk.III


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 4, 2007)

It said Lancaster, Lancaster, Lancaster at first....


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 4, 2007)

Moder civil transport aircraft like the A380, A340, B737...beautiful. Me thinks not. The only civil tube transport plane with ANY beauty (and still no competiion for military or experimental airplanes) is the B757 with the landing gear down. Like a beautiful lady with long legs.


----------



## v2 (Jan 4, 2007)

PZL P-11c


----------



## Bf109_g (Jan 4, 2007)

I know Alder, I changed it, because the Lancaster B.III is the most beautiful plane, but that's my opinion. And everyone on here likes different planes.

James.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 4, 2007)

X


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 4, 2007)

Beech Staggerwing! Good one. Very Art Deco.


----------



## Treize (Jan 5, 2007)

I'm sure these already mentioned, but I'm new to the forum and just couldn't make it through 17 pages of aeronautical pornography...  

Lockheed P-38J





Messreschmitt Bf-109G6R6





P-51D





Yes, I have a WWII Fighter Fetish.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 5, 2007)

Don't apologize. We all do.


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 5, 2007)

Even in toy form.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 6, 2007)

In Fw terms at least.......


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 6, 2007)

I would disagree and say these but anyway...


----------



## davparlr (Jan 6, 2007)

Gnomey said:


> I would disagree and say these but anyway...




Nope! Gangly.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 6, 2007)

X


----------



## mkloby (Jan 6, 2007)

davparlr said:


> Nope! Gangly.



You got that right


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 6, 2007)

But it was maneauverable and fast (475mph) at 45,000ft for God's sake!! Beautiful, I say.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 7, 2007)

do you judge beauty off figures


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 7, 2007)

X


----------



## Marcel (Jan 7, 2007)

For me the Fokker G.I is the best looking plane ever, but of course I'm Dutch.
Second, the Hawker Hurricane, which looks better than the spit in some ways.
I like the Spitfire (but only the merlin versions) and the He112 as well. Can anyone explain why they had elliptical wings (apart from looking great of course).


----------



## mkloby (Jan 7, 2007)

Marcel said:


> For me the Fokker G.I is the best looking plane ever, but of course I'm Dutch.
> Second, the Hawker Hurricane, which looks better than the spit in some ways.
> I like the Spitfire (but only the merlin versions) and the He112 as well. Can anyone explain why they had elliptical wings (apart from looking great of course).



I might be wrong, but I think I may remember from aero classes back in the day that elliptical wings offer the best lift vs drag, all other factors remaining constant. They also have nasty stall characteristics, with stalls beginning at tips and rapidly moving throughout - but there are other methods of overcoming this tendency.

Of course - manufacturing is complicated and more costly with elliptical wings, which is why tapered wings became popular...


----------



## Marcel (Jan 7, 2007)

mkloby said:


> I might be wrong, but I think I may remember from aero classes back in the day that elliptical wings offer the best lift vs drag, all other factors remaining constant. They also have nasty stall characteristics, with stalls beginning at tips and rapidly moving throughout - but there are other methods of overcoming this tendency.
> 
> Of course - manufacturing is complicated and more costly with elliptical wings, which is why tapered wings became popular...



Thanks, I was wondering this quite some time. But another question. At one time, they clipped the Spitfire's wings, for increased roll rates. Did this overcome the stall problems as well?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 7, 2007)

Gnomey those 190D and 152 pics are very nice! They look much better than the A which was also a good looking aircraft.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 7, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Gnomey those 190D and 152 pics are very nice! They look much better than the A which was also a good looking aircraft.



ach wo!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 7, 2007)

ach wo?


----------



## mkloby (Jan 7, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> ach wo?



I thought i remembered from my german classes 10 years ago that meant nonsense or no way? I was trying to be 'cultural'


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 7, 2007)

You got the nonsense part right apparently. 

I thought you sneezed.


----------



## iart7 (Jan 7, 2007)

Mighty nice looking planes, guys! but...
You can't beat this one:

iArt7 





_*=============== Fictional Paint Scheme of RAAF Hellcat ===============*_


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 7, 2007)

I like the plane, but that is an odd looking screenshot.


----------



## Treize (Jan 8, 2007)

Marcel said:


> Thanks, I was wondering this quite some time. But another question. At one time, they clipped the Spitfire's wings, for increased roll rates. Did this overcome the stall problems as well?




I think it was pretty much the same at the low altitudes the CW versions were intended for, but was probably worse at higher altitudes- same speed, thinner air, less wing area. Better roll performance but probably slightly worse stall/spin characteristics.

I know in flight sims they are usually great down low and really tricky up high, but those are by no means real life. Our Spit XVI.LF in Aces High is a monster on the deck but handles like a one legged rollerblader on ice above 15K.


----------



## Treize (Jan 8, 2007)

The Romanian IAR 80/81 series. WorldWar2.ro - IAR-80/81


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 8, 2007)

X


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 8, 2007)

It allways reminded me of a Fw-190 in some sort of way.

Actually like a cross between a Fw-190 and a Corsair as a matter of fact.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 8, 2007)

X


----------



## Chocks away! (Jan 8, 2007)

(Posted in the wrong place)


----------



## Treize (Jan 9, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> It allways reminded me of a Fw-190 in some sort of way.
> 
> Actually like a cross between a Fw-190 and a Corsair as a matter of fact.



15th USAAF pilots and crews who encountered them logged them in their reports as "Strangely marked early-model Fw-190s", they did not know until long after the war that it was completely different aircraft.

I knew a B-24 radio operator/gunner in the 15th AAF (who unfortunately passed away 2 years ago) who refused to believe that they were not 190's, even when I showed him photos and articles on the IAR and pointed out the differences. He insisted that they were "Yellow-nosed Focke-Wulfs".


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 9, 2007)

I can see the confusion especially in combat.


----------



## davparlr (Jan 9, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Gnomey those 190D and 152 pics are very nice! They look much better than the A which was also a good looking aircraft.



Baloney! For those of you who are unfamilar with Ameican slang, that means "Baloney!"


----------



## davparlr (Jan 9, 2007)

Chingachgook said:


> Yes, it is like they mated.



Not a good mating!


----------



## twoeagles (Jan 9, 2007)

I really (in my narrow American aviation world) had no previous knowledge
of the IAR 80 aircraft. I looked up some photo's, and have to say that
I don't see anything special in them. In any event, they wouldn't be
on my top 100 list (or top 500) of beautiful designs. Capable they may have
been, but they just don't do anything for my eye.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 9, 2007)

with the very slight exception of the wing shape i don't think she looks anything like a -190, although she is good looking as she looks so much like a racer............


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 9, 2007)

davparlr said:


> Baloney! For those of you who are unfamilar with Ameican slang, that means "Baloney!"



Now yall hear me...Yall R Jes Being Plane Stupid Naw... You hear me son...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 9, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> with the very slight exception of the wing shape i don't think she looks anything like a -190, although she is good looking as she looks so much like a racer............



I think it looks like a late combination of a Fw-190D and a Corsair.


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 9, 2007)

I think it is more Corsair than 190 though...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 9, 2007)

That I agree with because of the cockpit and tail configuration.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 9, 2007)

yes i believe i said corsair one of the last times this was discussed, but -190's pushing it, like i say i think only the wing shape is similar, the nose doesn't ring any bells with the D for me........


----------



## davparlr (Jan 9, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Now yall hear me...Yall R Jes Being Plane Stupid Naw... You hear me son...



At last! Something I can understand! And, thanks for complement I am usually called an idiot.


----------



## iart7 (Jan 9, 2007)

... Hughes H-1 Racer:


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 9, 2007)

very similar indeed!


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 9, 2007)

X


----------



## mkloby (Jan 9, 2007)

Chingachgook said:


> Yeah that is similar. Almost a rip-off.  Corsair also had roots in the Hughes racer?
> 
> BTW - the P-38 pilots that got shot down by the IAR80s thougth that they were Fw190s. But I must say they don't really look too similar - other than aircooled with spinner dome.



In the middle of combat you might.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 9, 2007)

davparlr said:


> At last! Something I can understand! And, thanks for complement I am usually called an idiot.



Anytime my friend.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 10, 2007)

X


----------



## mkloby (Jan 10, 2007)

Chingachgook said:


> C-17 Globemaster - Cargo planes are not supposed to look cool, but someone failed to tell Boeing this.



She's as sexy as a transport can be! I always loved watching them fly in and out.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 10, 2007)

C-17? Uh, uh. Nope. Not the Cargomaster III.

Rather the C-133 Cargomaster II. C'mon this plane is brutally handsome. Developed to carry intercontinental ballistic missiles, in its first form it could carry 100,000lbs, 2000nm. Man I love turboprops!


----------



## mkloby (Jan 10, 2007)

You compare that skank to the C-17!? She's actually not bad looking. I absolutely love turboprops - apparantly it's all I'm really destined to fly, and that's OK by me. The sound when you kick her into reverse after touchdown might be my favorite sound 8)


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Jan 11, 2007)

IAR 80/81

I like that plane. It looks almost like a corsair in tha tail, FW in the nose.


----------



## davparlr (Jan 11, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> C-17? Uh, uh. Nope. Not the Cargomaster III.
> 
> Rather the C-133 Cargomaster II. C'mon this plane is brutally handsome. Developed to carry intercontinental ballistic missiles, in its first form it could carry 100,000lbs, 2000nm. Man I love turboprops!



Nice looking but a miserable failure. It had the bad habit of falling apart in the sky. Killed some good men.

If you like airlifters, a real winner is the C-141!


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 11, 2007)

nice, but a bit of a flying tube.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 11, 2007)

X


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 11, 2007)

X


----------



## mkloby (Jan 12, 2007)

See that's what I'm talking about! C-17 kicks ass!


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 12, 2007)

Yep!

Another one I like.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 12, 2007)

the C-17 is stunningly beautiful, but as for the sidewinders?


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 12, 2007)

X


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 12, 2007)

X


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 12, 2007)

never knew about the missiles, we certainly don't do it, and yes with those wings it is..........


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 12, 2007)

Yeah that is a Spiteful.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 12, 2007)

no spitfire is she........


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 12, 2007)

X


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

Grob. Looks to much like so many other airplanes (eg Swearingen J-30, etc).

How about the Ratheon-Beechcraft Starship. What a shame that this was a short run. And then the travesty of chopping up all the airframes. My God.


----------



## pbfoot (Jan 12, 2007)

I haven't seen this pretty bird mentioned the famous TB 1 RD


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 12, 2007)

it's only the red that saves her..........


----------



## pbfoot (Jan 12, 2007)

Of course if you knew that it was powered by Rolls Royce it would help i think the Red Arrows followed suit with the red shortly after the Red Knights performances in Europe


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 12, 2007)

X


----------



## pbfoot (Jan 12, 2007)

No its a Canadian T33 or Tbird it was Rolls Royce nene powered and was a little faster climbed faster and cruised better then the more powerful Allison powered US version . The Red Knight with the red scheme was a solo display that was a staple at smaller airshows that couldn't arrange for the other larger formations


----------



## davparlr (Jan 12, 2007)

Chingachgook said:


> nice, but a bit of a flying tube.



That's because it is the stretched C-141B version. The C-141A was much better proportioned, and better flying.


----------



## pbfoot (Jan 12, 2007)

good choice on the 141


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

Okay. For those of us who love the 757 and her pretty legs, this has to be one of the most B-E-A-U-tiful turboprops ever made. And I do love turboprops. And such long legs. Pretty.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 12, 2007)

Very nince matt. I too LOVE turboprops. Something about feeling that power roll/yaw the A/C left...


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

Those did not do it justice. How about these...


----------



## mkloby (Jan 12, 2007)

She's got a hell of an anhedral!


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

And those legs...


----------



## Nonskimmer (Jan 12, 2007)

Niiiiiiiiiice pics!


----------



## mkloby (Jan 12, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> And those legs...



Are we somewhat sexually frustrated tonight???


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

tonight?


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 12, 2007)

I'm so horny even the crack of dawn looks good.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

and the C-141 will never be beautiful...........


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 13, 2007)

Got to agree with lanc here, although the turboprops are alright...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 13, 2007)

I dont think the C-141 looks that bad. Certianly sexier than a Lancaster....


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I dont think the C-141 looks that bad. Certianly sexier than a Lancaster....



The lancaster was rather lacking in the looks department! (waiting for lanc's response)


----------



## Sierra Fox (Jan 13, 2007)

Hawker Sea Fury, HANDS DOWN!!!!


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 13, 2007)

X


----------



## davparlr (Jan 13, 2007)

mkloby said:


> See that's what I'm talking about! C-17 kicks ass!



The C-17 is just a baby with a lot of promise (I believe that it has, or had the same displays that I helped develop for the B-2), but will have to serve long and well to fill the shoes of the C-141.
Vietnam
Grenada
Panama
Somalia
Kosovo
Afghanistan
Iraq (two wars)
A multitude of air evacs and emergency support
10.5 million hours flying time
1 million full stop landings



the Lancaster kicks ass said:


> and the C-141 will never be beautiful...........



I’ll bet the Vietnam War POWs would not agree with you. I suspect it will always look like an angel from heaven to them. Here’s a quote from an AF magazine. 

“Hanoi Taxi shuttles C-141 into history books	



by Eugene Vandeventer
Air Force Reserve Command History Office

5/5/2006 - ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE, Ga. -- Arguably the most famous C-141 Starlifter in the Air Force inventory touched down for the last time at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio on May 6. The “Hanoi Taxi,” tail number 66-0177 flew its final scheduled mission in preparation for permanent display at the National Museum of the United States Air Force.

The “Hanoi Taxi” is best remembered for its role in Operation HOMECOMING carrying the first 40 American prisoners of war from Hanoi’s Gia Lam Airport to Clark Air Base, The Philippines. 

On May 5, the Hanoi Taxi repeated the moment in history by flying approximately 100 former Vietnam POWs in what was the last mission for the cargo workhorse. 
There was much pride and melancholy in the final flight as airmen reminisced about the distinguished history of the C-141, this particular tail number, and the thought that it will never take flight again. “

I had flown C-141 66-0177, but not on the POW mission.

Now I will tell my only interesting war story (not really war). McGuire AFB had the responsibility for Presidential support, flying his car around, Secret Service, etc. As such, we had a C-141 on standby at all times and crewed, either in alpha alert (launch in three hours) or in bravo alert (launch in twelve, I think). I had pulled duty as aircraft commander on Oct. 10, 1973. We were ordered into alpha alert and, sure enough we launched. First indication that all was not normal was when my Loadmaster informed me that they had loaded a forklift improperly (no plywood to distribute the weigh) and Operations told me not to worry, I would have waivers for any discrepancy. We flew to Harrisburg, Pa., where they actually opened the field for us (it was the middle of the night and the field was closed). There was only a guy in the tower. Harrisburg has a armory and we had to load 40,000 lbs of shrike missiles by hand, and previously the mentioned forklift. Shrike missiles were anti-radar missiles. The tower guy called me up and said I had a telephone call from the Joint Chief Staff office!!! Quite a shock for a new captain. He told me I had to get the plane off. I told him we were loading it by hand!

After loading, we took off for Oceana NAS, which has parallel runways. We were told to land, taxi to end of the runway and shut down on the runway. VERY unusual. On the parallel runway was a Boeing 707 completely covered in wrapping paper. It looked like a BIG package. The cargo loading doors were open and we could see El Al written on the inside. They loaded the shrikes on the 707, which already had a load of sidewinders on it. It took the entire runway (12000 ft., I believe) to take off. On our arrival back at McGuire I turned on the news and Walter Cronkite, who said “Today, the US flew its first support flight for Israel. Here is a Boeing 747 (sic) taking off from Oceana NAS for Israel”. So much for secrecy. In reality it was my C-141 taking (you can’t miss telling the difference between the two). So, I made national television! My only claim to fame. That, and going to the same high school as Emmitt Smith, only much earlier.

Later on we flew shuttles out of the Azores (Lajes) to Israel. We had to split the straits of Gibraltar and avoid all national airspace (no European nations would provide support except a few in an emergency). The Navy stationed a couple of carriers in Med for protection from Libya and others. Near Cyprus we picked up Israeli fighter escort into Tel Aviv. Upon unloading one of the Israelis said that the ammunition we were unloading would be fired in 30 minutes. Close front! Then we turned around and flew back to Lajes. Because of this, the C-141 was upgraded to the B version with inflight refueling and a two fuselage plugs adding three pallets. If we had not had the Azores, we could not have resupplied Israel. Also we were almost always limited by space and not weight.

Last quote.

“The C-141 served the Air Force and our nation well and will be missed by all who had the opportunity to fly the Starlifter”. It tore me up to see them cutting up the C-141s but they had flown the life out of her. A gallant, strong, and reliable old friend, an indeed beautiful bird.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

Chingachgook said:


> Matt308, that's cool, looks like pure evil. (Tu-95?)



Tu-95/Tu-142


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

> 10.5 million hours flying time



they've already racked up well over 1 million and this will only continue to rocket, i'm sticking with everyone else here, the C-17 is, as Les would put it, a "Bangin' peice of @ss"!


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

Lanc, don't quote Les. It's not becoming of you.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

you're right, my own quotes are far better


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

dav - I'm not disputing that the 141 was an excellent A/C. I'm just partial to the looks of the C-17. She's hot! Of course - beauty is always in the eye of the beholder, and thank goodness for that - because someone even married me


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

mk's got a point, a female- yes a _real_ woman once said i was attractive in a special way


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

In a special way. Is that kinda like how one sympathizes with a three legged dog? Sounds kinda like a backhanded comment.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

she also described herself in the same way  of course i did my gentlemanly duty and reassured her of how stunningly beautiful she is, on account of the fact she's fit as


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 13, 2007)

X


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

You too?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 13, 2007)

Man alive she's fit


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> Man alive she's fit



British expressions always makes me laugh


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

God your fit as, mkloby.

And Chingachgook, you must have married up. Welcome to my and mkloby's world.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> God your fit as, mkloby.
> 
> And Chingachgook, you must have married up. Welcome to my and mkloby's world.




I'm not sure what the first part of your post means??? But she'll be improving the looks of my bloodline for sure


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

Sarcasm, Matt. Sarcasm. I'm still trying to figure out the new British youth lingo.

Put your gay shields down.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Sarcasm, Matt. Sarcasm. I'm still trying to figure out the new British youth lingo.
> 
> Put your gay shields down.



 it wasn't that - I just had no idea what you meant


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

No harm. No foul. Now that we have established your wife is "fit as", perhaps you should ask her what she 'thinks' she is "fit as". Being preggy, I bet it wouldn't match Lanc's definition. 

She is cute mkloby. Hang on to her.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 13, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> God your fit as, mkloby.
> 
> And Chingachgook, you must have married up. Welcome to my and mkloby's world.



Make that the 3 of us.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 13, 2007)

Thanks  I'm proof that even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 13, 2007)

Kinda like the cartoon Jurassic squirrel in Ice Age coveting his acorn.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 13, 2007)

X


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 14, 2007)

mkloby said:


> Thanks  I'm proof that even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while.



i'd rather hope that in marrying a woman you'd find no nuts 

and for those not in the know this's what the Urban Dictionary has to say about "Fit" Urban Dictionary: fit


----------



## mkloby (Jan 14, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> i'd rather hope that in marrying a woman you'd find no nuts
> 
> and for those not in the know this's what the Urban Dictionary has to say about "Fit" Urban Dictionary: fit



 it said "the british version of hot"


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 14, 2007)

yes that made me chuckle, but yes i hope you know what i meant now


----------



## HealzDevo (Jan 14, 2007)

I would go P/F-51 Mustang, Spitfire, B-36 Peacemaker in Bare Aluminium, Lightning (The Interceptor), B-1, B-2 Spirit and the F-117 all three B-1, B-2 and F-117 in black. The rest except for the Spitfire in bare aluminium. The Spitfire in 1940 BOB camoflage. These are all my nominations. For helicopters, AH-64D Apache Longbow in Dark Green/Black, and CH-47 Chinook in Artic Camoflage...


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 14, 2007)

Oh alright, HealzDevo. Back to the script it is.

You gotta love Rutan. Beautiful plane.


----------



## YakFlyer (Jan 15, 2007)

The Spitfire, need I say anymore.


----------



## Chingachgook (Jan 15, 2007)

X


----------



## bf109pl (Jan 15, 2007)

bf 109 E 












Do-335 












Me-262:
















HORTEN:











Arado 234 Blitz:


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 15, 2007)

What are the hub/fans on the horten? Never noticed those before.


----------



## Parmigiano (Jan 15, 2007)

Was a pre-Gotha 229 project, probably the 1937 Ho V with 2 small Hirth engines.

... and I LOVE the Rutan's Vary Eze, one day I will have the money and time to waste for building one for myself...


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 15, 2007)

Parmigiano said:


> Was a pre-Gotha 229 project, probably the 1937 Ho V with 2 small Hirth engines.
> 
> ... and I LOVE the Rutan's Vary Eze, one day I will have the money and time to waste for building one for myself...



Thanks, Pamigiano. But what purpose do the fan like devices serve?


----------



## Parmigiano (Jan 15, 2007)

I'm not sure but I think the fan was spinned by the airflow and used to generate electricity for the airplane.
The same system was used in the Me163 and I believe on the Fw 189 who had similar fans on the tip of the prop hubs.


----------



## mkloby (Jan 15, 2007)

Parmigiano said:


> I'm not sure but I think the fan was spinned by the airflow and used to generate electricity for the airplane.
> The same system was used in the Me163 and I believe on the Fw 189 who had similar fans on the tip of the prop hubs.



interesting as opposed to running a generator off the accessory section...


----------



## wolfpath (Jan 15, 2007)

To me, one of the most beautiful plane was the Reggiane 2005, and very beautiful were the Macchi M.C. 202 and 205 and the Fiat G. 55, of course! Don't you think?


----------



## wolfpath (Jan 15, 2007)

Sorry, I did not how to include a picture. Here in this site you can see - I hope - some pictures of the beautiful Reggiane 2005 and of the womderful macchi and FIat: it seems incredible that the FIat could do, during 2ww such wonderful planes (the Fiat Cr 32, prticularly, and the Cr 42 were fine planes). The beauty of these planes was not just estetic, if I can say. This beauty had a correspondance in excellente flight qualities, so it was real beauty, not jus a matter of shapes


----------



## TBFGunner (Jan 15, 2007)

. . .For me, there is absolutely no doubt that the B-17 was the most majestic, beautiful airplane ever built! My Dad flew in TBF's in WWII which was certainly a nice looking bird (pregnant bathtubs) they were called. My son also works on F-15's at Seymour Johnson as a crew chief. . .those aren't so bad either. . .You just gotta love the look of that '17 though.

Mike


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 15, 2007)

Beautiful, Wolfpath. And TBF gunner, I think the B-17 is nice looking, but the F-15 is a beauty.


----------



## HealzDevo (Jan 15, 2007)

I like the ones I mentioned. Plus the SR-71 Blackbird in Black is a real looker.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 17, 2007)

you mean she comes in other colours! sweet, i want mine in Orange!


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 17, 2007)

Yellow for training. Very British, you know.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 20, 2007)

this is true- man that would look [email protected] with RAF roundels!


----------



## joebong (Jan 21, 2007)

Pre malcom hood Spits, B17s, F111 aardvark, P38s.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 21, 2007)

i can't see anything in the F-111.............


----------



## Trautloft (Jan 21, 2007)

http://www2.uwindsor.ca/~bain9/veltro.jpg


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 21, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> this is true- man that would look [email protected] with RAF roundels!



Clave, where are you when we need you!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 21, 2007)

Bf-109G, Do-24, A-26 Invader, B-26 Maurader, A-20 Havoc, Fw-190D, Ta-152, Mosquito, Spitfire XIV and Ar-234 and not in any particular order


----------



## bigZ (Jan 21, 2007)

Depredussin 1913 Record holder, Buggatti, Reggianne Re 2005, DH Hornet, Whirlwind, Spit MK XI in PRU blue, Focke ta 152 C/E/H, Heinonoen HK-1, Sopwith Scooter.


----------



## Hellcatgirl5785 (Jan 21, 2007)

I think The most beautiful Planes of world war 2 are
The P 51 Mustang The P 47 Thunder Bolt The F6F Hellcat The Convair The Dehavailand Ardvarck The B 24 Liberator and the Me 262


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 21, 2007)

Well that's a breath of fresh air. Why the B24 HellCG?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 23, 2007)

because she obviously likes ugly bombers, the lanc of course being the finest looking 4 engined heavy of the war and indeed one of the best looking of all aircraft in the war...........


----------



## Hellcatgirl5785 (Jan 23, 2007)

I Chose The Liberator as one of the most beautiful of the war because it was ahead of it's time techonolgy wise and because it helped liberate europe from the nazis


----------



## twoeagles (Jan 23, 2007)

DH Aardvark???? Help me here...I keep visualizing the F-111. DH Aardvark?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 23, 2007)

how was the B-24 ahead in technology? the B-29, now _she_ was ahead in technology..........


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 23, 2007)

own up then, who almost fainted because i said something good about the B-29 over the lanc  see adler i'm not that bad


----------



## twoeagles (Jan 23, 2007)

Shucks, Lanc, you were only stating fact.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 23, 2007)

ah but one must ask why adler has yet to reply? answer, he fainted, see, it all makes sense.........


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 24, 2007)

Terribly sorry. Adler and I were conversing about Larches.

What was that young man?


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 26, 2007)

i said something good about something American other than you


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 26, 2007)

It's not that we desire you to praise something American, Lanc. Rather the forum is impressed that you had something positive to say about ANYTHING that is not of British origin.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 27, 2007)

i've done that on atleast a handful of occasions........


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 27, 2007)

...in 19,734 posts.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 27, 2007)

Again...A-5 Vigie


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 28, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> ...in 19,734 posts.



i think that's quite a favourable ratio 

and she looks a lot like the F-111, which is _not_ a beautiful aircraft............

normal service has resumed...........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 28, 2007)

Hellcatgirl5785 said:


> I Chose The Liberator as one of the most beautiful of the war because it was ahead of it's time techonolgy wise and because it helped liberate europe from the nazis



B-17s and Lancasters helped liberate Europe from the Nazis too...


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 28, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> i think that's quite a favourable ratio
> 
> and she looks a lot like the F-111, which is _not_ a beautiful aircraft............
> 
> normal service has resumed...........



Like an Aardvark? You kidding? The Vigie is beautiful, graceful, like a diving hawk.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 28, 2007)

looks like an Aardvark..........


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 28, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> looks like an Aardvark..........



Agreed it does.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 28, 2007)




----------



## renrich (Jan 29, 2007)

My vote for the most beautiful plane ever would go to the Spitfire.


----------



## YakFlyer (Jan 30, 2007)

Yep, the Spitfire, come on folks, how straight forward is this one! 
I'd have said the Concorde deserves a mention here too.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 30, 2007)

Well that depends on your personal taste. It is an opinion of what is the best looking and what is not. 

To me it is the Bf-109G followed by the Mosquito.


----------



## Smokey (Jan 30, 2007)

Kawasaki Ki 61 Hien "Tony"

ŽOŽ®í“¬‹@@”ò‰


----------



## str8jax (Jan 30, 2007)

Okay I think mine in no certain order me109 p 51 spitfire/typhoon fw 190 b17g f6 p47 yak 3..those are some of my favs but i like the looks of others ... Including the lanc. That Italian plane someone posted b... 2005 looks like a 109 in italian paint.


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 30, 2007)

Same with the Hein


----------



## mkloby (Jan 30, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Same with the Hein



Albeit a little more portly looking...


----------



## plan_D (Jan 30, 2007)

Most beautiful; me. The most beautiful plane...well it all depends if I'm sat in it or not.


----------



## Gnomey (Jan 31, 2007)

Not that found of the Hein to be honest, it doesn't look quite right unlike say the Spitfire or the 109...


----------



## davparlr (Jan 31, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Again...A-5 Vigie



Certainly makes my list of most beautiful planes. It does NOT look like an F-111! I like the F-111, I think it is an interesting design, but not beautiful. I also think it is highly underrated, the F-117 of its era.

*Classic Military Warning*

"If the enemy is in range, so are you." Infantryman's Journal


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 31, 2007)

how does she not look like a F-111? and it's not WWII but the Concorde is the only aircraft in the history of aviation that comes close to beating the Spitfire......


----------



## Matt308 (Jan 31, 2007)

Looks ugly and sounds uglier. Reminds me of a stork standing on one leg.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Jan 31, 2007)

i don't know if you're refering to the Concorde or Spitfire- but either way i can assure you you're wrong


----------



## mkloby (Jan 31, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> how does she not look like a F-111? and it's not WWII but the Concorde is the only aircraft in the history of aviation that comes close to beating the Spitfire......



Lanc - you've obviously been rocking the hashish...  

Spitfire is sexy, concorde... ehhh. THere are many other beauties out there. You gotta see them in person, you can't truly judge beauty from a picture.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 3, 2007)

in what way is the Concorde not the most stunningly beautiful airliner ever produced?


----------



## Gnomey (Feb 3, 2007)

I agree the Concorde is great, how can you not see that...


----------



## davparlr (Feb 3, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> how does she not look like a F-111?



???? Let's see. Oh, yes one has side by side seating the other tandem, one has swing wings, the other fixed. One had strange intakes under the wing, the the other has clean intakes in front of the wing. One is kind of chubby, the other, lean and clean. No wonder you think they look alike. You probably think the Lancaster looks like a B-17.

*Classic Military Warnings*

"No combat-ready unit has ever passed inspection"


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 3, 2007)

> You probably think the Lancaster looks like a B-17.



how dare you suggest i would degrade the Lancaster to the depths of human filth that is the B-17...........

Now some of you are no doubt thinking that that statement was overly biased towards the lancaster, well i would also like to say that the British parts of the Concorde were far better looking than the lanc..........


----------



## Smokey (Feb 3, 2007)

The Dassault Mirage series






















Mirage 2000 - Dassault Aviation - Avion de combat
Dassault Aircraft - Steve Crampton
Dassault Mirage 5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 3, 2007)

Pig ugly and that's an end to it.......


----------



## davparlr (Feb 3, 2007)

Smokey said:


> The Dassault Mirage series




I like deltas. The Mirage made my list of good looking aircraft.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 3, 2007)

doesn't make mine..........


----------



## pbfoot (Feb 3, 2007)

natuarally I've chosen this


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 3, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> doesn't make mine..........



And that is supposed to be the deciding factor if something looks good or not. For Christs sakes you think that French Bombers look good! You thinkt the Lancaster looks better than a B-17! 

Eneogh said...


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Feb 4, 2007)

and pB did she ever wear those american markings?


----------



## pbfoot (Feb 4, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> and pB did she ever wear those american markings?


no more then she wore RAF


----------



## Matt308 (Feb 4, 2007)

And the Mirage series are beautiful planes. [Aaaghh. I think I just complemented the french.]


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Feb 5, 2007)

There have been worse looking aircraft.


----------



## pejayte (Feb 27, 2007)

P51D, Hurricane, Spitfire and Sea Fury. No preference, just love them all the same! And for sheer brute force, the English Electric Lightning!


----------



## Aggie08 (Feb 27, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> in what way is the Concorde not the most stunningly beautiful airliner ever produced?



Constellation takes that honor!


----------



## str8jax (Mar 2, 2007)

Ive always liked the looks of the f4,s The phantom and the corsair I thing it has something to do with the way the wings are swept on both, and the dropped tail on the Phantom.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 6, 2007)

Aggie08 said:


> Constellation takes that honor!



On that we agree Aggie.


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 6, 2007)

Aggie08 said:


> Constellation takes that honor!



Ditto. The Connie is (was) the last word in airliner style and design artistry.
And all done before computers...


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 6, 2007)

I wish I could see one fly, just once. That would be amazing!


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 6, 2007)

twoeagles said:


> Ditto. The Connie is (was) the last word in airliner style and design artistry.
> And all done before computers...



And to think that her characteristic hump was the result of a design flaw!


----------



## Civettone (Mar 6, 2007)

Really?




Kris


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 7, 2007)

Got to climb on board a Connie in Alabama years ago.


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 7, 2007)

My earliest recollection of flying on an airliner was taking a TWA Connie from
Denver to NYC, a real treat because my Dad usually crammed six of us into
a Piper and flew us himself. Anyway, I remember it so well because the 
number 3 engine had to be shut down just outside my window, and my Dad said that was okay because they carried it as a spare anyway....


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 7, 2007)

Spare


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 7, 2007)

Civettone said:


> Really?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Humpback shape took on graceful "S". Complicated with long landing necessitated by large diameter props was the primary rationale for the humpback. Coupled with having to dump a single vertical stabilizer in favor of a lower profile triple tail, these were subsequently shadowed by the fuselage. The need to address flutter and rudder authority resulted in the graceful upcurve in the aft end.

God works in mysterious ways, but this was truly the Concorde of its day.


----------



## Marcel (Mar 9, 2007)

Nicest plane in the world: Piper Cub. Flew in one as a passenger, great experience


----------



## bigZ (Mar 9, 2007)

The Connie is not not bad looking but for a prop airliner but I prefer the Condor.


----------



## Smokey (Mar 9, 2007)

Nice. I find the Tupolev Tu 114 shapely as well






http://members.fortunecity.com/ibaicu3/aviatie25.JPG


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 9, 2007)

The Condor is pretty. But can't hold a candle to the Connie.


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 9, 2007)

John Travolta passed through Goose Bay with his Connie and I had the chance to talk to him on the radio for about 10 minutes one slow night. it is a real pretty bird as nice an airliner as there ever was


----------



## bigZ (Mar 9, 2007)

Going back to Concorde. It has the best shape of any plane in the top plan view unfortunately those engines spoil it at any other angle. Regarding the storky look I agree. But I think its always best to judge a plane in its element. Certainly a step backwards and an end of an era in aviation. 

RIP.


----------



## davparlr (Mar 9, 2007)

If you are going to talk about commercial aircraft, you must include the Convair 990. A beautiful, fast, failure.


----------



## MAV_406 (Mar 9, 2007)




----------



## MAV_406 (Mar 9, 2007)

I like the condor but out of all aviation the F-14 and SAAB Grippen


----------



## Desert Fox (Mar 10, 2007)

I would say the Ta.152 or the Sukhoi Su-37


----------



## MAV_406 (Mar 10, 2007)

i like it too


----------



## Jared (Mar 10, 2007)

I like the Fokker Dr1 and the F-22 isn't half bad  Not really WW2 but you know  ^^ I also like the Spitfires.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 10, 2007)

Su-37 is nice. And the Concorde? Anyone ever heard that beast take off and seen the spew come out the rearend? Now the B-1 is a Concorde refined.


----------



## Smokey (Mar 10, 2007)

There is also the De havilland DH 91 Albatross





















De Havilland DH-91 Albatross - Fronta.cz











De Havilland DH91 Albatros pictures and photos


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 10, 2007)

Your kidding right?


----------



## Smokey (Mar 10, 2007)

The best photos of this plane are found at the bottom of this page

De Havilland DH-91 Albatross - Fronta.cz


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 10, 2007)

Its a pretty aircraft but doesn't show the power or ability of connie doesn't look like it hauls agreat deal


----------



## Smokey (Mar 10, 2007)

Yeah it doesn't compare in that regard though the same construction methods were used in the Mosquito so it served as a proving aircraft for such a structure


----------



## ohka345 (Mar 11, 2007)

The Nakajima Kikka is the most BEAUTIFUL plane...is actually the 262....too bad they never got into service.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 11, 2007)

Have you ever seen a three dimensional model of this bird. Looks ungainly and slow compared to -262.


----------



## Civettone (Mar 11, 2007)

Kris


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 11, 2007)

Like a girl with a big butt.


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 11, 2007)

Smokey said:


> Nice. I find the Tupolev Tu 114 shapely as well
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah, I really like the dual-prop look the Russkies made. Purty.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 11, 2007)

Agreed with that one Aggie. I've posted the military version as mine earlier in the thread. BEAUtiful.


----------



## mkloby (Mar 12, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> Agreed with that one Aggie. I've posted the military version as mine earlier in the thread. BEAUtiful.



That's because props are beautiful. Screw turbojets and turbofans. Bunch of pointy nosed crap!


----------



## Desert Fox (Mar 13, 2007)

Hear hear!


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 13, 2007)

What about this foxy bird?


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 13, 2007)

Matt308 said:


> What about this foxy bird?



Jeez, Matt - this looks like it was designed by a committee, and they
apparently didn't think much of one another!


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 13, 2007)

That is a beast isn't it.


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 13, 2007)

Has to be French doesn't it...


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 13, 2007)

Indeed.....


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 13, 2007)

What is it? Certainly is unique, isn't it...


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 13, 2007)

Douglas designed. F'd up by Piaggio. Its a PD-808.


----------



## mkloby (Mar 13, 2007)

The cockpit looks pregnant.


----------



## Aggie08 (Mar 14, 2007)

Yeah, that's pretty awful. As long as it works I guess.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 14, 2007)

That thing is Fugly!


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 14, 2007)

Just a reminder that all the beautiful cars that come out of Italy are balanced in other areas. They can't do everything right. Makes them more human, I think.


----------



## ohka345 (Mar 17, 2007)

sexy....


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Mar 18, 2007)

what do you guys mean! she's beautiful!


----------



## Gnomey (Mar 18, 2007)

Why does it not surprise me that you said that..


----------



## ToughOmbre (Mar 18, 2007)

The *"Fort"*


----------



## Ajax (Mar 19, 2007)

I have chosen the Supermarine Spitfire for 5 reasons:

It's oval wings are the best looking wings ever made ever.
It is sleek and smooth, not square like the ME109 or the Mustang and not squished like it's constipated like the Corsair or the Stuka.
It isn't a great lumbering oaf.
It dosen't have unsightly drooping jet engines
One for the ladies; it's the most _romantic_.

A French plane? Bleugh!




_The above is Al Murray, a British 'pub landlord'. He has no respect whatsoever for any european countries. Note this is not my view, but I find his insolence amusing_


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 20, 2007)

I personally find the 3 aircraft you named (*Bf* 109, P-51 Mustaing, and Corsair) look better than the Spitfire. Just my opinion though. 8)


----------



## Ajax (Mar 20, 2007)

May I ask why? I'm just curious...


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 20, 2007)

The 109 sounds much better 
the Corsair looks more puposeful


----------



## Ajax (Mar 20, 2007)

The corsair, to me, looks like it's looking down on other planes. To put it blatantly, it looks like it's up its own arse


----------



## 102first_hussars (Mar 21, 2007)




----------



## MAV_406 (Mar 21, 2007)

SAAB gripen,draken,viggen are great


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 21, 2007)

Ajax said:


> May I ask why? I'm just curious...



The Bf 109 is sleak and beautiful looking but has a mean aggressive look to her, a warbird look of what she is meant to do....kill.

The P-51 Mustang is much cleaner than the Spitfire.

The Corsiar has a beautiful shape to her and the gull wings are just awesome!

Dont take me wrong I think the Spitfire looks great but those three above all look better in my opinion. I know she is not but the looks of the Spitfire to me make her look fragile.


----------



## Ajax (Mar 21, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The Bf 109 is sleak and beautiful looking but has a mean aggressive look to her, a warbird look of what she is meant to do....kill.
> 
> The P-51 Mustang is much cleaner than the Spitfire.
> 
> The Corsiar has a beautiful shape to her and the gull wings are just awesome!



Maybe the fact it looks fragile is part of the appeal? I'm not going to change my mind, but then nor are you going to change yours. Like many other things on this site, it's a question of opinion. Somone might find an F-16 bristling with missiles more beautiful than biplane of WWI, or a good game of baseball better than a good game of "soccer", it's all a question of opinion, and, in many cases, patriotism.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 22, 2007)

Exactly that is why I said, my opinion only....


----------



## ToughOmbre (Mar 22, 2007)

Gotta be the Spit. Must be the elliptical wings. Still second on my list to the B-17.


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 22, 2007)

When I walked into the hanger today my eyes went right to the 109 it has the look of a killer .


----------



## Ajax (Mar 22, 2007)

But when the people of Britain looked to the skies in the summer of 1940, they saw the 109s prowling a cross the skies like the ever-present Nazi threat they represented. Then they saw the Spitfire, the very sign that although all Britain's major allies had fallen or left her, she would still fight alone; to the death.

And the elation felt when they saw the trademark elliptical wings, it didn't matter how many casualties or how many Ju88s downed.
All that mattered was that Britain would fight, and at least take some Nazis with it. I have spoken to several people who were in Britain during this time, you see, and there really was a worry of invasion. People didn't know how much power Hitler had. The Germans were right on our doorstep remember, and they loved to remind us...


----------



## pbfoot (Mar 22, 2007)

Ajax said:


> But when the people of Britain looked to the skies in the summer of 1940, they saw the 109s prowling a cross the skies like the ever-present Nazi threat they represented. Then they saw the Spitfire, the very sign that although all Britain's major allies had fallen or left her, she would still fight alone; to the death.
> 
> And the elation felt when they saw the trademark elliptical wings, it didn't matter how many casualties or how many Ju88s downed.
> All that mattered was that Britain would fight, and at least take some Nazis with it. I have spoken to several people who were in Britain during this time, you see, and there really was a worry of invasion. People didn't know how much power Hitler had. The Germans were right on our doorstep remember, and they loved to remind us...


The only thing missing there was a chorus of Rule Brittania


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 23, 2007)

That would have been mighty scary though. The wife and kids huddled around the radio listening to Churchill and his fireside chats about the Empire 1,000 years hence looking back and this was their "Finest Hour". Either you were emboldened... or scared sh**less.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 24, 2007)

Which is why I like the looks of the Bf 109. It looks like a war bird, menacing and searching for prey.


----------



## Ajax (Mar 24, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> The only thing missing there was a *beautiful renditition* of Rule Brittania



Did somone say...

View attachment British Imperial Anthem - Rule Brittania.mp3


----------



## mkloby (Mar 25, 2007)

Ajax said:


> Did somone say...
> 
> View attachment 41122



You nutty crown folk


----------



## davparlr (Mar 25, 2007)

My Mother-In-Law was a young woman working a metal lathe in Leicester, England during the blitz. I always wonder what it was like sleeping, eating, and going of to work while people were flying above you wanting to kill you and dropping bombs on you. Explosions at night, fires, alarms, anti-aircraft artillery going off, concern about invasion. You cannot help but admire that generation.

We are very fortunate that our families do not have to go through that experience.


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 28, 2007)

Amen, brother.


----------



## BAGTIC (Mar 30, 2007)

The Hawker Hunter. What other fighter has bosoms?


----------



## 102first_hussars (Mar 30, 2007)

I still think the Spit is sexiest

when that plane went down, it looked like a falling angel

when the 109 or 190 went down, they look like the moment before one of my terds hit the toilet water


----------



## twoeagles (Mar 30, 2007)

102first_hussars said:


> when the 109 or 190 went down, they look like the moment before one of my terds hit the toilet water




Don't be bashful, hussars, say what you really think about German fighters!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Mar 30, 2007)




----------



## Matt308 (Mar 30, 2007)

Only Les can pull off those analogies. They just seem to flow best from his mind.


----------



## 102first_hussars (Mar 31, 2007)

Actually i wasnt trying to, it just came to me, but yeah i wasnt really trying


----------



## Matt308 (Mar 31, 2007)

It's all good. All good.


----------



## Ajax (Apr 1, 2007)

Anyways, back to the thread...




Beeeeeeeeautiful


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 1, 2007)

mmmhhm....


----------



## Maharg (May 5, 2007)

Spitfire. She has beautiful lines.


----------



## Glider (May 5, 2007)

BAGTIC said:


> The Hawker Hunter. What other fighter has bosoms?



I firmly believe that the Hunter is one of the best looking jets, have worked on them and even flown in them, but bosoms?

Either my eyesight is very very poor, or you I am afraid, have a problem!!


----------



## Negative Creep (May 5, 2007)

I'd say the Spitfire has to be in the running for the most beautiful machine ever made. If I had to be more exact, I'd go for a mark I or II with a 3 bladed prop, just for purities sake. Also, the Mustang, Lancaster, bubble canopy Yaks, Fury, Hunter, Blackbird, BF 110, B-29, Ta-152, Mosquito and Canberra could all be described as beautiful in the conventional sense


----------



## lape2002 (May 18, 2007)

Cool topic, here are some of favorite looking planes of all time : 

A5M4 Claude






Ki-61/II Kai Bubbletop Tony





Ki-45 Kai Tei Toryu (Nick)





Junkers Ju-90 V3 and later (including Ju-290)





SAI SM.84





Yak-3





Fw-189 a-1 





McDonnell XP-67 Moonbat









Seafire FR46/47 





Su-37 or any canard-winged Flanker





F-14D Tomcat


----------



## Bf109_g (May 18, 2007)

Mine's gotta be F-4C Phantom and MiG-21F "Fishbed"... 2 great Vietnam War planes.


----------



## WorkinStiff (May 18, 2007)

Best looking fighter, on the ground: P-47, FW190, Zero, I like those muscular looking, wide stanced radial engine fighters.......In the air, It has to be the Spit; so graceful looking, followed by the P-51 and the P-40,( although only when decorated with the sharks teeth.)..
Twin engined bomber: B-26, Betty B-25.....
Four engined bomber B-17E's Fs followed by the Halifax...The B-24 the Lanc look like flying boxcars and the B-29 like a flying torpedo....Dive bomber; The helldiver, Torpedo bomber: The jill followed closely by the Kate..The Avenger looks like a pregnant guppy and the Swordfish, well, it ain't much for looks but it sure got the Bismark.....
Best looking WWII biplane: Gloster Gladiator..
Postwar: B-58 Hustler, nothing else comes close....


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (May 18, 2007)

Funny how that Yak looks like a Mustang. About as pretty too.


----------



## Sgt. Pappy (May 19, 2007)

Hm. most graceful, I'd say the Spitfire, Mosquito and Rafale, ranked 1st to 3rd in that order.

Coolest looking planes methinks are the CF-105 Arrow, P-38 Lightning and the F4U Corsair, same order.


----------



## drgondog (Jun 5, 2007)

Is any aircraft ever built better looking than a Spitfire?

If we pick jet only, I would have to think F-86 (any model except the Dog)

Bomber only - B70 

Passenger Jet - Concorde


----------



## onandstopped (Jun 5, 2007)

Although not used until Korea, this simply goes fast, real fast, how bout 450KTS.


----------



## drgondog (Jun 5, 2007)

Actually the Marines got the 7F before WWII ended, but don't think they fired a shot. One of very good friends flew them before flying Night duty in Korea in an F4U (and got one of the bed check varmint variety bi-planes in the mountains N Seoul - THAT had to be hairy)

Col Don "Barrel" Fenton RIP, described it as a " stallin', pee in your pants, kinda chase" with flaps down and on ragged edge so that firing his 20mm always induced a stall)


----------



## Graeme (Jun 6, 2007)

Always struck me as having an aesthetically pleasing profile.


----------



## Lucky13 (Jun 6, 2007)

I have far too many on my "most beautiful list" I'm afraid. I like most things that fly up until F-14, -15, -16 and -18 they're nice looking, like many other jets. But if you look at the birds from golden age of flying and WWII and of course some passenger machines like Lockheed Constellation and Boeing 377 Stratocruiser that is talking about pure beauty. WWI fighters etc has their own charm that you can't take away either. I absolutely love the Bf 109F, G and K models, Spitfire with the Merlin engine, I have to admit that I don't like the Griffon version as much. Fw 190-D and the Ta 152H-1, those really say speed and ability like the -D Mustang, -N Thunderbolt and -38L Lightning. I could never compare the beauty of the 109G, Spitfire Mk IX or the Mustang, that to me would be like comparing the 1929-30 Duesenberg Model J, 1933 Rolls Royce Phantom II and 1936 Mercedes 540K and how do you compare those?? Today, those flying thingys with wings are getting too ugly.


----------



## Cyrano (Jun 6, 2007)




----------



## Lucky13 (Jun 6, 2007)

Agreed. Catalina is my alltime favorite flyingboat/amfibian.


----------



## davparlr (Jun 6, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> I could never compare the beauty of the 109G, Spitfire Mk IX or the Mustang, that to me would be like comparing the 1929-30 Duesenberg Model J, 1933 Rolls Royce Phantom II and 1936 Mercedes 540K and how do you compare those?? Today, those flying thingys with wings are getting too ugly.
> 
> QUOTE]
> 
> Where's the Duesy?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jun 6, 2007)

Great pic up there Lucky you criminal!


----------



## Lucky13 (Jun 6, 2007)

davparlr said:


> Lucky13 said:
> 
> 
> > I could never compare the beauty of the 109G, Spitfire Mk IX or the Mustang, that to me would be like comparing the 1929-30 Duesenberg Model J, 1933 Rolls Royce Phantom II and 1936 Mercedes 540K and how do you compare those?? Today, those flying thingys with wings are getting too ugly.
> ...



The top red one is the 1930 Duesenberg Model J. Me? Criminal? I didn't take those cookies...*whipes crumbs off his face*....


----------



## johnbr (Jun 6, 2007)

Me I have always love loved the xb51 just ad 3 GE 412


----------



## ACE Spades (Jul 14, 2007)

I would pick the f-14 and the f-22


----------



## Desert Fox (Jul 15, 2007)

I agree with you on the F-22, ACE, that is a very good looking aircraft.


----------



## Heinz (Jul 15, 2007)

For WW2 Its a hard choice between the Spitfire, Hurri, 109 and 262.

Spitfire is probably my choice.

For Post war the F 16 Fighting Falcon. The sleek lines I find really awesome.


----------



## The Basket (Jul 15, 2007)

concorde
spitfire 
hawker hunter


----------



## Aussie1001 (Jul 15, 2007)

The Su 27 looks really good however the spitfire and Vulcan really do it for me. Although the Concorde also looks real nice pity they decomissioned it.


----------



## drgondog (Jul 16, 2007)

I can never quite choose between the Spit and the F-86 as best looking

but favorite aircraft to look at? 

B-17, Fw190D, 51B w/malcolm hood, 109G and

B-70


----------



## machine shop tom (Jul 16, 2007)

The Skylancer always looked right to me:

http://history.nasa.gov/SP-3300/f32.jpg

This one's nice in NASA garb.

tom


----------



## davparlr (Jul 20, 2007)

ACE Spades said:


> I would pick the f-14 and the f-22



I dissagree with the F-22. The tail looks awkward. The F-35 and the YF-23 are nicer looking.


----------



## Watanbe (Jul 21, 2007)

I really am not that greater fan on the looks of the Corsair, it just doesnt do it for me. In my opinion the British make the best looking planes, the Italians a close second. 

Brits

Hawker Hurricane
Hawker Tempest
Hawker Typhoon
Hawker Sea Fury
De Havillend Mosquito
Supermarine Spitfire
Westland Whirlwhind
Avro Lancaster

Of course as much as I hate the French I believe the Dewoitine d520 was a beatiful plane!


----------



## The Basket (Jul 21, 2007)

Watanbe said:


> I really am not that greater fan on the looks of the Corsair, it just doesnt do it for me. In my opinion the British make the best looking planes, the Italians a close second.
> 
> Brits
> 
> ...



Why do you hate the French? Did they urinate in your corn flakes or something?

The Spitfire is just right from every angle. It aint only a beautiful aircraft but maybe the most beautiful machine. And it was the best fighter of WW2. A beautiful killing machine. And the Rolls Royce merlin makes the best sound of all. And British too.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 21, 2007)

Lets not destroy this thread with a discussion about how anyone hates the French. That is not what this thread is for.


----------



## Seawitch (Jul 21, 2007)

I've been pondering this a while now, if i gave an answer I thought, I'd think of something better later?
Lots to choose from, but I think I'll put my money on the Hawker hind/Hart.
Helicopters...I would go straight to the Westland Wessex, i adore it's looks.


----------



## Watanbe (Jul 22, 2007)

The Basket said:


> Why do you hate the French? Did they urinate in your corn flakes or something?
> 
> The Spitfire is just right from every angle. It aint only a beautiful aircraft but maybe the most beautiful machine. And it was the best fighter of WW2. A beautiful killing machine. And the Rolls Royce merlin makes the best sound of all. And British too.



I dont hate hate them, its more a bit of fun abusing the French. I havent got anything against french people personally. I however do think they have been useless in most conflicts, but as Adler said neither time nor place. 

And yes the Rolls Royce Merlin adds to the appeal, its the package that makes it great, performance, sound, style, potentcy. The honourable image of the plane as a defender of the British people adds to its appeal as well!!! It has become an icon for defence, struggle, courage, skill and quality.


----------



## Watanbe (Jul 22, 2007)

Oh and Basket I dont eat corn flakes8) 8) 

Im actually quite fond of the baguette


----------



## Trautloft (Jul 27, 2007)

im glad that i seen Westland Whirlwhind here


----------



## zuluecho (Jul 28, 2007)

I think the most gorgeous planes are the B-24 Liberator and the P-47!  
i can't believe no one has favored these..


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 28, 2007)

zuluecho said:


> i can't believe no one has favored these..



I can...

The B-24 was an ugly box!

Now nice looking bombers would be the B-17, Ju-88, Mossie....


----------



## zuluecho (Jul 28, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The B-24 was an ugly box!
> 
> Now nice looking bombers would be the B-17, Ju-88, Mossie....



banana bomber.. hehe.. i love it! i must agree though B-17 is beautiful too..


----------



## machine shop tom (Jul 28, 2007)

I've always liked the lines of the B-47:
http://www.af.mil/shared/media/photodb/photos/021001-O-9999J-014.jpg


http://www.boeing.com/news/frontiers/archive/2003/december/photos/12-COV-B-47.jpg

tom


----------



## Watanbe (Jul 29, 2007)

B-24, Jesus can someone please get the lad a doctor!!!!! I thought we were judging the most beautiful not most horrifically ugly!!!!  

I spose each to his own. I agree with you on the P-47 and the pics you showed revealed its purposeful looks. 

Yak 9D


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 29, 2007)

The P-47 was a beautiful aircraft but as you said about the B-24. The man needs a doctor....


----------



## Gnomey (Jul 29, 2007)

True about the B-24, hardly one of the best looking bombers. Besides there are so many better ones to choose: B-17, B-29, Lancaster, A-26, Mosquito, Ju-88 etc


----------



## d_bader (Jul 29, 2007)

My Top 5:

Concorde
Hawker Typhoon
Spitfire
Vampire
Eurofighter


----------



## otftch (Jul 29, 2007)

Although never in production I like the McDonnel Xp-67 Bat.I don't have a pic but maybe someone can post one.
Ed


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 29, 2007)

Although I've already professed my love for the Flying Fortress, my favorite medium is the B-25.


----------



## Watanbe (Jul 29, 2007)

thats a good picture ToughOmbre.

d_bader you have some nice designs listed there. 

In the past ive struggled to appreciate the looks of the FW-190 but it looks good in the below painting. Of course ill throw in one of my favourites the Beaufighter, though im not sure its beautiful.


----------



## model299 (Aug 1, 2007)

Wow. I've gone through all 38 pages of this thread, and while I didn't read every single post, I'm surprised no one has mentioned this plane yet. Now, I'm a little biased, as I happen to think the B-17 is a very good looking aircraft to begin with, but I've always thought the Allison powered XB-38 was gorgeous.





Lockheed Vega did a great job IMHO of cowl design. There was only one made, and it didn't last very long, but ya gotta admit, it's a great looking aircraft.

Other favorites of mine:
P-51 Mustang
P-38 Lighting
Supermarine Spitfire
Connie
De Havilland Comet
B-26
Bf-109 (The F, with the fewest lumps and bumps is my favorite version.)
F-86
F-104
Boeing 707

There are others, of course. But these leap to mind first.


----------



## model299 (Aug 1, 2007)

evangilder said:


> I agree that the Connie was a real looker. We used to have 2 of them in Camarillo, worked on by a different outfit than the CAF. Sadly, there is only one left, an EC-121 that is being sold. But at least the 121 is not going far. The original Cannie was sold to Switzerland.
> 
> It has quite and interesting history, starting in Army service as a C-69:
> The Lockheed Constellation - USA



In 1996, while on a business trip to the old 3M plant there, I drove by the Camarillo airport, and saw that unmistakable triple tail. I parked and wandered up to it. Two gentlemen were working on the brake assembly on the Port landing gear. Although wary at first, when I started asked intelligent questions, they relaxed, and eventually allowed me to go inside and check it out. I've got those pictures stashed somewhere in my "Room of Doom" and will try to find them and get them scanned and posted. They said I had missed an engine run-up the day before. Is the one I saw the one that went to Switzerland? I seem to remember later that the Camarillo city council tried to soak the owners for more money, claiming that the Connie was "too heavy for the runway." This in spite of the fact that the Navy had used this very same airport earlier for a Connie base before turning it over to the city. I've heard that since then, the owner, one of the men I met that day, has passed on. Anyone confirm that? They were both very nice to this stranger.


----------



## mkloby (Aug 1, 2007)

d_bader said:


> My Top 5:
> 
> Concorde
> Hawker Typhoon
> ...



you're not biased at all...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 2, 2007)

model299 said:


> Wow. I've gone through all 38 pages of this thread, and while I didn't read every single post, I'm surprised no one has mentioned this plane yet. Now, I'm a little biased, as I happen to think the B-17 is a very good looking aircraft to begin with,



When I think of bombers and good looking I certainly think of the B-17. She was the best looking bomber in my opinion.


----------



## Marshall_Stack (Aug 2, 2007)

SR-71
Spitfire
Zero
XP-38


----------



## wingnuts (Sep 2, 2007)

Hawker Hunter.... for the era

Hawker Hunter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## dannyboy (Oct 2, 2007)

does it have to be militaary? If not how about Concorde?


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 2, 2007)

She is a beaut. Aermacchi M-346 (Yak-130). Now there is some real lines on her!


----------



## SoD Stitch (Oct 2, 2007)

XB-70A, A-12, Me 262, Do 335; not necessarilly in that order . . .


----------



## Civettone (Oct 3, 2007)

just to name one...

Kris


----------



## Konigstiger205 (Oct 3, 2007)

I'll go with the Me262 and the F22


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 3, 2007)

Do-335? Really?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 3, 2007)

I think the 335 was a good looking plane in a wiered kind of way.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 3, 2007)

Weird is right. A technical marvel, but the lines are odd.


----------



## ccheese (Oct 3, 2007)

Gentlemen.... just remember, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder"

I like the Zero and the Spitfire....

And for a civilian aircraft, the DC-3 and the Northrop "Gamma"

Charles


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 3, 2007)

For me it is the:

Bf 109






Spitfire





Mossie





B-17





Fw 190D


----------



## The Basket (Oct 3, 2007)

Has the Spitfire not won yet?

The Do 335? Are we talking about the same plane? 

The Hawker Hunter was a looker...and the AlphaJet has always been a nice'un


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 3, 2007)

The Basket said:


> Has the Spitfire not won yet?
> 
> The Do 335? Are we talking about the same plane?



Does it have to win? Can people not find it good looking (I happen to find it good looking as I listed it), everyone is entitled to an opinion. Same goes for the 335.


----------



## Gnomey (Oct 3, 2007)

Yep, I like the 335 (not entirely sure why but I do). As for your list Chris I would agree with all of them (would also add the Ta-152 but it is similar to the Dora).


----------



## Downwind.Maddl-Land (Oct 3, 2007)

How about the Hughes XF-11(A):

Simple, clean, minimum drag and two socking great 'Corncobs'! It went like greased weasel wotsit and looked the part too.


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 4, 2007)

Looks like a pretty woman with "cankles".


----------



## ccheese (Oct 4, 2007)

I thought the Hughes XF-11A had contra-rotating props. This pic just
shows regular props......

Charles


----------



## 130fe (Oct 4, 2007)

F7F, F8F, and F11F Here kittie kittie


----------



## Aussie1001 (Oct 5, 2007)

Harrier i just love it.......
Spitfire looked bloody nice too.....


----------



## Downwind.Maddl-Land (Oct 5, 2007)

> I thought the Hughes XF-11A had contra-rotating props. This pic just
> shows regular props......



'Twas the XF-11 with the contra-props, which gave a lot of trouble (was that the one that crashed, nearly killing Mr Hughes? - I think so). The XF-11A had conventional props as illustrated above. But for completeness (can someone re-size?):


----------



## Civettone (Oct 5, 2007)

Makes you wonder ... how many succesful planes were equiped with contra-props??

Kris


----------



## Graeme (Oct 5, 2007)

Civettone said:


> Makes you wonder ... how many succesful planes were equiped with contra-props??



They seem to fall into an English or Soviet category?
Just a few that I could think of, that were 'successful'
Antonov An-22
Tupolev 'Bear' and 'Cleat'
Westland Wyvern
Fairey Gannet
Avro Shackleton.


----------



## comiso90 (Oct 5, 2007)

Downwind.Maddl-Land said:


> 'Twas the XF-11 with the contra-props, which gave a lot of trouble (was that the one that crashed, nearly killing Mr Hughes? - I think so). The XF-11A had conventional props as illustrated above. But for completeness (can someone re-size?):



Please also mention where u got the pics...


----------



## 130fe (Oct 5, 2007)

While you can claim resounding success for the Bear, Shack, and **** the Gannet was if'e at best and the Wyvern (all though completely beautiful) was a complete failure.


----------



## Graeme (Oct 6, 2007)

130fe said:


> While you can claim resounding success for the Bear, Shack, and **** the Gannet was if'e at best and the Wyvern (all though completely beautiful) was a complete failure.



The Gannet was a successful answer to building a small carrier-based aircraft combining anti-submarine search and strike capability and using gas-turbine engines that ran on ship's diesel fuel. The central feature of the design was the engine which had two power sections that could be run independently. In other words one prop could be shut down to reduce fuel consumption, extend engine life and patrol time. Served the Fleet air Arm and exported to Australia, West Germany and Indonesia. 

The Wyvern..a troubled development, but ninety eight S.4 versions built, eventually equipped four first-line squadrons, two which took part in the Suez war of 56' whose Squadron Commander of that conflict (C.W. Howard) described as... "a steady weapons platform. On army support patrol...it could offer a fully loaded 20mm cannon, sixteen 3 in rockets with 60 lb HE heads and a 1,000 lb bomb; with such a configuration we were able to give the Para (Parachute Regiment) effective support. It was also a good photo-reconnaissance vehicle, in both both vertical and oblique modes".

But then it all depends on what the critera for 'success' is..doesn't it?


----------



## Civettone (Oct 6, 2007)

Thanks Graeme, interesting info! 8)

Kris


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 6, 2007)

Agreed.


----------



## Corsair Wolf (Oct 7, 2007)

My favs are 
Corsair
Hurricane
Avro Arrow


----------



## Downwind.Maddl-Land (Oct 7, 2007)

> Please also mention where u got the pics...



Simply 'googled' XF-11 - there were no credits to be seen so I couldn't attribute them; there isn't a problem is there?

Thanks for the re-size job!


----------



## F4F Wildcat (Oct 7, 2007)

F4F (of course) F4U Corsair, J7W Shinden, (what can I say? it's a beautiful plane, regardless the trouble with it. F/A 18, SR-71, TBF Avenger, FR-22,
FR1 Fireball, that's about it. I was amazed when I found out about the Fireball. I'd never heard of a prop/jet plane b4.


----------



## comiso90 (Oct 7, 2007)

_*The most beautiful plane is the one in your sights!*_

see how pretty a MiG-21 can look?


.


----------



## rochie (Oct 7, 2007)

what about the tsr2


----------



## Graeme (Oct 7, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> _*The most beautiful plane is the one in your sights!*_



Yeah. An Arab AF MiG-21F bursts into flames from cannon fire. The date (top) does not tally with a published Israeli victory. 




Courtesy of 'MiG-21' by Gunston.


----------



## comiso90 (Oct 7, 2007)

rochie said:


> what about the tsr2



looks like a toy aggressor in a Godzilla movie.


----------



## comiso90 (Oct 7, 2007)

Graeme said:


> Yeah. An Arab AF MiG-21F bursts into flames from cannon fire. The date (top) does not tally with a published Israeli victory.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



She blowed up REAL GOOD!

now that be pretty..

(The poor English is intentional)


----------



## ccheese (Oct 7, 2007)

F4F Wildcat said:


> I was amazed when I found out about the Fireball. I'd never heard of a prop/jet plane b4.




The Navy had the AJ-2, "Savage", when I was still on active duty. It
was a carrier aircraft with twin re-cips and a jet in the fuselage. It 
was originally designed to deliver the A-bomb ! Later relegated to
photo-recon. The engines were 2 Pratt and Whitney R-2800-48's 
and an Allison J33-A-10 

Charles


----------



## Instal (Oct 8, 2007)

It has been said that there are only 3 perfect designs (aesthetically speaking)
that can not be improved on, the Bowie Knife, the Harley Davidson and the SPITFIRE.

Prop aircraft

1 Supermarine Spitfire
2 Dehaviland Mosquito
3 Curtiss P40
4 North American P51 Mustang
5 Vaught F4U Corsair
6 Hawker Sea Fury
7 Hawker Tempest
8 Grumman P38 Lightning
9 Boeing B17 Flying Fortress
10 Avro Lancaster

Jet Aircraft

1 Avro Arrow
2 Buccaneer
3 F14 Tomcat
4 F4 Phantom
5 Me 262
6 F86 Sabre
7 DeHaviland Venom
8 Northrop YB-49 Flying Wing
9 Aero Vodochody L-39 Albatros
10 Nimrod MR2


----------



## comiso90 (Oct 8, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> It has been said that there are only 3 perfect designs (aesthetically speaking)
> that can not be improved on, the Bowie Knife, the Harley Davidson and the SPITFIRE.



Just a historical tidbit..

There is no single design for the Bowie knife. No one knows what the original looks like. Any large sheath knife is commonly referred to as a "Bowie Knife"...
There are dozens or hundreds of different designs and all lay equal claim to "Bowie Knife" regardless of quality or origin.

*Grumman *P-38? would that be the "Lightning Cat"   


.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 9, 2007)

[email protected] said:


> 8 Grumman P38 Lightning


----------



## Instal (Oct 14, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> Just a historical tidbit..
> 
> There is no single design for the Bowie knife. No one knows what the original looks like. Any large sheath knife is commonly referred to as a "Bowie Knife"...
> There are dozens or hundreds of different designs and all lay equal claim to "Bowie Knife" regardless of quality or origin.
> ...



I think you are helping me prove my point. Obviously it is literally inaccurate. The meaning behind this quote is that no matter what form the current version takes each will be instantly recognised for it's inherant function and beauty and could never be confused as anything but what it is. The three are considered icons of design. I do not however have any such rebuttle for the "Lightning Cat" Allan Loughead would never forgive me.


----------



## Cdat88 (Nov 1, 2007)

Hhmmm..

Spitfire
B-17F (The chin turrent, while effective, ruins the lines of this beauty)
A6M5 "Zero"
P-38
Me-262
The Connie... 

I cannot really say much about the electric space heaters they call fighters these days, I would say jets stopped being attractive after the Me-262.

I like the Lancaster as a plane, but it's appearance is quite hideous...that snout is difficult to look at...


----------



## Desert Fox (Nov 1, 2007)

This is the one of the best pictures I have ever seen of an aircraft. And yes, I pulled it from your website evangilder 
Awesome photography mate
PS. Sorry for it being so big. I didn't have time to crop it when I posted


----------



## drgondog (Nov 1, 2007)

Cdat88 said:


> Hhmmm..
> 
> Spitfire
> B-17F (The chin turrent, while effective, ruins the lines of this beauty)
> ...



You don't think the F-86 was attractive? or the B-70?


----------



## DBII (Nov 1, 2007)

P26A, the art deco P38, Mosquito, A26, Fw190, F86.... to many to choose from.


----------



## Cdat88 (Nov 1, 2007)

drgondog said:


> You don't think the F-86 was attractive? or the B-70?



Well, I do have a HUGE bias towards piston engines, but I make an exception for the 262.


----------



## the su-47 is gangsta (Nov 4, 2007)

I would g
o for the su-47


----------



## Cdat88 (Nov 4, 2007)

the su-47 is gangsta said:


> I would g
> o for the su-47



I would have never guessed...


----------



## kool kitty89 (Nov 26, 2007)

How about the Ki-83, probably the best twin-engine heavy fighter of the war and japan's best looking a/c imho. Armed with 2x 20mm and 2x 30mm cannons with a 430+ mph top speed and 1300+ range and powered by 2x ~2000 hp turbosupercharged radials with rear exhaust to augment thrust. Excellent maneuverability for its size and a (framed) bubble canopy. too.http://www.ne.jp/asahi/airplane/museum/cl-pln10/2002cl/img/Ki83.JPG http://www.warbirdphotographs.com/ArmyJB&W2/Ki-83-12.jpg Untitled Document
http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/IJARG/images/ki83-2.jpg

Not my personal fave, but just thought it should be mentioned.

Tight cowled T-bolts like the XP-47J and XP-72 are also very nice, especially with the bubble-top.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Nov 26, 2007)

the lancaster kicks ass said:


> what do you guys mean! she's beautiful!



Lanc if you like that, how about the T-37 Tweet/A-37 Dragonfly A-37 Dragonfly - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia though personally I think Cessna's plane is better.


----------



## AlloySkull (Nov 27, 2007)

Tweet? That's lovely isn't it?  I find MiG-21s, Me-109Es, P-40s, and the later model F-86 Sabres attractive  Sukhoi Su-27s and 47s are quite nice.


----------



## Elvis (Nov 27, 2007)

I prefer the simple lines of a J-3 cub









Elvis


----------



## Freebird (Nov 27, 2007)

comiso90 said:


> Just a historical tidbit..
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think he means the Lockheed "Atalanta"!


----------



## AVRoe (Nov 27, 2007)

The AVRO Vulcan, 2nd Vickers Varsity 3rd Tigermoth


----------



## Crumpp (Nov 27, 2007)

http://www.popularaviation.com/PhotoGallery/3486.JPG

http://www.popularaviation.com/PhotoGallery/2897.JPG

http://www.popularaviation.com/PhotoGallery/2386.jpg

Only thing Missing:






All the best,

Crumpp


----------



## comiso90 (Nov 27, 2007)

freebird said:


> I think he means the Lockheed "Atalanta"!



What does that have to do with Grumman?


----------



## kool kitty89 (Nov 27, 2007)

I like the P-40B/C and the XP-42 (close-cowled P-36 that strongly resembled the P-40B/C) as well but the later model P-40s (ie Warhawk, Kittyhawk) were a bit ugly imho. Though the P-40D and later models do have the intimidating ugly kind of beauty not unlike the Bf-109 (particularly with a shark-mouth), albeit somewhat less than the 109's looks.

Below is the XP-42 from Image:XP-42.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia and 3-views comparing the P-40 models from plan 3-vues


----------



## Elvis (Nov 28, 2007)

It's my understanding that the P-40 is actually derrived from the P-36. The main difference being the radial powerplant of the P-36 was replaced by the V-12 of the P-40.
Apparently the streamling afforded by the slimmer engine gave enough increase in performance that the Army accepted it.


Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Nov 28, 2007)

I knew that. In fact the P-40C and earlier models had virtually the same airframe as the P-36, excepth the engine section, while the P-40D and later models had a redesigned nose and fusalage and a stronger, wing-only armament. The XP-42 was an attemt to use close sowling to achive the same streamling with a radial engine as the P-40 had with the V-1710. Though this largely failed as performance lagged behind that of the uprated Allison powered P-40s had higher performance and the XP-42's engine had constant cooling problems (due to lack of a cooling fan).

Though I'm not sure what you mean by: "Apparently the streamling afforded by the slimmer engine gave enough increase in performance that the Army accepted it." 

The USAAC had accepted P-36's for service, though they were obsolete by 1940 they still served at Pearl Harbour (at least the few that managed to get in the air) along with P-40B's. The P-40 was basically a quick-fix, or intrim measure since the P-39 and especially the P-38 were not ready for service in 1941, so the P-40 was chosen despite its lowere performance since it could be produced immediately. (sort of like the Hurricane in England was)


----------



## Elvis (Nov 29, 2007)

Kool Kitty,

Sorry, my mistake.
It was my understanding that the P-36 was never accepted for service.
I stand corrected!


Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Nov 29, 2007)

The USAAC originally chose the marginally higher performance P-35 over the P-36 (even though the P-36 was much cheaper and somewhat more reliable), but as the P-35s were coming out very slowly the AAC decided to order P-36s as a backup plan, though by this time the P-36 had been improoved and was outperforming the P-35 aniway. (~322 mph in the 36A while the P-35 never made 300) The P-36 was present in much larger numbers than the P-35 and was found to be much more servicable as a combat aircraft. The P-36C even had a decent early war armament with 2 .30 cal guns in each wing in addition to standard AAC armament of one .50 cal one .30 cal in the nose. (more powerful armaments like those of the P-40B/C as well as the 8 .30 cals like the spitfire/hurricane were tested but by this time the P-40 was already in production and almost entering service) Though it was still quite outdated by the Pearl Harbor. But it was definantly better than the alternative (P-35) and could have prooved a decent defensive force along with the P-40Bs at pearl Harbour if more planes had been able to get off the ground (only 4/39 P-36's did, scoring two kills: the first USAAC kills of the war)...


----------



## Elvis (Dec 1, 2007)

kool kitty,

Thanks for the additional information.

Maybe I've watched "Tora, Tora, Tora" too many times, but its been my understanding for years now, that only two P-40's got off the ground during the attack on Pearl.
I've never heard about P-36's or any other aircraft in the sky to defend the Harbour on that day.

Was there only 4 P-36's in the sky, or were they accompanied by other allied planes?
Is the P-40 stat a myth?



Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Dec 1, 2007)

...btw, here's a bit I gleaned off the Aviation History website...

"_The P-40 was initially designed around the Allison V-1710 liquid-cooled inline engine which offered better streamlining, more power per unit of frontal area, and better specific fuel consumption than did air-cooled radials of comparable power. Unfortunately, the rated altitude of the Allison engine was only some 12,000 feet, rendering combat above 15,000 feet a completely impracticable proposition. The P-40's ancestry dated back as far as 1924; the famed Curtiss Hawk fighters being in the forefront of all US warplanes. But its development was hindered from the start. The overall limitations of its design were such that the addition of multi-speed superchargers was considered inadvisable in view of the pending production of superior fighter designs. The achievements of the P-40 were therefore all the more creditable. 
The prototype XP-40, the Curtiss Hawk Model 81, owed its origin to the earlier Model 75 of 1935 vintage. With the standardization of the Allison V-1710 , the P-36 design was reworked to incorporate this engine, becoming the XP-37 which was equipped with a General Electric turbo-supercharger, and featured numerous other modifications, including a rearward positioned cockpit. Thirteen YP-37s were built for service evaluation; but, with increasingly ominous signs of an approaching war, development of this fighter was abandoned in favor of a less complex and more direct conversion of the P-36 for the Allison engine, the XP-40. This was, in fact, the tenth production P-36A with an integrally-supercharged 1,160 hp Allison V-1710-19 (C13) engine, and first flew with its new power plant in the autumn of 1938. Successful in a US Army Pursuit Contest staged at Wright Field, in May 1939 it was awarded what was at that time the largest-ever production order for a US fighter, totaling nearly thirteen million dollars. 
The P-40 was a relatively clean design, and was unusual for its time in having a fully retractable tail wheel. One hundred and ninety-seven P-40s were built in 1939-40 for the USAAF, and many more were sold abroad to Britain and France. In the RAF, which service purchased 140 outright, it was known as the Tomahawk Mk. I, IA, and IB, and carried two .303 in. Browning machine-guns in place of the 0.30in.-calibre guns fitted in USAAF machines. It retained the standard synchronized armament of two 0.5 in.-calibre machine-guns in the top nose decking._"


Interesting airplane with an interesting history.




Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 1, 2007)

Yep, but getting back to the topic at hand; I still think the early model P-40s (A, B, Tomahawk) were much better looking than the later model P-40s (D, E, Kittyhawk, warhawk, etc.). Though as I said earlier the later P-40's did have an ugly-menacing look somewhat akin to the Bf-109.

And, iirc, there were around 90 P-40's at pearl along with the P-36's as well as some ~20 P-26's. I beleive ~9-14 P-40's managed to take off, some of which (like George Welch) didn't have flight clearance, but when you're airfield's beeing gunned down what are you gonna do? 

I try to find some actual figures though.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 2, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> I still think the early model P-40s (A, B, Tomahawk) were much better looking than the later model P-40s (D, E, Kittyhawk, warhawk, etc.). Though as I said earlier the later P-40's did have an ugly-menacing look somewhat akin to the Bf-109.


Hmmm, I never noticed much of a difference between the different versions of the P-40.
Think you could post a couple of examples of what you're getting at?




kool kitty89 said:


> I beleive ~9-14 P-40's managed to take off, some of which...didn't have flight clearance, but when you're airfield's beeing gunned down what are you gonna do?


LOL! Yeah, I think you're on to something there!   



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 2, 2007)

Is's sad though since Welch was not awarded for his efforts in a P-40B (he shot down more than any pilot at Pearl, 4 kills ans 1-2 probables iirc and all this with a plane loaded only with .30 cal ammo since their little airstrip lacked .50 cal) He truely did some amazing things. First person to fly through the sound barrier (and live through it/maintain control; and actually twice before Yeager in the X-1, the 2nd time less than 1 hour before Yeager!), he racked up a high number of kills before being overcome by malaria, had he continued to fight it's conceivable that he'd have ranked along with aces like Richard Bong. See: The Amazing George Welch: Part One 

But the main reason the US got mauled at Pearl Harbour is that we ignored the warnings. We were not well prepared for an attack and to top that the moblization of defences was slow as it was assumed to be a drill and this was supposed to be a day off (more or less). And even on top of this the US ignored radar warnings as the British technology was not well accepted and it was assumed to be mistaken. If only HALF of the air defences had managed to take action it would have been much worse for the Japanese. We had ~100 P-40s, ~40 P-36s, 20+ P-26s, a carrier of F2As (~20 iirc) and probably some F3Fs. Though the F3Fs and P-26s wouldn't be that useful they would have been better than nothing and the F2As would have been the best aganst the japanese fighters. Even with only 1/2 mobilizes that's over 90 fighters, that's a stark comparison to the <20 that managed to fly.
Even if they were only F2A-1s the Buffalos would still have had the strongest armament (3 .50s + 1 .30 cal) decent speed (271mph @ SL, 311mph max) and a 3000+ ft/s initial climb rate and handeling aproaching that of the Zero (handeling was excelent into high speeds too). If they were F2A-2s the climb dropped to the still impressive ~2500 ft/min and agility was a little less but the increased top speed (344 mph), armour, electronics, gunsight (ring bead replaced with teliscopic sight) and 4 .50 cal BMG armament made for an excelent early war fighter, especially in the pacific. (both the F2A-1 and -2s had been delivered prior to the attack so either could have been present, though I think they were F2A-1s) Wat's more is that the F2As wing guns were on a separate trigger/toggle from the cowlguns, allowing the pilot more options in combat and possible longer firing time. (as 2 .50s were often sufficient to down many Japanese fighters and the cowlguns, though slowere due to prop sync, didn't have the limits of distance syncronized wingguns so they could hit accurately at longer range) Of course, all 4 could be fire simultaneously too. Unfortunately the performance advantages were ruined in the F2A-3 and Buffalo Mk-1 which were not well rounded in any respect and those models gave the poor little fighter its bad name.

But I digress...

I already presented sketches for comparison on the previous page, but here they are again, and I'll add the P-36 for comparison:


----------



## Elvis (Dec 3, 2007)

Its my understanding that there were no carriers present at Pearl.
The entire fleet was out to sea at that time, so there shouldn't have been any F2A's present that day (as you mentioned, they were stationed on the carriers).
You also forgot to mention that there were a flight of B-17's scheduled to come in.
In the movie, which depicted the most widely accepted version of why what the radar picked up was not reported with any urgency, this was already known to one of the operators, so it was ignored.
Plus, their only way of communicating with HQ was to scribble the message on a piece of paper, drive into town and _hand deliver_ it.
This seems to support your comments on the mentality of the American Military, as it pertains to the importance of Radar as a defensive tool.

Of course, you also have to remember that the Military wasn't quite the "crack" outfit its considered today.
LOTS of "de-militarizing" happened between the wars.
I once heard a figure that sometime around the later 1920's or early 1930's, all of the personnel for all of the services, only came to 100,000 people.
That ain't much.
Thus, the military wasn't as "drilled" back then.
About 20 years ago, I lived with a girl I dated and her neighbor was a very nice old gent who spent his afternoons in the garage building dollhouses and wooden cutouts of famous cartoon characters, which he gave away to the local charities, or any little kid who happened along.
He was retired Army. Turned out to be some kind of "wig" (as Dad used to call them) and served from about 1938 'til sometime during the Vietnam conflict.
I remember his story's of going out on tests for what was then called "Puff the Magic Dragon" (we know it today as a 7.62 mini-gun).
Anyway, he mentioned to me once that when he joined up, being in the Military wasn't quite as "prestigeous" as it is these days.
It was litterally considered "just another job". Guy could've been an insurance salesman and it wouldn't be considered much different (not that there's anything wrong with selling insurance).
It was also in a certain state of dissarray. Training wasn't as well thought out. Field manuvers happened, just "whenever".
The mentality was still that The Great War was to be the last major conflict, so why gear up?
Who'd a thunk Hitler felt any remorse against the Poles?

It is sad to think that had we been even a little better prepared, we could've put up a much better defense.

...but I guess those are the lessons of history and that's a good example of why they should always be heeded.

Thanks for posting the pics of the airplanes.
I'm sorry, but I still don't see a big difference between the "B" and "E" models of the P-40.
The oil cooler cowling of the "E" looks bigger and a little more integrated and the "B" has that small intake on top of the nacele, but otherwise I just don't see a difference.
Maybe I have to see some actual pictures.
I'll have to do some research on the net and see what I see.

...btw, did I ever tell you I have a piece of video about a P-40 that was dug up in Canada and sent to Australia to be rebuilt?
Great little piece of documentary footage.
The plane's owner was Cole Palen (sp?).
Check it out if you ever get the chance.

...in the meantime, here's a little something I found on U-Boob...


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Z8rEOMlT_Q_

...and...


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NcbF9ysddN4_

...and...


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KLuPfuk5wk_


Enjoy!



Elvis


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 3, 2007)

Why coundn't there have been F2A's? They might have been on shore for repairs.

Dont take me wrong I am not saying there were. All I am saying is that just because they were based on carriers does not mean there could not have been any at Pearl for various reasons.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 3, 2007)

Ok well for some reason I'd thought there was one carrier docked in harbor. It was probably good that all cariers were away though, since they were then spared and the a/c carrier was the decisive force in the pacific. I assumed the F2As had been on a carrier, but they were probably doing training/defense duties if they were on land. (and probably the F2A-1s which had already been replaced by F2A2s and F4F3s were just entering carrier service, at that time too)

This is what gave me that impression: " F2A Buffalos were in service at Pearl Harbor, in the Philippines, and Wake Island and Midway" from Naval Air 1942

see also: Brewster F2A Buffalo 

and I forgot to mention the P-35s stationed at pearl which claim 3 kills and 1 down at pearl.

Also the F2A-3s were at least as good overall if the load was low (1/2 fuel load with no drop tanks still gave over 600 mi, and with the drop tanks it still had the ability to drop and fight on a patrol) so stay below 6000 lbs and you're good. from Brewster F2A-3 : " The increased fuel capacity dramatically increased the range -- the additional 80 gallons of fuel gave the F2A-3 a maximum range of 1680 miles. Five and six-hour patrols became routine. However, the increased weight of the F2A-3 with no corresponding increase in engine power imposed a severe performance penalty. Maximum speed decreased to 321 mph, and the rate of climb fell below 3000 feet per minute. Many pilots actually preferred the F2A-3 to the F4F Wildcat, but one experienced Buffalo pilot said that he would have never have taken an overweight F2A-3 into combat." so they were good as long as they were not overweight, even then they were still probably better than the Buffalo Mk-1 at the same fuel load. (and had added armor and improved systems compared to the F2A-2) 

But the F2A really needed a more powerful engine, like the uprated 1300-1400 hp R-1820. Then again the P-36 might have been up to P-40 standards with a 1400 hp R-2000 engine... (a P-42 with R-2000 would have probably been on par with even later P-40s if they'd solved the cooling issues with a cooling fan, I think the R-2000 also incorporated a 2-stage or 2-speed supercharger so better altitude performance too) I know some R-1820's models had 2-speed superchargers.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 4, 2007)

My comments on the F2A's presence at Pearl was in response to Kool Kitty's comments about carrier's being present there and nothing more.
Seems they were present after all, thanks to further research by Kool Kitty.
Great articles on the Buff's, btw. Thanks for the links.
It was always said that pilots who tested both the F2A and F4F's always preferred the handling of the F2A.
I think it gets a worse rap than it truely deserved, despite what happened at Midway (and notice how different the outcome was in Finland!).
As for the F2A-3 comments, a more powerful engine fitted to a slightly larger prop (or maybe just more blades) would've probably made a great difference in the handling of the airplane.
I'm thinking the Wright R-1820-56, that was fitted to the FM-1 varient of the F4F would've been a fine candidate.
In the FM-1, it's performance was "okey-dokey", but in the lighter Buff, who knows.
I also suspect that extra 10" of length ahead of the wings was part of the "-3's" problem's as well.
Would it have been so difficult to adjust the wing's placement on the fuselage to account for the added length?
...of course, did it really need that extra 80 gallons of fuel to begin with?
Maybe the "-3" should've just been the "-2" with self sealing tanks and the more powerful engine, and forget about the extra fuel or the increase in armour plating (didn't it have some to begin with?).



Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Dec 4, 2007)

...oops...


----------



## drgondog (Dec 4, 2007)

Kool Kitty - the two things the Japs should have feared the most were the carriers and the subs. The carriers were 'out' and the third strike which tageted the Submarine docks and POL was aborted. Who knows how the future might have been altered if the Japanese had been successful at getting all their attack objectives and follow up to take Oahu.

Good bye Australia at least would be my speculation as we could never have assembled a Carrier Fleet in time to meet Japs head on (in time-before 1943)and our logistics chain would have been unbelievable until we could re-take Hawaii.


----------



## helmitsmit (Dec 4, 2007)

Back to the P40 why did it have the ugly air intake like the Typhoon? why not more streamlined?


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 4, 2007)

That's the radiator, not the intake. The intake is the little hole/scoop over the nose. And the chin radiator of the P-40B/C was pretty streamlined (kind of like the P-38J/L) but the later P-40s aparently needed more cooling for uprated engines, and if you notice those ones were quite a bit faster despite the lower streamlining (similar to the early to late P-38 comparison) but as the original radiator was similar in size to the P-38J/L's I'm not sure why a larger one was needeed...

And on the Typhoon, aren't you glad they came up with the radial Tempest Mk II and the Sea Fury; can you immagine if they'd stuck with the merlin in the production Sea Fury. As it was the other Tempest marks were still a bit ugly, But the Mk II had similar good looks to the P-47N (which used the tempest's canopy incedentaly), albeit with a slimmer fusalage.
The Tempest Mk II would have to be among the best looking WWII planes while the other marks are pretty ugly; worse than the late P-40s and the Bf-109 too since they were ugly enough to be menacing. (granted the 109 more than the P-40)

Likewise Brewster's F2A looked "pugnacious" from the nose. It was a nice looking plane too, better in looks then the F4F-3+ imho.


----------



## Desert Fox (Dec 5, 2007)

helmitsmit said:


> Back to the P40 why did it have the ugly air intake like the Typhoon? why not more streamlined?




I personally found the chin radiator on the Typhoon quite good looking. I'm not sure why, it was just an aspect of the aeroplane that I particularly liked.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 5, 2007)

I like the Tempest Mk II looks better overall, though I think the chin intake looked better on the Typhoon then it did on the Tempest...

The P-39 and P-63 were nice and the P-59 looked nice from the right angle.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 5, 2007)

helmitsmit said:


> Back to the P40 why did it have the ugly air intake like the Typhoon? why not more streamlined?


I too don't mind the large "chin" on the P-40...anyway, if it wasn't there, the shark would be flying around its mouth closed and that's no good! 
...I don't like it on the Typhoon, though.
Looks more tacked-on. The P-40's was much more integrated IMHO.

...but, and forgive me if I'm incorrect, isn't that "chin" on the P-40 the covering for the oil cooler?
If not, where's the oil cooler intake on the P-40?



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 5, 2007)

IIRC the oil cooler in all P-40's is in the nose. Though originally on the prototype, ONLY the oil cooler was in the nose, while the radiator was ventrally mounted. This was later moved to the chin position and the oil cooler was mounted between the 2 glycol cooler radiators. (hence the 3 divided sections clearly visible in the 3-view illustrations. See: Curtiss XP-40 (FYI you can look up almost any US fighter on this site,P-1 to P-92 as well as the F-fighters, by altering the URL, though there doesn't seem to be any index or homepage and the F2A is the only navy and only fighters/prsuit a/c are covered)

Personally I think the P-40B/C nose makes a better shark's mouth as it still has the open mouth (albeit not as wide as the D an later models) and has a curvier, pointier, sharke-like nose.
I'm still not sure if the P-40 necessary the larger radiator mounting since the P-38J's was no bigger than the P-40B's an it worked fine. (certainly much better than the small radiator intake of the early P-38s which certainly were inadequate)


----------



## helmitsmit (Dec 6, 2007)

Even the Tempest 5 look good! Those wings are gorgeous! I agree that the intake damaged the lines a little! Actually I don't care what engine they use sabre or merlin as long as they lose the chin radiator. The sabre v1 fury that did 485mph was very beautiful


----------



## helmitsmit (Dec 6, 2007)

I have to say it is weird that more fighters didn't empoy spitfire or mustang style intakes. The mosquito had a good intake system.


----------



## Pflueger (Dec 6, 2007)

My favorite has always been the Westland Whirlwind but my photo sources are very limited.

Anybody out there got any good Whirlwind pics?

Do any intact Whirlwind specimens survive?


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 6, 2007)

As said the P-40 tried a ventral radiator, but it resulted in poor aerodynamics. The belly scoop may have worked for the Hurricane and Mustang, and the wing radiators for the Spit, but that doesn't mean they can be substituted on other a/c. 
The wing-root radiators on the P-39 and P-63 are very sleek as well.

I prefer the Centaurus powered Tempest II and Sea Fury the the Saber powered Tempests, they just look right with radials. And the wings are nice, like the P-47N's.

On the Whirlwind, there are plenty of pictures on the web, just google it. Though there are no Whirlwinds left. IIRC the few remaining when they were retired in '43 were eventually scrapped. =(


----------



## Pflueger (Dec 6, 2007)

Just took another look at Tempest II, you are right she was a beaut, but I have a thing for the twin engine craft. I even like the looks of the humble bf 110.

The only whirlwind photos I see are cheezy (Wikipedia-esque), I never seem to find shots as cool as the ones I see posted here. I guess its time for me to step up earn my stripes, eh?


----------



## helmitsmit (Dec 6, 2007)




----------



## helmitsmit (Dec 6, 2007)

best i can find sorry


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 6, 2007)

If you love twin-engine fighters then you must love the looks P-38 and Fw-187 too then. Granted the Mossie, Hornet, and Whirlwind are some of the best looking too. The 187 was an excelent fighter too, fast, maneuverable, outclimbing and diving the Bf-109 and with twice the range! Even when it was forced to switch to lower powered engines it still beat the 110. It would have been very bad for the Brits had she been chosen over the 110 as an escort fighter. Though the requirement of the 2nd crewman was unnecessary and pointless unless a radar was fitted for nightfighting. The 187 was the onlt twin fighter in Germany that could have rivaled the P-38 as a long range heavy fighter.

Also do you like the twin jets, or just the props? Since the He 280 is also quite a nice plane. Though Jumo 004s just looked wrong, 003s were OK but the original nacelles fore the HeS-8 looked best.


----------



## Desert Fox (Dec 6, 2007)

At the moment I'm reading a book entitled "Wings On My Sleeves", written by Eric Brown, who was a test pilot during WWII and in the post war years. One of the photos in the book is of the Westland Wyvern. This is the first time I have heard of this aircraft, and I find it to be very good looking. It's most unique/unusual feature is the contra-rotating propellors.

_My thanks to Wikipedia for the following data_:

*General characteristics*
Crew: One 
Length: 42 ft 3 in (12.88 m) 
Wingspan: 44 ft 0 in (13.42 m) 
Height: 15 ft 0 in (4.57 m) 
Wing area: 355 ft² (33 m²) 
Empty weight: 15,608 lb (7,095 kg) 
Loaded weight: 21,200 lb (9,636 kg) 
Max takeoff weight: 24,450 lb (11,113 kg) 
Powerplant: 1× Armstrong Siddeley Python 3 turboprop, 3,667 hp (2,736 kW) 

*Performance*
Maximum speed: 383 mph (613 km/h) 
Range: 904 miles (1,446 km) 
Service ceiling: 28,000 ft (8,537 m) 
Rate of climb: 2,350 ft/min (11.9 m/s) 
Wing loading: 60 lb/ft² (292 kg/m²) 
Power/mass: 0.17 hp/lb (0.28 kW/kg) 

*Armament*
4x 20 mm Hispano Mk. V cannons in the wings 
16x underwing rockets or 
Up to 3,000 lb (1,364 kg) of bombs or 
1x Mk-15/17 torpedo or sea mine 

If you look closely in this picture, you will notice the contra-rotating props. Sorry that I couldn't find a better picture, but they are few and far between on the internet.


----------



## Desert Fox (Dec 6, 2007)

After a little bit more searching, I found the following picture, which illustrates the unique design much better.

_Picture taken from F-16.net :: The Ultimate F-16 Reference_


----------



## Pflueger (Dec 7, 2007)

Kool Kitty, gotta admit the 187 was gorgeous

Was looking at other photos on link below (if I were smart enough to directly attach photos I would):

Focke-Wulf 187 archive file

Lord only knows what the Luftwaft was thinking when they passed (repeatedly) on this beauty. What a perfect craft for the Luftwaft to have had during the BoB = range, speed, manueverabilty, and even limited/very favorable battle testing. Wonder what she was missing? Powerful patrons like Messerschmitt had I supppose.

As far as the Mossie/P-38 go, I luv 'em, my nature I suppose draws me to the more obscure birds - which likely has kept me coming back to this forum.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 7, 2007)

The only disadvantage was that the Fw 187's cockpit was small (albeit less so than the 109) and the RLM requiring a 2-seater in all configurations didn't help either. Limiting the use of the DB 600 series engines was hypocritical too as they were allowed to be used on the Bf 110. Imagine if the He 100 and Fw 187 had seen service...

How about jets though? The He 280 was fairly obscure and quite nice looking. Probably even better with HeS-30 engines, though not as good an interceptor as the Me-263 she was probably the best dogfighter of the war. Maybe 2x MK 103 cannons could have been fitted, that would have made a good combo, though recoil effects would be high, still acceptable. As mentioned 004s were wrong in almost every way for the 280. Too much fuel consumption, size and weight. The elliptical wing (similar to the P-47's) was also beautiful.

Maybe she should have used HeS 6 engines instead (mid-wing mounted like the Meteor to keep ground clearance) that way she could have flown under power right away in 1940 (as the HeS 6 was running in late '39) The HeS 6 was producing around 1300 lbf of thrust at a decent fuel consumption (~1.3 [lb/lbf hr] iirc), thrust that the HeS 8 wasnt producing until 1942.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 8, 2007)

Kool Kitty,

Thanks for the clarification on the radiator / oil cooler locations on the P-40.
Much obliged.

As for the mentions of the P-51's radiator intake, yes, aestetically, it's a very nice and effective piece of hardware.
However, its design constituted that whatever plane it was attached to be a fighter, primarily.
Anyone who has any knowledge of the F-51's "success" in the Korean conflict knows that that large scoop turned out to also be really great at catching debris due to strafing, which was a role it was pressed into during that time.
A lot of crashes due to engine failures caused by lack of coolant were reported (or so I've read/heard).

One other airplane that I like, aesthetically, was a swedish plane (I believe).
I think it was called a "Dragon" and I seem to remember it being described as an attack/observation airplane.
The pic I saw, which was in some magazine I had as a kid, showed a black twin engined airplane.
VERY sleek looking and the only time I ever saw one or ever saw mention of one.
The reason I think it was swedish is because _I thought_ it was mentioned that it was made by Saab and can picture the white circle with the three inverted triangles on the side of the fuselage, which I believe signify's the Swedish Airforce.

Can't find any info, or even any mention of the plane on the web.

Anyone know what I'm referring to?

The "Dragon" name is only a guess. I could be totally off on that part.



Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Dec 8, 2007)

...never mind, I think I just found it.  
The propeller version is the one I'm thinking of and apparently it was a single, pusher (sorry about that. Hey, it was 30+ years ago!).


While I was parusing the site that included the plane I asked about, I found this...







I like this one. Kinda reminds me of a Focke-Wolff 190, but a little sleeker.
Nice long lines that are kinda curvy, but not too much.
It almost looks like a Greyhound, waiting at the gate.

Here's the article that accompanies that pic.





Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 8, 2007)

There's the J-21 behind it. 8) And she's a nice plane but I think I like the rounder fusalage/nacelle of the Vampire/Spidercrab and the Bell XP-59 twin boom pusher paper project.

The Mustang wasn't really cut out for the close support role. The P-47 (F-47) would have been a much better choice for the role, the P-36 would have been good too, as the ducting for the engine was mostly on the top (plus the radiator intakes at the wing roots) and the 2-stage supercharger only had a rudementay cooling system but also water-injection. The P-36 also had more power than the Mustang (with 1,600 hp millitary/takeoff and 1,800 hp with water-injection at SL) and had much better low-altitude maneuverabillity than the P-51. Though the USAAF had never ordered the craft for service and thus there were none available. (save for the hadfull of flying-target and target-towing RP-63s) 

The P-47 would have been far as well due to firepower and incredible survivabillity. The T-Bolt wasn't chosen for Korea due to lower numbers in reserve inventory than the F-51D. This was a bad move imho since, not only would the 'Bolts have saved the lives of many pilots (and probably many more ground forces they were supporting), but due to lower losses ther would have still been more F-47s (had they been used) left in the end than F-51s. There were large numbers of P-47Ns left over after WWII and most had only served frontline escort service for the last months of the war (not entering service untill early 1945) and these outperformed the F-51Ds that were used.(except somewhat in agility) (If you dont like the wet wings as some others have expressed due to volnerabillity, you don't have to load them with fuel) It's also one of my favorite P-47 varients, and despite the longer span and area, the new wing improved roll (and thus, maneuverabillity) and reduced overall drag due to the squared-off tips. (I think it was also a laminar flow airfoil, but I'm not sure)


I also remember a nice looking Romainian plane mentioned here earlier that looked like a Fw-190 + a Corsair. 

The IRA 80


----------



## Desert Fox (Dec 8, 2007)

Again, while reading 'Wings on my Sleeve', I have discovered the Saunders Roe A-1 jet powered flying boat. First flying on 15 July 1947, the A-1 had a more boat like appearance than piston engined flying boats, mainly because it did not require ground clearance for the propellor, and could therefore sit lower in the water. In order to reduce drag, the floats could rotate 180 degrees to sit inside the wings. It also performed very well, with excellent handling, shown at the Farnborough Air Show in 1948, where the pilot put her through some amazing manoeuvres (for a flying boat). It achieved a top speed of over 500 miles per hour, which was well within the capabilities of most land based jet aircraft of the time. However the end of the war meant that there was very little need for such an aircraft, and the design was scrapped in 1951, after three prototypes had been built. 
This would have to be a very beautiful aircraft, it is very streamlined and, for want of a better word, sexy


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 8, 2007)

It's Nice, (I first saw the plane in "Seaplanes and flying boats" and later in "Worst weapons")

One of only two seaplane jet fighters built (the other being the Sea Dart) and the only aplication of the Metrovick F.2/4 Beryl turbojet engines. It was a good design, and possibly useful in Korea, but at less than 520 mph she was limited as a fighter. Despite this it had good powerload (with 2x 4,000 lbf engines and only a 16,000 lb loaded and 19,000 lb max weight) and climb, and had a powerful 4x Mk V Hispano cannons. With ample bomb/rocket load and an amazing 1,200 mile combat range with 2.4 hour endurance, she would have made one hell of a Fighter-bomber or close-support craft. A good complement to the Vampires. (assuming the RAAF ordered them) 

And with any calm area of water easily set-up as an airbase, it could have helped hold off North Korea in the early stages of the war, when Meteors, Vampires, F-80s, and F-84s were limited to mainly using remote airfields (like in Japan) as they were not suitable for the small dire and grass fields on the South Korean front. (Similar to the role the F-51s played in the opening days of the war, though the F-47Ns would have still been better IMHO)



Here's the P-47N on its first patrol in the ETO. (It saw most service in the PTO though)


----------



## Elvis (Dec 9, 2007)

Kool Kitty,

Couldn't agree with you more.
47 MUCH better ground attack/fighter plane than the 51.
...for a _pure_ fighter, its a toss-up to me, but the 47 was a much tougher airplane and the superior fire power of the 47 only gives it that much more of an edge in the ground attack role.

...also, LOVE the IRA 80.

I'm gonna research that one, too.
Thanks.



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 9, 2007)

Neither the Jug or the Mustang ere paricularly maneuverable at low altiude, but the armor and volnerabillity is what matters at low level, particularly in the close-support or attack role. The Thunderjet was also particularly adept in the air-to-ground role. The P-63 may have been even better suited to the close-support role due to excelent low-altitude and high-speed (for a prop plane, ie 380-450 mph) handeling and, despite the liquid-cooled engine, was quite resistant to battle damage. (mainly due to a simpler 2-speed supercharger and dorsal intake) Though the wing-based fuel tanks would be somewhat volnerable. The 37mm M10 cannon was also good on hard targets/ lightly armoured vehicles. Of course, the craft wasn't available in the US's inventory since it was never ordered... 
Ironically, there is some evedence that North Korea used P-63s (an maby P-39s) recieved from the Soveits, in the war.


Probaly the ultimate ground-attack close-support craft (that was prop powered and thus would be usable in the small airfields of the South Korean front early in the war) would probably be the P-72. Speed and climb rivaling jets good range, the Jug's extreme toughness and a good armament (though I'm not sure the 4x wing-mounted 37mm cannons of the dedicated interceptor varient would have been sucessful or reasonable) and though the standard armament was to be 6x .50 cal guns, they probably could have used 8, especially if they used the P-47N's wing design. Or maby just upgrade to 6x M3 .50 calls with more ammo (400+ rpg) as the added ROF would give more firepower than 8x M2 guns. The handeling and maneuverabillity were supposed to be better than the P-47D iirc, and the P-47N's wing would improve this even more.


And with a P-47 aganst a Mustang in a dogfight... I'm not sure either. Assuming an early razorback (offered better speed and stabillity until the fin extention was added) P-47D without wing pylons and an American P-51B (without the awkward extra rear fuel tank added to late models). And assuming both were arround 30,000 ft and near combat cruse (~400 mph) The Jugs would only get one pass to take the Mustangs, then the 'Stangs could evade. But the Jugs would have the option of dissengaging at will with their dive capabillities.


----------



## magnocain (Dec 10, 2007)

While the p47 and the p51 are dogfighting (and losing altitude like in many dogfights), an f4u will zoom by and shoot them both down.


----------



## Pflueger (Dec 10, 2007)

Any idea on how the IRA 80 performed? I know looks can be deceiving (Breda 88 for example) but that is a cool looking AC.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 10, 2007)

Me thinks Mangnocain is also Renirich, or they're just friends.  

(you guys really need an "_Rah! Rah! F4U!_" sticky, so you get this out of your systems  )

------------------------------

Pflueger,

Actually, performance wasn't all that outstanding.
Here's an article on the IAR 80 that includes a little bio, some stats, more pics and a couple of links at the bottom.

Personally, I think a J22 could take it, in a dogfight.





Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 10, 2007)

I'll give you that the F4U could certainly handle the Mustang and Jug at low level, but not so easily higher up. Plus the P-63C/D could best them all at low-to medium altitude performance, and still competitive higher up too. And had the firepower to take down the Jug easily (within 300m) with the 37mm M10 (or possibly the far more powerful, but heavy M9 of the P-63D) while the .50 cals of the P-51 and F4U, or even the 20mm's of some F4Us (which many lacked gun-heaters for high-alt) could be absorbed by the Jug in considerable amounts.

Though the P-47M (or N with half fuel load/no wing fuel= 1000 mi range) at altitude would best them all, and even be a challenge down low. 

Though the Tempest Mk II would also be quite a contender.

Don't even mention the P-47J or P-72... 

If the British hadn't spurred the US jet program (in Gen. H. Arnold) in 1941 (which had already been working in Lockheed in '39 and with NACA contracts in '40, but had taken low priority) The US would have still had a 500+ mph (estimated 550 mph theoretical with contra props and 3,000 hp) fighter in the P-72 and possibly even faster with an uprated later model Wasp major (3,500-4,000 hp, possibly meetin the original theoretical 550mph). This could have been in service by early 1945 and would be devastating to early jets, and would be easy to convert to, and far more reliable and fuel-efficient. With the P-47N's wings it would have made a good escort too. And despite the (relatively) high drag from the thick wings, the standard P-47 had a mach limit of ~.75+ and the P-72 with improvements and dive-flsps of late-model P-47N's should have been around .79 mach (similar to early jets: Meteor I-III, Vampire I, Airacomet, He-280)


----------



## magnocain (Dec 10, 2007)

I do feel sorry for the pilot who has to face off a p63 head on (or directly behind) with that 37mm cannon.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 11, 2007)

...or, god forbid, you find yourself behind a B-25 that happens to be equipped with the 75MM M8 cannon in its nose  

I wasn't aware of the M9 37mm gun.
Was it used widely in aircraft during the war?
Sounds like they should've put that in the M5 tanks...they may have faired a little better.



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 11, 2007)

The M9 was nevere used operationaly iirc, just in prototype form. It was heavy and had high high muzzel velocity at the expense of high recoil. So it would be easier to aim for a single shot and had much longer range than the M4 and M10 cannons, but I'm not sure it's woeth the recoil and weight (thus performance loss). The M10 was probably the best, only modestly heavier than the M4 and with the same balistics but a higher rof and nearly double the ammo. see: The WWII Fighter Gun Debate: Gun Tables

Though perhaps a 30mm gun would have been a better interceptor weapon, but the US didn't realy have4 one and the 37mm is a good weapon once you're aquainted with it and, despite the dropping, the trajectory was fairly predictable and many experienced pilots could hit targets accurately around 400m. Though it is probably best used in a semi-automatic fashion due to the low rof as it would be easier to aim this way.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 14, 2007)

And for twins, don't forget the DH.88 Comet! Remind you of anything? (rember the Comet is circa 1934) 

I always thought she'd have made a good combat plane with the necessary modifications, as the design was very sleek and the wings unusualy thin for the time.(slightly scaled-up with clipped wings with rounded tips, strengthened airframe, added armour and weapons, cockpit redone as singe-seat and moved foreward for better visibility, withe the nose fuel-tanks replaced with rea-mounted ones-to make room for cockpit+guns, and more powerful engines: possibly Kestrels, Peregrines, or maby radial Mecury or Pegasus engine, maby even merlins!)


----------



## magnocain (Dec 14, 2007)

It manuvered like a freight train on a freeway, very slowly.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 15, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> And for twins, don't forget the DH.88 Comet! Remind you of anything? (rember the Comet is circa 1934)


Gee, by chance, does that start with "MOS" and end with "QUITO" ?









Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 15, 2007)

Actually I meant the superficial resemlance to the Me 262...

But the Mossie certainly shared characteristics with the Mossie.(especially in construction)

And the DH.88 was realy crap in aerobatics/agility? With the large conntrol surfaces and low wing loading it should have been at least decent, even if the long span and outboard enfines limited roll rate.


----------



## Glider (Dec 15, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> Actually I meant the superficial resemlance to the Me 262...
> 
> But the Mossie certainly shared characteristics with the Mossie.(especially in construction)
> 
> And the DH.88 was realy crap in aerobatics/agility? With the large conntrol surfaces and low wing loading it should have been at least decent, even if the long span and outboard enfines limited roll rate.



I wouldn't be suprised after all she was designed for long range with a high cruising speed for which she relied on being a clean design and fuel economy. 
The engines with only 2 x 225 hp engines would lack power for aerobatics.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 15, 2007)

That might explain it. I wonder how she'd have performed with clipped wings and 525 hp Gipsy Twelve engines? Or maby even 700 hp Kestrels, or some bristol Radials, like Jupeters or Mercurys.(though the large diameter radials would adversely affect drag...)


----------



## Glider (Dec 16, 2007)

No idea, but one thing for sure, she wouldn't have gone nearly as far!!


----------



## zipo (Dec 16, 2007)

mine is this - the supermaine Sb.6


----------



## Crumpp (Dec 16, 2007)

Perfection on the wing..


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 16, 2007)

Glider said:


> No idea, but one thing for sure, she wouldn't have gone nearly as far!!




But even with half the range it would reach nearly 1,500 miles! And even if 1/3 the range it would dtill have the longest range of any RAF fighter (at ~1000 mi) until the Beau and Mossie...


----------



## Elvis (Dec 17, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> Actually I meant the superficial resemlance to the Me 262...


Oh sure, make me look like an idiot (  just kidding. I take care of that just fine, all by myself.  ).






kool kitty89 said:


> ...the DH.88 was realy crap in aerobatics/agility? With the large conntrol surfaces and low wing loading it should have been at least decent, even if the long span and outboard enfines limited roll rate.



Yeah, I wouldn't expect the DH88 to have much in the way of aerobatics, since it was never designed for such things.

...however, that doesn't mean it couldn't be redesigned to be more useful as a military fighter-bomber.
As you said; more powerful engines, shorter wings, larger control surfaces, etc..

It could've easily been done. I think it would've worked wonderfully as an adjunct Mosquito, in that case.





Elvis


----------



## Marcel (Dec 17, 2007)

zipo said:


> mine is this - the supermaine Sb.6



You mean this one?


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 18, 2007)

Yeah, she's a beauty.

On the topic of DH. a/c, how about the DH.91 de Havilland Albatross.

Probably the second-best looking prop transport/airliner ever built. (second only to the Constellation)


----------



## RamRod (Dec 19, 2007)

Mind you, on looks only, Spitfire, F4U Corsair, P-38 Lightning, F-14 Thomcat, and the Canberra. Honorable mention: B-25. 
How's that for eclectic?!


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 20, 2007)

What, no Thunderbolt... She may have been bulky, but those eliptical wings were beautiful (like the Spit's) and the overall airframe was very sleek. (if a bit large) The Tempest II was nice on the same lines, though a bit thinner in the middle, in fact the bubble-top P-47D's and M's used a copy of the Tempest's canopy, though the N's used a different, enlarged one... And don't forget the interior, the P-47 was one of the most comfortable fighters to fly in, with fully padded seat, A.C. and heat.

Granted the Planes you mentioned are on the top too, all our own oppinions of course. My particular fave of that list would have to be the P-38...


----------



## ScOoTeR1992 (Dec 20, 2007)

meh i have to the say the Sukhoi SU-37 KIKS ASS its pretty much the only plane that can perform Pugachev's Cobra manevour


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uTfZLQdkHo_


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Dec 20, 2007)

ScOoTeR1992 said:


> meh i have to the say the Sukhoi SU-37 KIKS ASS its pretty much the only plane that can perform Pugachev's Cobra manevour



Are you sure about that.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 22, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> Yeah, she's a beauty.
> 
> On the topic of DH. a/c, how about the DH.91 de Havilland Albatross.
> 
> Probably the second-best looking prop transport/airliner ever built. (second only to the Constellation)


Nice.
Redminds me of a Lockheed Super Constellation.






So which came first?

...and hey, since we're talking about D.H., how could anyone forget the first Jet Airliner - the DeHavilland Comet!






Beautiful plane, if I say so myself!




Elvis


----------



## magnocain (Dec 23, 2007)

awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww,
its a cute little fighter


----------



## Elvis (Dec 23, 2007)

...smaller and _sexier_...
















Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Dec 24, 2007)

_Awwww_, don't just wanna pinch its cheeks.
 








Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 26, 2007)

I alwaystght the F2A was a cute little plane. 

The Comet Airliner (noth the DH.88) is nice looking, probably one of the best looking jet airliners, I love the look of the mid-wing nacelles.

And what's that one magnocain posted? It looks kind of like a 
squished F7U Cutlass.


----------



## johnbr (Dec 26, 2007)

I like this one but it would have been great with a pair of He oo6 jet engine's.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 27, 2007)

It actualy was designed to be refitted with a single Jet engine as soon as they became available. (planned ~2000 lbf iirc)


----------



## Torch (Dec 27, 2007)

Kinda like this one..


----------



## Crumpp (Dec 27, 2007)

Staggerwings are beautiful, reminds me of a Spartan!


----------



## therritn (Dec 28, 2007)

For WW I:I'd say the Spad 13 
For WW II: The F4U Corsair
Korea: F-86 Sabre
Vietnam:F-4 Phantom
Modern: F/A-22 Raptor


----------



## pbfoot (Dec 28, 2007)

also rate the Staggerwing highly but just behind the Grumman Gulfhawk of which I can find no decent pics


----------



## Elvis (Dec 29, 2007)

pbfoot...







Next time you look up a Gulfhawk, try adding "IA" or "II" after it.
That's how I got this pic.

--------------------------------------

Kool Kitty,

I'd say you hit the nail on the head.
Looks like an F7U, to me...



















Elvis


----------



## pbfoot (Dec 29, 2007)

i found lots of that but was looking for a "real one"


----------



## Elvis (Dec 29, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> i found lots of that but was looking for a "real one"


???
That is a "real one".
???



Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Dec 29, 2007)

pbfoot,

Did you mean a "vintage" pic, like these?...










Sorry if my response comes off as "smart alecky". It's just your response doesn't make sense to me.




Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 29, 2007)

Elvis said:


> pbfoot...
> 
> Kool Kitty,
> 
> ...




The canopy in the first pic looked wierd to me (made the plane look smaller), but I guess they're the same... It looks odd sometimes if there's no size comparison or refrence.


----------



## Torch (Dec 29, 2007)

...


----------



## Graeme (Dec 30, 2007)

kool kitty89 said:


> The canopy in the first pic looked wierd to me (made the plane look smaller), but I guess they're the same... It looks odd sometimes if there's no size comparison or refrence.



It depends on which version of the Cutlass you're looking at.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 30, 2007)

Well, lets compare, "side-by-side"...

Here's the pic I posted...






...and here's the one Magnocain posted...







What do you think?




Elvis


----------



## Graeme (Dec 30, 2007)

Elvis said:


> What do you think?



Elvis, I think they're both F7U-3M's.


----------



## Elvis (Dec 30, 2007)

I agree. I think they're both the same variation of F7U.





Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Dec 30, 2007)

The gun placement looks alot better on the F7U-1 near the nose then on the later versions close to the intakes. The near intake muntibgs caused injestion of the propellant into the engines, I wonder why they noved them from the F7U-1 placement...


----------



## Elvis (Jan 1, 2008)

Probably to make room for a radar guided aiming system.

Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Jan 1, 2008)

That makes sence, still you'd think there could be a better place for the guns.

The engine nacelles also seem to have changed on the later model...


----------



## GreyWolf (Jan 2, 2008)

Well I really like the German birds but if I was to pick acouple that I really like,
P51, FW190, Me109 and the Supermarine Spitfire.

Salute Wolf


----------



## kool kitty89 (Jan 3, 2008)

I like the longer nose and fusalage of the 190D/Ta-152, but the sid-mounted scoop on the nose ruins the smmetry and sleek look of the nose imo, which is why prefer the looks of the Fw-190A series, plus the A's cowling looks nicer.

And is that pic a real photo or a CGI? I've never seen a drop-tank like that on a 190...


----------



## Elvis (Jan 5, 2008)

KK,

I was wondering that myself. I think its CGI.
The nose looks a little "wierd", too. Although I'm not sure why.

I still like the FFVS J22.
This is a "B" model...






Man, that thing's sittin' on the ground and it looks like its going 300mph!



Elvis


----------



## Wombat (Mar 11, 2008)

Most beautiful WW2 plane? There's no question about it. Bristol Beaufighter. It looks just like a Spitfire....only much bigger, with a bloated fuselage, 2 big radial engines, the nose chopped off.....oh, well, I like the looks of it, anyway.


----------



## SoD Stitch (Mar 11, 2008)

kool kitty89 said:


> I like the longer nose and fusalage of the 190D/Ta-152, but the sid-mounted scoop on the nose ruins the smmetry and sleek look of the nose imo, which is why prefer the looks of the Fw-190A series, plus the A's cowling looks nicer.
> 
> And is that pic a real photo or a CGI? I've never seen a drop-tank like that on a 190...



It's more likely a big RC Fw-190D.


----------



## claidemore (Mar 12, 2008)

They don't get much prettier than this:


----------



## wingnuts (Mar 12, 2008)

Like most aircraft from Hawker's the Hawk looks quite nice in a cutesy way.... but not too popular with the ground crews or pilots... so looks is all it has going for it.

I have one to look after later today... One just left on Monday after an engine change.... took a week! .. typical Brit machine


----------



## hole in the ground (Mar 26, 2008)

kool kitty89 said:


> And for twins, don't forget the DH.88 Comet! Remind you of anything? (rember the Comet is circa 1934)
> 
> I always thought she'd have made a good combat plane with the necessary modifications, as the design was very sleek and the wings unusualy thin for the time.(slightly scaled-up with clipped wings with rounded tips, strengthened airframe, added armour and weapons, cockpit redone as singe-seat and moved foreward for better visibility, withe the nose fuel-tanks replaced with rea-mounted ones-to make room for cockpit+guns, and more powerful engines: possibly Kestrels, Peregrines, or maby radial Mecury or Pegasus engine, maby even merlins!)



Nail and head come to mind 
And it sounds like you have just designed the mosquito and hornet


----------



## kool kitty89 (Mar 26, 2008)

Yeah, but not 'til 10 years later. And the Mossie wasn't really a "fighter" in the usual sence. A fighter bomber and nightfighter certainly.

I alwas though the DH.88 looked a bit like the Me 262, especially the 2-seater.


----------



## Krabat42 (Mar 28, 2008)

Is this still the "Most beautiful plane"-thread? Then I miss the outright winner:  





Now we can close the thread, it's getting rather long.


----------



## Elvis (Mar 29, 2008)

Krabat42,

PM doesn't wanna respond (after countless efforts). In case you got multiples of the same reply from me, my apologies.
Something strange in the connection, I guess.
Anyway, I'll just answer your reply here with a thankyou and...AHA! I see the tail now!





Elvis


----------



## Burunduk (Mar 31, 2008)

It's one of my three lovely aicraft (other two are DC-3 and SR-71)


----------



## Elvis (Apr 1, 2008)

...the classic jet battle...








Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Apr 1, 2008)

While not my first choice as "most beautiful airplane", these things do have a beauty all their own...









Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Apr 1, 2008)

One last shot of Wyatt Fuller's F-86...







...that's all for now.





Elvis


----------



## Célérité (Apr 1, 2008)

My favorite aircraft, the dewoitine 520, best french hunter in 1940. Unfortunately there aren't any De 520 in flight today. The last De 520 to be in flight crashed in 1986. It only remains tree exemplary in museum in france.


----------



## claidemore (Apr 1, 2008)

Yak 9, nothing fancy, just clean, simple, functionality.


----------



## drgondog (Apr 1, 2008)

Elvis said:


> One last shot of Wyatt Fuller's F-86...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My favorite all time airplane, bar none - beautiful shots, Elvis


----------



## The Basket (Apr 1, 2008)

claidemore said:


> Yak 9, nothing fancy, just clean, simple, functionality.


Agree but the Yak-3 instead. That was one clean airframe.


----------



## Elvis (Apr 2, 2008)

drgondog,

Thank you and yes, I thought those were some very nice shots myself. 
Here's one more of the same plane, buzzing the field this time.


Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Apr 2, 2008)

Here's a great shot of an F4U banking.
Wonderful lines, that airplane had.

Here's the website I copped the photo from - Oshkosh 2002 WW2 aircraft

If you're not aware of Richard Seaman's work, check out his website.
I'm sure you won't be sorry.



Elvis


----------



## Flyboy2 (Apr 4, 2008)

I've always been partial to the Saab 21 and the Amiot 354. I can't figure out how to put pictures on this website so look them up.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 4, 2008)

You can either go to "go advanced" when posting and then use "manage attachments" to post pics; or you could use



to post a pic.


The SAAB 21:





And the Amiot 351 (354 had single fin tail): 






Also:











The FFVS J-22, one of Elvis's favorites.  (I think it looks a bit like a mix between the Fw 190, F4F, and P-36)


----------



## Elvis (Apr 5, 2008)

YES!






Hey, any plane that can do 355MPH and climb at approx. 2900ft/min. while carrying 4-13.2's, all on 1,065HP, has got my vote!

As for _appearances_, you're right. I've always noticed a great similarity between the J22, the FW190 and some of the Japanese planes, as well.

...but then, when you look that good, why mess around with it? 

Alas, vintage pics, like this one, are the only ones we're going to see of the plane in flight...






...as the Swedes only have one example left in "working" condition.

These days, "the big red K" is occassionally rolled out and started up for air shows and interested parties.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgTRxoZ9FPI_

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMV_DfrUJiw_



Elvis


----------



## claidemore (Apr 5, 2008)

One of the better Fairey Firefly pics I've seen. From this site:

Nellis Airshow 2004 Highlights


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 5, 2008)

Thats hot 'n sexy

I like that one Claide


----------



## rochie (Apr 5, 2008)

yeah claidmore that is a cracking picture


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 5, 2008)

For a second there i thought it was a Gloster Meteor

Then i saw the prop, it does sorta kinda resemble one IMO, i mean the nose and canopy clearly comes from the spit


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 5, 2008)

Where the hell have you been?


----------



## smg (Apr 5, 2008)

i have to say that the spitfire and seafire


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 22, 2008)

Awhile ago we were discussing the P-40, how it looked better (IMO) before the redesign of the P-40D (Model 87, due to redesign of Allison engine with new spur gear and higher thrust line) and why the P-40 had the chin radiator. (and w/out it the shark's mouth would be closed)

Well, here's a few P-40 versions w/out the chin radiator:

XP-40 with ventral radiator:






YP-40F 





XP-40K





And one of the Best views of the Hawk 81:


----------



## Elvis (Apr 22, 2008)

Hey, do I see John Wayne in that bottom pic? 


Nice views KK.
I have to say, I like the bottom one best. Very aggressive looking bunch.



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 22, 2008)

Tup I like the looks of the Tomahawk better than the later models with the altered nose. (due to change in Allison design with shorter engine and higher thrust line)

Tomahawk:





Kittyhawk/Warhawk:


----------



## Smokey (Apr 23, 2008)

PCM 1/32 Re. 2005..... tale of an elegant fighter - LSP Forums

I think the Reggiane Re 2005 is a looker


----------



## Desert Fox (Apr 23, 2008)

Completely agree. Italians know how to make beautiful aeroplanes. The Macchi MC 205 Veltro is perfection itself 8)


----------



## eddie_brunette (Apr 23, 2008)

For me...

Dh98, Sunderland Flying Boats, P40F, P38, Spitfire, La-7, Beaufighter, Ki43, Tempest, JU88, Me262, bf110


----------



## eddie_brunette (Apr 24, 2008)

more....


----------



## eddie_brunette (Apr 24, 2008)

last ones....


----------



## Elvis (Apr 24, 2008)

kool kitty89 said:


> Tup I like the looks of the Tomahawk better than the later models with the altered nose. (due to change in Allison design with shorter engine and higher thrust line)
> 
> Tomahawk:
> 
> ...


KK,

You must have better eyes than I.
Both planes look the same, to me.



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 24, 2008)

It's more obvious here:


----------



## Elvis (Apr 25, 2008)

Ah, I see it now (#$*^% shadows!).
I guess I'm kind of the opposite. I actually like the looks of the larger radiator "cowling" of the later versions.
It just seems like it belongs there, to me.



Elvis


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 25, 2008)

The later nose makes it look more aggressive, kind of like the Bf 109. But I think the early nose was sleeker and more shark like. The canopy and rear fusalage of the later models was a bit sleeker though. (a bit lower profile, and more slope to the wind screen)


----------



## 102first_hussars (Apr 25, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Where the hell have you been?




Didnt realise id be missed

lol


Moved out to the back woods, i was working on the pipelines for like 7 months Xraying pipelines, but the Rigs have been more or less inactive around mid Alberta, So i was swamping for a bit, that wasnt cool, So i just started running a service truck changing tires working on Graters, Big Beds, Skidders, wheelers, really heavy duty ****, Making some serious money out in my little boom town

More or less ive been a little occupied for the last year or so

Starting to settle down a bit though


----------



## olbrat (Apr 28, 2008)

my two cents:

WWI Taube (and a number of other WWI aircraft)
Graf Zeppelin
DeHavilland DH89 Dragon Rapide
MC205
ME262
B-25 Mitchell (balanced look/proportions)
F7F Tigercat
F9F Panther
F89 Scorpion
Vulcan


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 28, 2008)

I think the R.2005 looks better than the MC.205 (or the G.55)


----------



## olbrat (Apr 28, 2008)

Thanks for the pix kool kitty.

I think you may be right. the cowling and fuselage of the R2005 seem a bit more sleek. (now I'm going to spend the rest of my work day comparing these two aircraft).


----------



## kool kitty89 (Apr 28, 2008)

Plus it's got Eliptical wings. (similar to the P-35/P-43/P-47; R.2000/R-2001/R.2002)


----------



## olbrat (Apr 28, 2008)

Thanks kool kitty!

I have three of my co-workers here all discussing aircraft aesthetics now. I'm convincing a couple of them to look beyond American designs. They are still stuck on what aircraft they pretended with when they were young. They were quite surprised by some of the styles. I have a feeling our discussion will carry over to a nearby pub.


----------



## wingnuts (Apr 28, 2008)

Not the most beautiful but just looks right.... and I still see some of these flying over my place near Point Cook regularly... over 75 years later


----------



## Trebor (Apr 29, 2008)

the B-24 Liberator. my great uncle flew in one of these, and made bombing runs in Europe I love this plane.


----------



## kool kitty89 (Jun 3, 2008)




----------



## Kruska (Jun 3, 2008)

Oh there are so many beautiful aircrafts.

No.1 of my favorite modern aircrafts






No.2






No.3






Regards
Kruska


----------



## Henk (Jun 5, 2008)

Well, the XB-70, Blackbird, Me-262, He-162, Do-335, Fw-190 in all it's sorts, Ho-229, B&V 222, B-17, He-111, Hs-129, Ar-232, Ar-234 and the Dornier X. 

What a mouth full. That is the ones I love the most.


----------



## Marcel (Jun 6, 2008)




----------



## KrazyKraut (Jun 6, 2008)

Fiat G.56


----------



## Eurofighter (Dec 14, 2008)

The Supermarine Spitfire and the P-51D Mustang.


----------



## ralphwiggum (Dec 15, 2008)

Macchi 202 Absolutely Gogeous!


----------



## fly boy (Dec 15, 2008)

I could not look at the whole thing but did anyone put in p-51 my favorite warbird hands down


----------



## ratdog (Dec 15, 2008)

bupbada dah.......... please address the winner


----------



## SoD Stitch (Dec 15, 2008)

ratdog said:


> bupbada dah.......... please address the winner



Totally agree with you; here's probably the cleanest picture of an XB-70 in flight:






Credit goes to Stevin Levin at [email protected] for this awesome photo.


----------



## Venganza (Dec 16, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Oh there are so many beautiful aircrafts.
> Regards
> Kruska



Excellent picture of the Scooter (an A-4M?). Interesting photo - it caught it just as the landing gear were retracting, or extending). Not a beautiful plane in my opinion, but still one nifty-looking little bird. Always looked like it was ready to launch. I've always been partial to the various Spitfires/Seafires, but if I had to chose one from the lot, then I'd go with the Seafire FR.46. The contraprops do it for me. The scoop under the front of the nose of the FR.47 almost made it look like a Spiteful, not a real Seafire (Spifire). The FR.46 is still every bit the Spitfire.

Venganza


----------



## MikeGazdik (Dec 16, 2008)

US: P-40B, sleek nose with scoops, like a hot-rod. Germany: Bf 109F, just a smooth look. RAF: Spit MkIX, its a Spit, come-on! Japan: Ki-61 Tony, all of thier planes didn't have to look like a Toyota Tercel! Russia: MiG-1 Siberian beauty!


----------



## Gnomey (Dec 16, 2008)

XB-70 is beautiful, certainly one of my favourite of the delta wing jets. Along with the Vulcan and the Concorde.


----------



## ratdog (Dec 16, 2008)

sorry Stitch, but i *think* that pic is from flight simulator


----------



## Venganza (Dec 17, 2008)

ratdog said:


> sorry Stitch, but i *think* that pic is from flight simulator



If that is from Flight Simulator, I may have to get the latest version as that picture is beautiful! It certainly looks real.

Venganza


----------



## ScOoTeR1992 (Dec 17, 2008)

this is easy for me, I've always loved the Russian aircraft, especially the MiG-29 and Sukhoi SU-37. Photo's don't do these bird justice


----------



## Graeme (Dec 17, 2008)

ratdog said:


> sorry Stitch, but i *think* that pic is from flight simulator





Venganza said:


> It certainly looks real.



Looks real to me.

Both images are of "Ship Two" with the wing tip deflection at 65 degrees. The bottom image is scanned from Airpower November 1992, obviously with the chase plane a little closer.


----------



## Vraciu (Dec 18, 2008)

The most beautiful planes for me:

Ki-83
J5N
P-47N
F4U
B-25


----------



## AMCKen (Feb 12, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> Okay. For those of us who love the 757 and her pretty legs, this has to be one of the most B-E-A-U-tiful turboprops ever made. And I do love turboprops. And such long legs. Pretty.



Some nifty videos on youtube like:


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faUvdTJRh48_ 

Parts of this one were edited down to 2:25 with Deodato music but that one seems to have disappeared. Good thing I got a copy.

Ken

Now this one is gone also. Try:

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFn3XVOxEz8_


----------



## AMCKen (Feb 12, 2009)

Elvis said:


> KK,
> 
> You must have better eyes than I.
> Both planes look the same, to me.
> ...



IIRC the earlier Allisons used epicyclic reduction gear with the lower thrust line (I believe in line with the crankshaft), and the later ones used spur gear reduction with the raised thrust line. Spur gear could handle the increased power better.


----------



## Amsel (Feb 12, 2009)

The P-51 D and the Me 109 G are some pretty birds. I really love the lines and nose's of those two.


----------



## AMCKen (Feb 12, 2009)

Elvis said:


> KK,
> 
> You must have better eyes than I.
> Both planes look the same, to me.
> ...



Oh, and to see the difference, check where the centre of the prop lines up. Below the exhaust stacks with the earlier engine and in-line with the exhaust on the later engines.


----------



## Nightwitch (Feb 13, 2009)

I love the Yak-3 VK-107. Here's a modern Yak-3 with an Allison engine. This pic was given to me by the pilot and owner, though he's since sold the plane.


----------



## SoD Stitch (Feb 13, 2009)

ratdog said:


> sorry Stitch, but i *think* that pic is from flight simulator



Negative; check the original source, it's real.


----------



## Nightwitch (Feb 13, 2009)

A little known bird that never made it into mass production, the Polikarpov I-17, is really iconic in my opinion. Polikarpov's planes are all gorgeous, even the little Rata, but I think he really went above and beyond with the I-17.


----------



## Amsel (Feb 13, 2009)

Nice looking bird.


----------



## Waynos (Feb 14, 2009)

How about that Bugatti aeroplane? impractical maybe, but utterly gorgeous.


----------



## Elvis (Feb 22, 2009)

Nightwitch,

The I-17 looks like someone took an I-16 and gave it the "P-40" treatment, and then some.
Does it share any parts with the I-16, or is it completely its own thing?



Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Feb 22, 2009)

Ah, Marcel (and others) beat me to it, so I'll just post another pic of one. This is an actual L-4, though.
The blue plane is an Auster J-1. I think this one dates from the 50's.
I've always been especially fond of both of these particular pictures of these planes.


Elvis


----------



## sturmer (Mar 3, 2009)

for wwI: Fokker Dr.I
for wwII: Spitfire, Me-109, Ju-87, B-17
modern era: A-6 intruder, the F-14 and the almighty F-16


----------



## fly boy (Mar 3, 2009)

p-51
c-47
b-17
b-47
spitfire


----------



## Hesekiel (Mar 3, 2009)

Junkers Ju 88 "Dreifinger".... She´s a beauty....


----------



## Nightwitch (Mar 3, 2009)

Elvis said:


> Nightwitch,
> 
> The I-17 looks like someone took an I-16 and gave it the "P-40" treatment, and then some.
> Does it share any parts with the I-16, or is it completely its own thing?
> ...



Sorry I missed this. As far as I am aware, the I-17 is a completely new design. Obviously, it borrows from the I-16 in terms of styling, as it was designed by the same guy, but I don't think it extends any further than that.


----------



## Auravir (Apr 13, 2009)

In your mind, what is the most beautiful aircraft of all time?

My vote goes for the spit


----------



## Amsel (Apr 13, 2009)

How about this beauty? A new Hughes H-1.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Apr 13, 2009)

This topic is already an existing thread

 http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/most-beautiful-planes-3322.html

TO


----------



## davebender (Apr 13, 2009)

That thread is 3 years old. Since then some people have left and new people like me have joined. In my opinion it's better to start a new thread then to keep the antique in service forever. 8)


----------



## Gnomey (Apr 13, 2009)

Not really, there has been many discussions on this topic before and they are all in that thread (and several others). This should really be merged with that thread (can one of mods do it) and we can continue from there.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 13, 2009)

Agreed, and on that note the threads are merged.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 13, 2009)

Klicked the link and got this message: "No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator." Are they merged now?


----------



## imalko (Apr 13, 2009)

Most beautiful aircraft? In mi opinion Bf 109F and MiG-29.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 13, 2009)

How about these two for pure beauty? The DH 88?


----------



## ToughOmbre (Apr 13, 2009)

I probably posted my vote for "Most Beautiful Aircraft" awhile back in this thread, but this warbird is worth a second mention. 

The "Fort".

TO


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Apr 13, 2009)

Lucky13 said:


> Klicked the link and got this message: "No Thread specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator." Are they merged now?



Yes they are merged now. There shouldn't be a link anymore.


----------



## Auravir (Apr 13, 2009)

Another beaut' would have to be the Bugatti 110P


----------



## gumbyk (Apr 13, 2009)

For my mind, there isn't much out there to compete with the La-9...


----------



## vikingBerserker (Apr 13, 2009)

1st XB-70
2nd Saab AJ37 Viggen


----------



## comiso90 (Apr 14, 2009)

gumbyk said:


> For my mind, there isn't much out there to compete with the La-9...



Are you being biased cause that La-9 is in New Zealand? 

.


----------



## Amsel (Apr 14, 2009)

Those beautiful planes of the Stalinist years had to be a mistake. I just can't see them building such good looking birds on purpose.


----------



## gumbyk (Apr 14, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> Are you being biased cause that La-9 is in New Zealand?
> 
> .



Maybe... and I've never really seen a photo that does the machine justice.

my fingerprints might also be on the logbooks...

Amsel, what about the Yak 3, 11? they're not exactly ugly aircraft. I will give you that point about the Polikarpovs though


----------



## sturmer (Apr 14, 2009)

the concorde


----------



## Elvis (Apr 15, 2009)

A favourite of mine, since I was 5 or 6 years old....










Elvis


----------



## johnbr (Apr 15, 2009)

Martin xb51 or the Seamaster.


----------



## MacArther (May 6, 2009)

Either the F-4 Phantom or the F-14 Tomcat....can't really decide between either because I love the lines on both....


----------



## kration (May 6, 2009)

De Havilland Hornet.

Such a delicate looking killing machine.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/DH_Hornet_Mk_1_PX275.jpg


----------



## Elvis (May 12, 2009)

Did anyone mention the Swedish FFVS J-22 yet?







I always thought that was a nice looking plane.
Performed well, too, from what I understand.


Elvis


----------



## Elvis (May 12, 2009)

I'll also throw out a "cudo" to the FM-2.
Best of all the Wildcats (and my avatar!)









Elvis


----------



## AMCKen (Jun 8, 2009)

The MB5 is also very nice. It has been mentioned only once before in this forum so I thought I'd add to that.


----------



## smg (Jun 8, 2009)

the spitfire
http://www.spitcrazy.com/Spitfire2Labusch.jpg


----------



## diddyriddick (Jun 8, 2009)

Hmmm....For me, the Spit or P-51D.

As to those who chose the F4U, I can only say that beauty is, indeed in the eye of the beholder.


----------



## comiso90 (Jun 8, 2009)

gumbyk said:


> Maybe... and I've never really seen a photo that does the machine justice.
> 
> my fingerprints might also be on the logbooks...
> 
> Amsel, what about the Yak 3, 11? they're not exactly ugly aircraft. I will give you that point about the Polikarpovs though



You've flown the La-9?


----------



## Elvis (Jun 8, 2009)

AMCKen said:


> The MB5 is also very nice. It has been mentioned only once before in this forum so I thought I'd add to that.


Wasn't that an attempt to marry a P-51 with a Griffon engine?
Aussie modification, right?


Elvis


----------



## Elvis (Jun 8, 2009)

smg said:


> the spitfire
> http://www.spitcrazy.com/Spitfire2Labusch.jpg


Teaser (  ). Here's a good pic...






I think that's a Mk.I. I could be wrong.



Elvis


----------



## Waynos (Jun 8, 2009)

Elvis said:


> Wasn't that an attempt to marry a P-51 with a Griffon engine?
> Aussie modification, right?
> 
> 
> Elvis




Never heard of an attempt outside of Reno racing to do that with a P-51 but you may be thinking of the Commonwealth CA-15, which was in fact an entirely new design with no commonality with the P-51?

This aircraft in the photo, the MB 5, was a product of Martin Baker, more usually associated with ejector seats and was also utterly unrelated to the P-51. It was evolved independantly through M-B's experience with their MB 2 and MB 3 fighters and 'could have' been a superb service fighter if not for the end of the war. It was designed not only to be phenominally fast (460mph plus) but was also designed to be extremely easy to maintain and repair in the field.


----------



## gumbyk (Jun 8, 2009)

comiso90 said:


> You've flown the La-9?



Sadly, no, just took care of the paperwork for certification here in NZ, hence my fingerprints are only on the aircraft logbooks. Closest I have come is to sit in the cockpit, a few years ago now.

Besides, I would be extremely lucky to get that thing off the ground and back again in one piece!!


----------



## Cromwell (Jun 8, 2009)

2 of my faves are


*1. Fi167*









2. *A1H Skyraider*


----------



## Elvis (Jun 9, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Never heard of an attempt outside of Reno racing to do that with a P-51 but you may be thinking of the Commonwealth CA-15, which was in fact an entirely new design with no commonality with the P-51?
> 
> This aircraft in the photo, the MB 5, was a product of Martin Baker, more usually associated with ejector seats and was also utterly unrelated to the P-51. It was evolved independantly through M-B's experience with their MB 2 and MB 3 fighters and 'could have' been a superb service fighter if not for the end of the war. It was designed not only to be phenominally fast (460mph plus) but was also designed to be extremely easy to maintain and repair in the field.


 My bad. Thanks for the info.


Elvis


----------



## Coors9 (Jun 9, 2009)

Enough said....


----------



## Cromwell (Jun 9, 2009)

Elvis said:


> My bad. Thanks for the info.
> 
> 
> Elvis



BTW Martin Baker are still operating a Meteor or two ! Yep 1940s jet planes

NB: Anyone care to comment ?

*MB5 Replica*


http://johnmarlinsmb5replica.mysite.com/index.html


----------



## Amsel (Jun 9, 2009)

The Skyraider is a beast, but a good looking crate. With all that mud it's hauling in that photo, it doesn't look like it would fly.


----------



## gumbyk (Jun 9, 2009)

No arguments on the 'beast' description for the Skyraider. But I just can't find an angle that I would call 'beautiful'.


----------



## Willja67 (Jun 10, 2009)

diddyriddick said:


> Hmmm....For me, the Spit or P-51D.
> 
> As to those who chose the F4U, I can only say that beauty is, indeed in the eye of the beholder.



This is an F2G model with the background photoshopped in (hence even more beautiful in real life) so I wonder what prescription of eyeglasses you have what you really need?

I do think the spit is a beautiful plane but I would never fly a merlin into combat if I had a choice of something with a radial engine. Nick a coolant line and the engine is toast. Many are the stories of these big radials sustaining what would be catastrophic damage for most other types of engines and still coming home.

That capability adds beauty in my opinion.


----------



## diddyriddick (Jun 10, 2009)

Willja67 said:


> This is an F2G model with the background photoshopped in (hence even more beautiful in real life) so I wonder what prescription of eyeglasses you have what you really need?
> 
> I do think the spit is a beautiful plane but I would never fly a merlin into combat if I had a choice of something with a radial engine. Nick a coolant line and the engine is toast. Many are the stories of these big radials sustaining what would be catastrophic damage for most other types of engines and still coming home.
> 
> That capability adds beauty in my opinion.



I've never denied the frailties of liquid cooled engines, or how good an airplane the F4U is. It is one of my favorites since watching Black Sheep Squadron when I was a child, but it is awkward. As I understand the thread, we were looking for the most aesthetically pleasing designs, and the F4U aint it.

As to your example, it is a lovely paint job on an ugly airplane.


----------



## DBII (Jun 10, 2009)

P-38, Tigercat and F-104

DBII


----------



## Willja67 (Jun 10, 2009)

A matter of opinion I guess paint job or no I think she's beautiful.


----------



## Catch22 (Jun 10, 2009)

I'm with Wilja, something about a DSB Corsair just gives me the shivers.


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jun 10, 2009)

I've been studying the Piaggio P108 lately, and I have to admit it was a pretty plane.


----------



## Elvis (Jun 12, 2009)

Is it just me or does that Piaggio bear a striking resemblence to an early B-17?







Elvis


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jun 12, 2009)

Actually it does, especially the tail section.


----------



## river (Aug 6, 2009)

Hi,

I was looking for "Most Functional Looking" aircraft and found this thread.

I find the Spitfire and B26 Marauder to be lovely looking planes of the WW2 era.

Post WW2 I'd say the SR-71 and XB-70 Valkyrie are two fantastic looking aircraft.

Civilian stuff would be the DC-4, Super Constellation, Britannia, 707, 990 Coronado and VC-10.

river


----------



## imalko (Aug 6, 2009)

vikingBerserker said:


> I've been studying the Piaggio P108 lately, and I have to admit it was a pretty plane.



I agree, nice looking plane which resembles early B-17. However, I don't like the shape of the nose section.


----------



## Elvis (Aug 6, 2009)

river said:


> Hi,
> 
> I was looking for "Most Functional Looking" aircraft and found this thread.


Welcome River!

"Most Functional Looking" is an interesting associated catagory.
I think maybe the cross-over candidate that would stradle both this catagory and that one would be an L-4.
In the same sense that the "functionality" of an Army Jeep is "beautiful", both aesthetcially and practically, so is the L-4.
Great little plane that spurred a couple of post-war markets.

...JMHO. 


Elvis


----------



## Doughboy (Aug 6, 2009)

F4U Corsair.


----------



## river (Aug 6, 2009)

Hi,

I thought about "most functional" yesterday, while having lunch and watching a DVD on the Beaufighter in RAAF service during WW2. And I thought the Beau is not a pretty aircraft, but with its snub-nose and those big radials and the concentrated firepower, it looks the part. It looks functional and built to kick butt. I also think the P47 is not an asthetic looking plane, but it looks functional more than it looks pretty. The later model B24 with the front/rear power turrets has that "I'm not pretty. I'm built for a purpose" look.

I find the F4 Phantom has that "functional, built to kick butt" look about it.

river


----------



## Elvis (Aug 6, 2009)

river said:


> Hi,
> 
> When I say "most functional" it can be beautiful or ugly or whatever - it's all in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> river


...???...
I never said that wasn't what you meant.
Why do you feel the need to restate yourself?



Elvis


----------



## river (Aug 6, 2009)

Hi,

Sorry. Old habit on forums where the typed word can at times be misleading to my intentions. I'll edit my previous post. 8)

river


----------



## Elvis (Aug 7, 2009)

river said:


> Hi,
> 
> Sorry. Old habit on forums where the typed word can at times be misleading to my intentions. I'll edit my previous post.
> 
> river





river said:


> Hi,
> 
> I thought about "most functional" yesterday, while having lunch and watching a DVD on the Beaufighter in RAAF service during WW2. And I thought the Beau is not a pretty aircraft, but with its snub-nose and those big radials and the concentrated firepower, it looks the part. It looks functional and built to kick butt. I also think the P47 is not an asthetic looking plane, but it looks functional more than it looks pretty. The later model B24 with the front/rear power turrets has that "I'm not pretty. I'm built for a purpose" look.
> 
> ...


Ah, I see what you were getting at now.
That makes much better sense.
Thanks for your help in resolving that issue.



Elvis


----------



## billswagger (Aug 7, 2009)

Its not my favorite warbird but the late P-40 , M or E is a sleek design, that looks as a fighter plane should.

I'd even give credit to the 109s on looks alone, but i can't say i favor it beyond that.


oh yeah, 
i cant leave out the F8F bearcat.


----------



## Colin1 (Aug 7, 2009)

Trot out the same tired old favourites I'm afraid

The Spitfire: graceful, beautiful lines probably at their zenith with the Mk VIII, this was the last of the Merlin fighters, prior to the more muscular lines of the Griffon fighters.

The Mustang: the D was the epitomy of aerodynamically efficient beauty, a well thought-out, clean chassis with compound curves aplenty.

Neither the Bf109 nor the Fw190 series were beautiful in the same sense as the previous two but they certainly had their own, dangerous-looking brand of beauty. Most of the notable German designs looked predatory, viz the Me262, the Ju87.

The Typhoon had all the beauty of a square-jawed, bar-room brawler.

The P-47 looked like the Typhoon's drinking partner...


----------



## ccheese (Aug 7, 2009)

vikingBerserker said:


> I've been studying the Piaggio P108 lately, and I have to admit it was a pretty plane.



I didn't know _Piaggio_ built airplanes !! I have a Piaggio motor scooter !!!


However, for a beautiful airplane, my vote goes to the "Connie".

Charles


----------



## Civettone (Aug 7, 2009)

ccheese said:


> I didn't know _Piaggio_ built airplanes !! I have a Piaggio motor scooter !!!
> 
> 
> However, for a beautiful airplane, my vote goes to the "Connie".
> ...


Well ...
After the war, Piaggio re-tooled the small starter motor used on the big P. XII radials of the P.108 and used it to power the Vespa scooters it now builds in the re-built Pontedera plant. 

Kris


----------



## Elvis (Aug 8, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> *Trot out the same tired old favourites I'm afraid*
> 
> The Spitfire: graceful, beautiful lines probably at their zenith with the Mk VIII, this was the last of the Merlin fighters, prior to the more muscular lines of the Griffon fighters.
> 
> ...



Oh my gaawwwd, Colin, that's _sooooo_ "5 minutes ago".  





(   )

(actually, I gotta agree. The Spit was one of the most elegant designs of the war)



Elvis


----------



## Clay_Allison (Aug 8, 2009)

The A-10 Thunderbolt II looks more beautiful to me than any other plane. I went to see Terminator Salvation just because of the A-10s.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 8, 2009)

ccheese said:


> I didn't know _Piaggio_ built airplanes !! I have a Piaggio motor scooter !!!
> 
> 
> However, for a beautiful airplane, my vote goes to the "Connie".
> ...



They STILL do too


----------



## Civettone (Aug 8, 2009)

One can say what they want about Italian aircraft designers but they definitely had a sense of style 


Kris


----------



## Elvis (Aug 9, 2009)

LOL!

Heck, Waynos, for a second I actually thought you were talking about the scooters!











Elvis


----------



## Waynos (Aug 9, 2009)

Last time I saw a girl with that look on her face was........well, just last night actually


----------



## Clay_Allison (Aug 9, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Last time I saw a girl with that look on her face was........well, just last night actually


STOP SCARING WOMEN!!!


----------



## Waynos (Aug 9, 2009)




----------



## vikingBerserker (Aug 9, 2009)

Nice!


----------



## Colin1 (Aug 9, 2009)

Waynos said:


> Last time I saw a girl with that look on her face was........well, just last night actually


Was she saying "Oh gosh, I see I'm not the only one short on cubic centimetres..."


----------



## Waynos (Aug 9, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> Was she saying "Oh gosh, I see I'm not the only one short on cubic centimetres..."



No, she said "will it fit if I do this?" (now look at the picture!)


----------



## Civettone (Aug 9, 2009)

LOL !


Kris


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 10, 2009)

For me, I love SR71.


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 10, 2009)

I also like the Skyray.


----------



## Waynos (Aug 10, 2009)

Ah thank god! We're back on aeroplanes. I was starting to make myself blush!

I think the DH 91 Albatross was a very beautful looking aircraft.


----------



## Daviducus2 (Aug 10, 2009)

The Italian Series 5's are beautiful.

MC.205






G.55


----------



## Clay_Allison (Aug 11, 2009)

The Reggiane Re.2005 is the most beautiful fighter I've ever seen.


----------



## Condora (Aug 11, 2009)

Ok, my preferences go to:

*WWI*
Albatros
Sopwith Camel
Fokker E.III​*Inter-war*
Hawker Fury​*WW II*
P-51 Mustang
Westland Whirlwind
Me-262 (have a look at the Me-309, the resemblance is incredible!)​*Late props*
Hawker Sea Fury
De Havilland Sea Hornet​*Early jets*
Saab 29 Tunnan
Yak-17
F-86 Sabre
Hawker Hunter
Supermarine Scimitar
Dassault Super Mystére
F-100 Super Sabre​*Across the Sound Barrier*
Dassault Mirage IIIC
Saab 35 Draken
F-8 Crusader
English Electric Lightning
F-5
Saab 37 Viggen​*Modern Jets*
F-16 Fighting Falcon
Mig-29
F/A-18 Hornet​*XXI century Jets*
Dassault Rafale
Saab 39 Gripen
F-22
YF-23​


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 11, 2009)

I guess there are way too many to list only one, or tow, or three, or.....


----------



## Condora (Aug 11, 2009)

Uh, BEFORE someone starts flaking my list, I was think of picking one by era, but as I saw that sometimes there were a few that deserved a mention, decided to keep all the ones I deemed beautiful.

If I had to choose only ONE... I'd go both for the Me-262 and Me-309! 
The only major difference seems to be the powerplant, and the lines always reminded me of a shark.

Amazing: I wrote the second post imediately after the first one, and still someone managed to comment before I posted the second.


----------



## Civettone (Aug 11, 2009)

I don't really see this incredible resemblence between the Me 262 and 309 to be quite honest. Can you provide some pix to prove your point ??



Kris


----------



## Condora (Aug 11, 2009)

Civettone said:


> I don't really see this incredible resemblence between the Me 262 and 309 to be quite honest. Can you provide some pix to prove your point ??
> Kris




I cannot upload from here, I'll try to use some pics taken from the net, one is just a model, but I think it will explain what I mean: remove the prop&engine from the nose, put the jets underwing...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2009)

I too don't think that they really look alike, but I guess I can see how some people might find a resemblance.


----------



## Condora (Aug 11, 2009)

IMHO, the differences of the Me-262 to the previous Me-309 are only due to the different powerplant, and the slight sweeping of the controls and wing.

I haven't been able to find pics of the Me-262 initial prototype (with props), I would like to see if the sweep existed in that model (I think not, but I'd like to be sure). 
As for the rest, we have two airplanes with a very close fuselage lines (the Me262 could be more profiled, because it didn't have the engine bulging the nose), both used the then-unsual tricycle landing gear, almost the same canopy, both from the same manufacturer, both first flew on Jul, 18th 1942... 

I think it's a safe bet that the same guys designed simultaneously both aircraft.

Adler, your pic is even better than the one I provided, I could only get the backside of the Me-309 (who'd want to see THAT?), thanks.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2009)

If you go to these websites, they have pics of the Me 262 V-1 with prop:

Me 262 Archiv

µÚËÄ½Ú ÏóÌìÊ¹Ò»Ñù·ÉÏè

Messerschmitt Me 262.htm


----------



## Condora (Aug 11, 2009)

Thanks, Adler!

"Es tut mir leid, aber es ist mir seer schwer deutsche lesen, und ich kann ein bischen chinesisch lesen, ich verstehe nicht japanesich" (or something like that, I learned a bit about 20-something years ago, but never practised - sorry about the many mistakes).

They are really interesting, I thought there were no photos, and my jaw dropped to the floor when I saw the prop on the Me-262's... NOSE? I'd always assumed they had used props under the wings, INSTEAD of the jet engines! Maybe one of each, to test the jet, before swapping to all-jet configuration.

Never dreamed that they would cramm a third engine on the plane.


----------



## Civettone (Aug 11, 2009)

I have to say that those images do look a bit alike. But other photo's from different angles ...

The main difference has to be the triangular transection shape of the fuselage. That is so remarkable when looking at a Me 262 from up front. 

What they do have in common is the cockpit nice in the middle. One could also say the nose wheel ... but that was not part of the original Me 262 design. 

As a side note, it's the first time I noticed that bulge underneath the Me 309. It strikes me as odd!
Kris


----------



## Condora (Aug 12, 2009)

Civettone said:


> The main difference has to be the triangular transection shape of the fuselage. That is so remarkable when looking at a Me 262 from up front.



The Me309 had to have a "rounder" transection, it had a big engine up front defining the shape.
Have you checked Adler's links, to see the Me262 with a prop?


----------



## paradoxguy (Aug 13, 2009)

Elvis said:


> Teaser (  ). Here's a good pic...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The armament configuration (one 20mm cannon and two outboard 0.303 machine guns on each side) suggests the depicted Spitfire is a Mk V.


----------



## paradoxguy (Aug 13, 2009)

Condora said:


> I cannot upload from here, I'll try to use some pics taken from the net, one is just a model, but I think it will explain what I mean: remove the prop&engine from the nose, put the jets underwing...



Nice model of the Me-309. Did you build it?

PG


----------



## paradoxguy (Aug 13, 2009)

Keeping in mind aesthetics are very subjective, here's my list:

Fighter

Fiat CR-42
Focke-Wulf Fw 190A-series and 190D-series
Focke-Wulf Ta 152C (the long wingspan of the 152H give it a visually unbalanced appearance)
Gloster Meteor
Kawasaki Ki-61 (versions with retractable tailwheel; its sleek appearance makes it look faster than it was)
Macchi MC-202 and MC-205
Messerschmitt Bf 109F-series, Bf 109K-4 (cleaner lines than the other Bf 109's, especially with the retractable tailwheel)
North American P-51D Mustang
Reggiane Re 2005
Supermarine Spitfire (all Mks)
Yakovlev Yak-3

Bombers

Avro Lancaster
Boeing B-17 Fortress
Junkers Ju 88
Martin B-26
Mitsubishi G4M

Multi-purpose aircraft

DeHavilland Mosquito (all versions)
Junkers Ju 88
Messerschmitt Me 210/410
Mitsubishi Ki-46

Ground attack/dive bombers/torpedo bombers

Curtiss Helldiver
Grumman TBF Avenger
lIyushin Il-2
Nakajima B5N and B6N


----------



## Condora (Aug 13, 2009)

paradoxguy said:


> Nice model of the Me-309. Did you build it?
> 
> PG



Unfortunately, no: I cannot do certain things from work (shhh, don't tell a soul!), and I had to look for an image on the net.


----------



## AMCKen (Aug 13, 2009)

paradoxguy said:


> The armament configuration (one 20mm cannon and two outboard 0.303 machine guns on each side) suggests the depicted Spitfire is a Mk V.



Symmetrical radiators and 4 blade propellor? I'll say Mk.IX. : )


----------



## paradoxguy (Aug 13, 2009)

AMCKen said:


> Symmetrical radiators and 4 blade propellor? I'll say Mk.IX. : )



You're right, I missed the 4-blade propeller, but I shouldn't have!  

I agree, definitely later than Mk V, but I have to admit my recognition skills of Spitfire variants later than Mk V's need refining.


----------



## AMCKen (Aug 14, 2009)

paradoxguy said:


> You're right, I missed the 4-blade propeller, but I shouldn't have!
> 
> I agree, definitely later than Mk V, but I have to admit my recognition skills of Spitfire variants later than Mk V's need refining.



warbirdregistry.org - Supermarine Spitfire


----------



## Dark Matter (Aug 14, 2009)

The Cessna C-106 Loadmaster is a buatiful aircraft.


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 14, 2009)

Also, always loved the B-47.


----------



## Elvis (Aug 14, 2009)

Saw an interview with the late Boeing test pilot Tex Johnston the other day, on a local TV show.
Tex test flew the B-47 and remarked, all these years later, that it was still his favourite airplane.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AMCKen,

Great research!
Indeed, appears to be a Mk.IX.
I must admit, I'm a real beginner when it comes to identifying the different mk.'s of Spitfire. My suggestion was only a guess. I think that's the way it was listed at the website I got the pic from.

BTW, a little off-topic (sorry), but $3000 for a Hornet-based AMX in nice shape (some interior wear, but otherwise very good).
Is that a good deal?


Elvis


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 14, 2009)

The B47 has always reminded me of a rather large over size fighter.


----------



## AMCKen (Aug 16, 2009)

Dark Matter said:


> The Cessna C-106 Loadmaster is a buatiful aircraft.


Cessna C-106 Loadmaster - transport

The CC-106 Yukon looks really good.

Photos: Canadair CL-44D4-2 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net


----------



## Elvis (Aug 16, 2009)

Cessana C-106 Loadmaster




 Hey you guys ain't kiddin', that's a really sweet lookin' airplane!
Kinda reminds me of a B-26, a little.








Elvis


----------



## AMCKen (Aug 16, 2009)

Elvis said:


> Cessana C-106 Loadmaster
> 
> 
> 
> ...



...or a de Havilland Flamingo.

De Havilland Flamingo aircraft profile. Aircraft Database of the Fleet Air Arm Archive 1939-1945


----------



## gumbyk (Aug 16, 2009)

Looks like the ugly love-child of a B-26 and a C-47 to me


----------



## Elvis (Aug 17, 2009)

AMCKen,

Yes, it looks like a slimmer version of the Cessna (or maybe the Cessna's a fat DeHavilland?  ).

I wonder why the order was cancelled?
The airplane sounds impressive, for what it was. 
Order 30, but cancel after one plane is delivered...hmmm. 

Apparently it wasn't because the plane was defficient, either. That one plane soldiered through the entire war and left military service in '46.

 Strange. 




Elvis


----------



## trackend (Aug 17, 2009)

Victor was not bad as far as blow lamps go


----------



## Civettone (Aug 17, 2009)

Looks a bit like a mixture of a Blackburn Botha and a DC-3.











Kris


----------



## trackend (Aug 17, 2009)

I dont think so


----------



## Elvis (Aug 17, 2009)

I agree with Trackend.






If anything, One _might_ make a comparison to a Beech 18, although the DeHavilland is a larger airplane...







Elvis


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 17, 2009)

Hmm, don't see it either.


----------



## Civettone (Aug 17, 2009)

Yeah the Botha pic isn't really showing it from the right angle...  Main point was the underwing engines. And with the DC-3 it's the cockpit section which resembles with that C-106... ah well 


Kris


----------



## Waynos (Aug 17, 2009)

DH also wanted to relaunch the Flamingo after the war with a slight redesign but using a single Mosquito fin, even more like the Cessna.

All De Havillands are Beautiful, they can't help it. Its taken 60 years to make the DH 106 Comet ugly, but now we call it the Nimrod MRA4 so it doesn't count. Though I think it is the only aircraft in production in 1949 and 2009 so thats cool.


----------



## AMCKen (May 19, 2011)

trackend said:


> Victor was not bad as far as blow lamps go


 
or the Convair XB-46.

File:Convair XB46.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Messy1 (May 19, 2011)

2 of my favorites are the B-47, and the Seafury. The B-47 to me looks like a huge fighter. And I just like the Seafury's clean lines. No unnecessary bulges or bends. I can't explain it. Just wish it had been completed in time to see action in WW2. I am sure it would have proven a great aircraft.


----------



## Glider (May 19, 2011)

Most Beautiful, no contest


----------



## Elvis (May 28, 2011)

For Messy1...









Elvis


----------



## Messy1 (May 28, 2011)

Thanks Elvis!


----------



## tomo pauk (May 28, 2011)

La-7 meets Spitfire, or, in other words, Sea Fury looks like a child of two great looking parents.


----------



## Tangopilot89 (May 28, 2011)

Of all time? Concorde without a doubt. Looks fantastic from every angle.

For warbirds - Spitfire. Jet age - Hawker Hunter/English Electric Lightning/Avro Vulcan. Modern - Eurofighter (bit biased there) or Su-35 Super Flanker.


----------



## Coors9 (May 28, 2011)

P-51B Mustang
F-15 Eagle
SU-27
F4U Birdcage
If I had to pick one.....The Constellation with out a dought


----------



## A4K (May 28, 2011)

Modern aircraft: TSR-2 and RNZAF A-4K Skyhawk (biased? Who, me? )
WW 2: hard to say, but probably Fw 190D-9 or 11, other types too depending on mark or paintscheme...


----------



## NZTyphoon (May 31, 2011)

I haven't read through from page 1, so I don't know if I'm repeating, but my pick for one of the most beautiful aircraft is the Mitsubishi Ki-83 Mitsubishi Ki-83 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mitsubishi Ki-83 - escort fighter
de Havilland Hornet meets F7F Tigercat


----------



## hawkeye2an (Aug 9, 2011)

Not sure if this has been done before, but I've not run across it in my 2 years so here we go.

As they say: “Beauty is in the eye of the beholder”

So, what are the Most Beautiful Airplanes?

Strictly Aesthetic, which ones LOOK best to you.

This is just for FUN, of course there are no wrong answers it’s what looks good to you.

Here are mine:

WW1 
Albatros - Love those clean lines

30s
1. Bugatti Racer 
2. Beech Staggerwing
3. DH-88 Comet – sleek elegant lines

WWII 
1. Spitfire 
2. XP-67 Moonbat. That blended fuselage/wing and it just looks futuristic and fast

Cold War
1. SR-70 the ultimate speed machine 
2. B-58 looks like it’s going fast even sitting in a museum TODAY

Present Day
1. B-2 Stealth Bomber – what’s not to like?

Thanks for playing along,
Andy


----------



## beaupower32 (Aug 9, 2011)

WWII - Bf-109 G-6 (I think its the best looking of all)

Cold War (B-52) just intimidating

Present Day (F-35) Cause I work on it!

But I have taken to the airplane below for some odd reason
View attachment 175274


----------



## seesul (Aug 10, 2011)

For me:
P-51D
P-38
F4U
A6M
F6F
B-17G
FW190


----------



## herman1rg (Aug 10, 2011)

Hawker Hurricane
DeHavilland Mosquito
Blackburn Buccaneer


----------



## imalko (Aug 10, 2011)

I believe we already have a thread on this topic somewhere on the forum...
But, to answer the question:
WW1 - Albatros DII
WW2 - Messerschmitt Bf 109G (early marks before 13mm machine guns above engine were introduced)
Cold War - MiG-21
Present day - MiG-29


----------



## Readie (Aug 10, 2011)

For me...

WW1 The Spad. 
The Fokker DV11 

Interwar years The MC72. 
The SB6

WW2 The Mk9 Spitfire 
The Mustang

Post war The EE Lightning
The Vulcan 


Cheers
John


----------



## Njaco (Aug 10, 2011)

yes, its somewhere on the forum...

Mine...

WWI - Fokker DVII
WWII - Me 410 or FW 200
Cold War - F4U Phantom (although the Sabre was close.)
Current - A-10


----------



## tyrodtom (Aug 10, 2011)

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder . But a A10 Warthog, beautiful ???


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2011)

For me the most beautiful is the Bf 109G/K. Absolutely love the bird and the way it can look so beautiful but yet so deadly as well.


----------



## parsifal (Aug 10, 2011)

WWI Fokker Triplane red of course

Between the wars: Gee Bee 

WWII: Spit II 

Cold War: A4 Skyhawk

Modern: Probably the F-14


----------



## Kryten (Aug 10, 2011)

WWI Spad

WWII: Mosquito MkVI

Cold War: Hawker Hunter

Modern: SU27


----------



## claidemore (Aug 10, 2011)

WWI: Se5

WWII: Spitfire Mk VIII desert camo 

Cold War: F5 Freedom Fighter

Modern: Mig 29 is a sexy beast.


----------



## Readie (Aug 10, 2011)

Was the MIG 29 the jet you could hire for a trip to the edge of space ?
I remember seeing a chap having a ride in a Russian MIG...it looked unbelievable.
Cheers
John


----------



## TheMustangRider (Aug 10, 2011)

I believe it was the MiG-25 and its huge engines that could get that far.

… So here’s my list:

WWI - Spad VII/XIII
WWII – P-51D Mustang/Supermarine Spitfire Mk I/II/V
Cold War - F-86 Sabre
Modern – F-15 Eagle/Su-27 Flanker


----------



## Ratsel (Aug 10, 2011)

yep. a Mig-25 went to 92,500ft. Mig-29 around 70,000ft. lots of youtube videos on both.

anyways My list:

WWI ~ Albatros DII
WWII ~ Bf109G/AS * all time best looking aircraft
Cold War ~ F-104
Today ~ CF-18 Hornet/Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II

civilian ~ Lockheed L-1011 TriStar


----------



## Readie (Aug 10, 2011)

Thanks MN and PK40,
I have seen the flights on you tube now.
They look an out of world experience
Cheers
John


----------



## tyrodtom (Aug 10, 2011)

Instead of sniping other people choices, I guess I should state my own.
WW1- Abaltross DIII
WW2- Spitfire Mk VIII
Cold war- Hawker Hunter or F-86
Today- ???

Civilian- Cessna 195, or sentimental favorite, Beechcraft Staggerwing because one of my uncles use to have one.


----------



## fastmongrel (Aug 10, 2011)

WWI = Albatross DIII
interwar = DH 88 comet racer
WWII = Spitfire MkV
Cold war = Hawker Hunter
Modern = Dassault Rafale
Airliner = Concorde


----------



## Readie (Aug 10, 2011)

tyrodtom said:


> Instead of sniping other people choices, I guess I should state my own.
> WW1- Abaltross DIII
> WW2- Spitfire Mk VIII
> Cold war- Hawker Hunter or F-86
> ...


----------



## Readie (Aug 10, 2011)

fastmongrel said:


> WWI = Albatross DIII
> interwar = DH 88 comet racer
> WWII = Spitfire MkV
> Cold war = Hawker Hunter
> ...




I forgot the Concorde. I worked at Heathrow when that beauty flew, a bit cramped in the cabin it has to be said but, for sheer glamour there is no other equal.
Cheers
John


----------



## HoneyMarch (Aug 10, 2011)

My list:

DH.88
Supermarine S6.B
Macchi MC.72
Lockheed Constellation
F86 Sabre






Supermarine S6.B


----------



## GrauGeist (Aug 10, 2011)

Mine are:

*WWI*
Albatros D.III/D.V

*Between Wars*
Lockheed Electra

*WWII*
Fighter: P-38 He100
Jet: He280 Me262
Bomber: Me264 B-29
Seaplane: Bv222 JRM-1

*Post War/Korea*
F9F Panther

*Cold War*
F-104
A-12 Archangel/SR-71 Blackbird

*Modern*
B-1b


----------



## Njaco (Aug 10, 2011)

Tom, most other jets today just look like...well, jets. But the A-10 has a sort of ugly grace to it that attracts me, looks cool. Besides if I had said the Harrier I would be told to go stand in the corner!


----------



## armadillomaster (Aug 11, 2011)

I'm late into this thread but wanted to add my twopence worth.

WWI = Sopwith Camel
Interwar = DH.84 Dragon
WWII = IAR 80
Cold war = AVRO Vulcan
Modern = F35 Lightening
Airliner = Airbus A320


----------



## Tartle (Aug 12, 2011)

Pre world war II- DH 91 Albatross


----------



## parsifal (Aug 15, 2011)

That is a very good looking plane. It reminds me of that plane from the kids TV show "International Rescue"


----------



## kettbo (Aug 16, 2011)

Piston engine:
Bf-109G-5/AS in the pale blue gray Hohen scheme

Jet:
F-105D! Peel it back to the raw shapes....see my avatar...sleek, deadly look to it!


----------



## fastmongrel (Aug 17, 2011)

I think I have just come acros my new most beautiful aircraft the Republic F12 RainbowRepublic XF-12 Rainbow - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## TheMustangRider (Aug 17, 2011)

That's a neat looking four-engine aircraft right there, it resembles in a way the beautiful B-29 Superfortress as well.


----------



## Messy1 (Aug 22, 2011)

I'm liking the looks of this P-40Q right now.


----------



## MacArther (Aug 22, 2011)

Messy1 said:


> I'm liking the looks of this P-40Q right now.
> View attachment 176116



Me too! Although, that has been a like for a while now....


----------



## parsifal (Aug 23, 2011)

spitfire fuselage with Mustag wings????


----------



## woljags (Aug 23, 2011)

my fav aircraft of all time is the Short Sunderland


----------



## wuzak (Aug 23, 2011)

TheMustangRider said:


> That's a neat looking four-engine aircraft right there, it resembles in a way the beautiful B-29 Superfortress as well.



Can't see how the Rainbow resembles a B-29 in any way, nor would I ever say that the B-29 is a beautiful aircraft. Not many 4 engine aircraft could be called that, IMO, but the Rainbow is one.


----------



## TheMustangRider (Aug 23, 2011)

wuzak said:


> Can't see how the Rainbow resembles a B-29 in any way, nor would I ever say that the B-29 is a beautiful aircraft. Not many 4 engine aircraft could be called that, IMO, but the Rainbow is one.



Beauty is in the eye of the holder is what they say 
The Superfort was a beautiful bomber plane in my opinion, it is an elegant and imposing machine either in the air or sitting on the ground and its streamlined silhouette and sheer size make it an intimidating aircraft that exemplified how much airpower had evolved during the final days of the war.


----------



## stug3 (Jan 27, 2013)




----------



## J dog (Jan 27, 2013)

to me it is the Me 262. There is something very elegant about it that makes it seem very beautiful and fierce. It could fly like nothing else of its day and the swept wings made like an angle that was both a beauty and a terror in the skies.


----------



## vinnye (Jan 27, 2013)

Spitfire or Mossie for me!
Like the Mig 29 and F22 too.


----------



## GregP (Jan 27, 2013)

Since this is a WWII forum, I’ll stick with the WWII timeframe and say the most beautiful fighter for me is the Mistubishi A6M5 Zero. The proportions are just right. A close second is the Fiat G.56.

The most beautiful bomber to me is the Douglas A-26 Invader followed by the Amiot 370 for sheer aesthetics. Honorable mention to the Beechcraft A-38 Grizzly.


----------



## tomo pauk (Jan 27, 2013)

Sooo many beautiful planes were built. Spitfire, Sea Fury, La-7, Yaks, He-111, almost anything Japanese, P-66, A-20/-26, Mosquito, Italian series 5 fighters...


----------



## Jack_Hill (Jan 27, 2013)

SR-71.
Looks like a flying Darth Vador.


----------



## wuzak (Jan 27, 2013)

GregP said:


> Honorable mention to the Beechcraft A-38 Grizzly.



Even with that probiscis?


----------



## GregP (Jan 27, 2013)

Well, they didn't HAVE to equip it with a 75 mjm cannon but, if they did, then yes. If they didn't, it would have been a bit prettier with 4 or 6 20 mm cannons in the nose.


----------



## joker_86z28 (Jan 27, 2013)

Most beautiful for me are the p51D, bf109 all variants, spit mark viii, b17f, p39.


----------



## 69TA (Jan 28, 2013)

The most beautiful plane of WWII for me are the P51D. A sleek flying hot rod killer...
High on my list would also be the Bf109E for its pure evil look and the Me262 for its high speed look of the time...


----------



## Marcel (Jan 28, 2013)

Among the best looking aircraft should be this one. As a test, who kows what it is?


----------



## meatloaf109 (Jan 28, 2013)

Dutch fast mail plane. S-4. Can't remember who made it.


----------



## rank amateur (Jan 28, 2013)

Pander Postjager. You gotta be Dutch to know that one.
Hats of to Meatloaf.

Chrzzzz


----------



## Marcel (Jan 28, 2013)

rank amateur said:


> Pander Postjager. You gotta be Dutch to know that one.
> Hats of to Meatloaf.
> 
> Chrzzzz


Valsspeler 

Very good. And very good looking imo


----------



## meatloaf109 (Jan 28, 2013)

Personally, I'm fond of the Curtiss P-6E Hawk.


----------



## tengu1979 (Jan 28, 2013)

I think I would go with Classic - The Spit. I just love this Eliptical Wings. If I had to choose a version I would go for PR MkIX as I love the clean look of D wing ad I like symetry of The coolers underneath those wings.


----------



## P47RCFlyer (Feb 4, 2013)

P-51, F4U and the P47. Too hard to choose.


----------



## tragus35 (Apr 22, 2014)

The Yak-3 is a good looking aircraft. The reproductions flying now, are on youtube, and they look fine in the air.


----------



## thedab (Apr 23, 2014)

Can I have two


----------



## CommanderBounds (Mar 30, 2015)

My pick for the most beautiful aircraft of WWII is....The Ilyushin Il-2 Sturmovik/ Il-10! I've always loved the look of this craft. It's probably not as good looking as the Spitfire, P51 or Corsair but it sure is a nice looking aircraft. I would've picked the Dornier Do 17 until I remembered this was about beautiful aircraft! 

Now as far as Civil craft go I *LOVE* the unusual Vickers VC10. It's ugly to some but it's a beautiful craft in many respects. A close second was the Dassault Mercure.

My pick for best looking modern fighter is a hard one because I like alot of them like the Dassault Dornier Alpha Jet, F104, Mirage, Gnat and the Harrier but I choose the A7 Corsair over all of them because of it's great looks.

AND now to switch it up!

My favorite Helicopter is the Westland Sea King and my favorite Chinook is the Piasecki H-21 "Flying Banana"


----------



## ScreamingLighting (Mar 30, 2015)

The De Havilland Hornet, the Spitfire LF Mk IX, the P-38, and last but not least the Sea Fury.


----------



## BiffF15 (Mar 30, 2015)

WW2

Bomber:

US XB-38 
Axis He-217

Fighter:

US: P-51D (honorable mention XP-38 Lighting)
British: Spit Mk14 w/bubble canopy)(honorable mention Sea Fury)
German: Fw-190D13 (honorable mention BF-109G)
Japanese: J2M3 Raiden (most honorable mention Zero)
Italian: Macchi C.202

Transport:

US C-47

Cheers,
Biff


----------



## Shortround6 (Mar 31, 2015)

Some planes get better looking as they get older.


----------



## blueskies (Apr 1, 2015)

From the side the H looks worse then the D.

But from some angles it is much sleeker.


----------



## Lucky13 (Apr 1, 2015)

_This_ is the most beautiful aircraft _ever!_

































Don't you just _love_ those lines? What a _beaut!_


----------



## grampi (Apr 1, 2015)

P-51D, F-84 Thunderstreak, F-100, F-11 Tiger, and F-16...


----------



## GregP (Apr 1, 2015)

Glad someone other than mne likes the F-11! Of course, I also like the F5D Skylancer from the same era.

Best looking for me is a tossup but, as far as fighter go:

1) Prop: Spitfire XVI with bubble canopy has to be in there, but the Sea Fury and Sea Hornet are pretty, too.
2) Jet: F-86F has to be in there, but the F5D and F-11F are pretty, too.
3) Trainer: Has to be the Macchi MC-339.


----------



## CommanderBounds (Apr 1, 2015)

Glad to see I revived this interesting thread! I'd like to revise my statement about the A7 Corsair and switch it in for the F11 Tiger (especially the earlier version!)


----------



## GregP (Apr 1, 2015)

Got to see the Blue Angles in Tigers once or twice and like it a LOT as a display bird. They should have built the "Super Tiger." I, for one, would love to have seen it fly.

It's a bit homely but, if you were in Viet Nam and if you got your butt saved a few time by it, the old Skyraider is georgeous! It's the ONLY bird I know of that can orbit for an hour right over YOU and a half and drop something or shoot something on every pass to keep the bad guys pinned down.


----------



## grampi (Apr 2, 2015)

I remember my folks taking me to see the Blue Angels back in the 60s when they were still using the F-11...what a beautiful plane in the sky! I forgot to mention another one too, the F-100 Super Saber! I also saw the Thunderbirds when they were using the F-100s...


----------



## GregP (Apr 2, 2015)

Super Sabres were good display aircraft, too. Good bomb haulers in Viet Nam, but not very spritely when carrying bombs.

They were fairly rugged, like the F-86, and pretty reliable, too. I went through a time of the F-100 being a favorite and moved on, but I still like them, too.


----------

