Pictures of Cold War aircraft. (1 Viewer)

[Donivanp]

View attachment 843039

The Dragon Roars.

 

[Viking1066]

B-52 drops its bomb load on Hanoi USAF

 

[Viking1066]

BuNo149993 A-4E of VA-163 'Saints' on the USS Oriskany taking on fuel from KA-3B tanker 138974 of VAH-4 from the same carrier in the summer of 1967 PASW

 

[Viking1066]

Convair Delta Darts of New Jersey ANA escorting B-52G Stratofortress FACB

 

[Viking1066]

CVW-6 embarked on USS Franklin D. Roosevelt (CVA 42) 1970's SEAO

 

[Viking1066]

Delta Dart F-106A '59-0007' of the 119thFIS 177FIG New Jersey ANG LINP

 

[Viking1066]

Douglas A-1E Skyraider over Vietnam USAF

 

[Viking1066]

ECN-2493 Two F-104Ns in flight over the desert in 1970 NARA

 

[Viking1066]

English Electric Canberra T22 Royal Navy 1984 AIRH

 

[Donivanp]

There sure have been an interesting amount of 104 lawn darts posted of late.

 

[GreenKnight121]

View attachment 842791

The maid is stealing the barbecue!

 

[GreenKnight121]

HM S Eagle, HM S Bulwark and HM S Albion, which took part in the Suez operation. In total 163 fighter jets were based on them, including 117 Sea Hawks, Sea Venoms and Wyverns 1956 PASW
View attachment 842813

Wyverns were turboprop aircraft, not jets.

 

[GreenKnight121]

AEW Gannets were cross-decked from HMS Hermes and HMS Centaur to the USS Forrestal August 1962 HERF
View attachment 842815

And Scimitars and a Sea Vixen.

 

[GreenKnight121]

The Dragon Roars.

That's a Viggen (Thunderbolt), not a Draken (Dragon).

 

[Donivanp]

That's a Viggen (Thunderbolt), not a Draken (Dragon).

Oh, darn

 

[Viking1066]

That's a Viggen (Thunderbolt), not a Draken (Dragon).

He's being rhetorical and we love it!

 

[Donivanp]

He's being rhetorical and we love it!

Oh damn

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

There sure have been an interesting amount of 104 lawn darts posted of late.

Flawed though they were, what with stability issues and short range, they're still some of the neatest-looking aircraft that flew.

It gives the lie to "if it looks good, it is good", doesn't it? Because it looked terrific, but had serious problems with gravity that led to a divorce early into the relationship.

 

[Donivanp]

Flawed though they were, what with stability issues and short range, they're still some of the neatest-looking aircraft that flew.

It gives the lie to "if it looks good, it is good", doesn't it? Because it looked terrific, but had serious problems with gravity that led to a divorce early into the relationship.

They say that the F-4 is proof that with enough thrust a brick will fly. The F-104 was a test bed for the theory! Beautiful don't get me wrong, it's quite elegant in design! But little more that a lawn dart. The USAF dropped it like a hot potato having only buying the A and C (some B's I know) the A/B's never really sticking around before being used for research projects/chase planes and the C went to a single wing. The international community bought the majority of them.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

They say that the F-4 is proof that with enough thrust a brick will fly. The F-104 was a test bed for the theory! Beautiful don't get me wrong, it's quite elegant in design! But little more that a lawn dart. The USAF dropped it like a hot potato having only buying the A and C (some B's I know) the A/B's never really sticking around before being used for research projects/chase planes and the C went to a single wing. The international community bought the majority of them.

Sad to say you're dead right, a -104 had the glideslope of a streamlined rock if caught into trouble. The F-4 wasn't much better even if losing only one engine, albeit the brick wasn't streamlined. We lost one at Carswell in Nov 88 into Lake Worth, not too long before I reported for duty ... but I heard all about it afterwards. Lost one engine on final and took two fliers to drowning deaths.

But the -104 was prettier, and that is a stone-cold fact. I'm sure that was a large solace to its pilots.