FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Yep!
Best Jet Fighter 1947 -1957
- Thread starter pbfoot
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
razor1uk
Staff Sergeant
Yep too, if 8)
Although I think the early EE/BAC Lightnings without the belly gun pack, might not be seen as just 'fighters' which tend to have to lead their nose over their targets path/trajectory to hit with cannons.
An British interpreted of some slanting music inspired weapon angles, has that the earlier models had their nose cockipt shoulders flanking cannons are fixed, mounted at above borsight, around 11.5 or 15 degrees iirc up/skyward from horizontal to help shoot 50's Soviet heavy bombers at higher altitudes.
Matching that to firing cannon ballistics aerodynamic variations between muzzle locations, convergences excetera for a long range 'howitzer' styled arcing shot.
Minimising exposure to enemy tail gunner; that due to UK defence opinions of the day, we'd lost the initative if the enemy bomber needed being intecepted with Ligntnings, which could be playing catch up, why waist time trying to get to a near equal altitude before aiming a straight tail on shot, shot from below gives more possible impact area...
In air to ground training in the older models required sometimes upto a further 24 deg nose down to keep the target 'sighted' and hit it on the gun range - diving further at the terrain below does encourage spending less time spent aiming but also better accuracy or risk becoming a plough.
Those with the missle packs and later on belly weapon packs were more 'fighterable'; the equipment of the belly/love'handles gunpack moved the guns closer to aero/flying attitude bore sight angle, for easier aiming at the ground at lower alts' against other fighters
Also later upgrades to avionics and inclusion of missile system related avionics and design improvements/changes deleted the shoulder cannons; using the empty spaces for (each) weapon its ammo, for installing some of those componants and other systems.
Although I think the early EE/BAC Lightnings without the belly gun pack, might not be seen as just 'fighters' which tend to have to lead their nose over their targets path/trajectory to hit with cannons.
An British interpreted of some slanting music inspired weapon angles, has that the earlier models had their nose cockipt shoulders flanking cannons are fixed, mounted at above borsight, around 11.5 or 15 degrees iirc up/skyward from horizontal to help shoot 50's Soviet heavy bombers at higher altitudes.
Matching that to firing cannon ballistics aerodynamic variations between muzzle locations, convergences excetera for a long range 'howitzer' styled arcing shot.
Minimising exposure to enemy tail gunner; that due to UK defence opinions of the day, we'd lost the initative if the enemy bomber needed being intecepted with Ligntnings, which could be playing catch up, why waist time trying to get to a near equal altitude before aiming a straight tail on shot, shot from below gives more possible impact area...
In air to ground training in the older models required sometimes upto a further 24 deg nose down to keep the target 'sighted' and hit it on the gun range - diving further at the terrain below does encourage spending less time spent aiming but also better accuracy or risk becoming a plough.
Those with the missle packs and later on belly weapon packs were more 'fighterable'; the equipment of the belly/love'handles gunpack moved the guns closer to aero/flying attitude bore sight angle, for easier aiming at the ground at lower alts' against other fighters
Also later upgrades to avionics and inclusion of missile system related avionics and design improvements/changes deleted the shoulder cannons; using the empty spaces for (each) weapon its ammo, for installing some of those componants and other systems.
Last edited:
Glider
Captain
The attacker was replaced as quickly as possible and the Swift was clearly outshone by the Hunter, I don't think there worth adding to the list.
renrich
Chief Master Sergeant
If the F8U is eligible it takes the cake.
N4521U
Colonel
Skyray..............
It's a silly vote, you can discount it if you like.
I always thought it looked like a big styrofoam plane....
Wasn't the F-100 a pickup truck????
It's a silly vote, you can discount it if you like.
I always thought it looked like a big styrofoam plane....
Wasn't the F-100 a pickup truck????
Lucky13
Forum Mascot
The Cutlass was a bit of a failure, right......could anything have been done to make it a halfdecent jet?
Glider
Captain
A redesign maybe?
- Thread starter
- #48
pbfoot
1st Lieutenant
as a dogfighter I still think the F86 ruled , it was proven over and over again in all NATO gunnery meets and the simple fact they were the target of all various other types in the skies over Europe during this period
razor1uk
Staff Sergeant
I think this design appeared maybe 5 - 10 years early for its Westinghouse engines, which I believe was amongst its biggest flaws - leaving it relatively underpowered for the parasitic surface drag of its design layout.
Rattleing my brain box about, otherwise it was supposedly well liked by its pilots for its ride and responsiveness - apart from its powerplant(s) related limitations the 'plumbers nightmare' of hydraulic pipework within (I think it was one of the 1st USN planes with hydrualicly boosted controls).
If it were possible to rebuild one with say engines from the mid 60's of a similar diameter size, it'd probably go as it was originally intended.
Glider
Captain
My understanding was that the engines were but part of the problem. The Hydraulics were a major factor and the weakness of the nose landing gear didn't do it any favours. Its crash record was very poor alost dreadfull and it killed a number of pilots in a very short time. Its ability to take part in air to air combat must be questioned as the Blue Angels deemed it to be unsuitable for demonstration flying.
oldcrowcv63
Tech Sergeant
The Cutlass had some interesting nicknames: Flying toaster (the GE engines were said to put out less heat than the manufacturers toasters), Ensign Killer, Gutless Cutlass.
In Contrast the Ford (F4D) Skyray had notable climb performance and level flight speed but was apparently ill suited to multirole development after its introduction, despite the promise of its updated F5D intercepter development which apparently just lost out to the Vought F-8. F5D first flew in 1956. beautiful airplane.
In Contrast the Ford (F4D) Skyray had notable climb performance and level flight speed but was apparently ill suited to multirole development after its introduction, despite the promise of its updated F5D intercepter development which apparently just lost out to the Vought F-8. F5D first flew in 1956. beautiful airplane.
Attachments
Last edited:
