The best fighter of the 1950's.

The best fighter of the 1950's

  • Supermarine Scimitar

    Votes: 1 0.8%
  • Hawker Hunter

    Votes: 7 5.7%
  • MIG-19

    Votes: 5 4.1%
  • F-105 Thunderchief

    Votes: 6 4.9%
  • English Electric Lighting

    Votes: 11 8.9%
  • F-100 Super Sabre

    Votes: 9 7.3%
  • Dassault Super Mystère

    Votes: 2 1.6%
  • MIG-21

    Votes: 26 21.1%
  • F-86 Sabre

    Votes: 18 14.6%
  • F-8 Crusader

    Votes: 21 17.1%
  • F-106 Delta Dart

    Votes: 8 6.5%
  • F-102 Delta Dagger

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • F-104 Starfighter

    Votes: 9 7.3%

  • Total voters
    123

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Dave - you are correct. It was the redesign of the YF-102 to the F-102A that resulted in the Whitcomb Area Rule change to fuselage because of disappointing speed performance of the YF-102.

The F-102B was a further and major redesign of the A and became the basis for the F-106 because the B was so significantly different.

Er, hello? Who was correct? :twisted:

no offence Dave, you too :)
 
Supermarine Scimitar?

Best of 1950s?

No!

Garbage.

The Spitfire was still in service so I vote for that!
 
Ok, one more. How about the Mirage 3. That was a very good fighter.

This is harder than I thought. None of those fighters listed is a dog. Not a single Brewster Buffalo in the bunch.
 
I'm a little fuzzy on 1950's aircraft, (well, anything past World War II I guess. :oops: )

I do know the Mig 21 was an amazing fighter when it came out, and was better than a lot of the other fighters out there.
 
=Graeme;490938
G'day FB2. Did you happen to read that from the Wiki site above?

Ya I did, and actually thought that was a little wierd as well, but thought they might be referring to some Tu-95 versions with the buldge in the front.

do know the Mig 21 was an amazing fighter when it came out, and was better than a lot of the other fighters out there.

It sure was, some versions of the MiG-21 still service in airforces today. The MiG-21 was small and manuveurable, and even gave American pilots some headaches in Vietnam...

Now nobody shoot me over this statement, but I believe the MiG-21 was roughly the equivalent to the F-4 Phantom in regards to how many entered service and the variability of the design.
 
As for the best aircraft, I'm going to have to say on combat record with usage and longevity its got to be the MiG-21

That choice and reasoning would make Bill Gunston very happy! :)



Ya I did, and actually thought that was a little wierd as well, but thought they might be referring to some Tu-95 versions with the buldge in the front.

This? As far as I know it's a radar randome known as the "Crown Drum" nose randome. I think Richard Whitcomb would be ashamed of the Bear with all its lumps and bumps. :)

 
It sure was, some versions of the MiG-21 still service in airforces today. The MiG-21 was small and manuveurable, and even gave American pilots some headaches in Vietnam...

Now nobody shoot me over this statement, but I believe the MiG-21 was roughly the equivalent to the F-4 Phantom in regards to how many entered service and the variability of the design.
The MiG-21 was respected by US pilots but there were a few incidents where a good portion of the NVNAF MiG-21 force were almost wiped out (Operation Bolo). Also consider that the US imposed "rules of engagement" on fighters that was later lifted in May of 1972.

The MiG-21 performed better than the F-4 at certain altitudes, but the F-4 could easily exploit and better the MiG-21. Never the less the MiG-21 was a very good design despite some limitations.
 
Its kinda tough to choose since some of the aircraft on the list are 1st generation and some were 2nd verging on 3rd ,
Agree...

If you want to base combat career and over all impact I'd say the F-86. Performance and longevity - the F-106
 
On the Tu-95 comment, as it's a subsonic (or transsonic) aircraft, why would area rule even be considdered? (or matter)

KK - I don't have all the data so just speculating.

The Tu-95 was faster than the F-80 and Me 262, the wings were swept the same as an F-86 which meant they knew they were in transonic regime (of course) - and that is where the major wave drag rise occurs.

I have zero idea one way or the other whether an 'area rule' fuselage was considered as part of the design or whether the many bulges on this a/c had some other purpose like housing radars, etc., but if they did (I don't have a plan view handy) it would be very noticable wasp waist at the wing/body intersection..
 
Yeah, I saw that, sorry, I meant you were right too :)
 
I believe the Lightning outperforms the MIG-21 in most areas really.

Very few if any 1950's fighters can be compared to a fighter like the F-15, the Lightning is perhaps the only one.
 
On the Tu-95 comment, as it's a subsonic (or transsonic) aircraft, why would area rule even be considdered? (or matter)

Yeah, I don't think the area rule would count there, and I don't think it was used

This? As far as I know it's a radar randome known as the "Crown Drum" nose randome.

Thats what I was thinking of, I knew if it was a radar but didn't know if thats what was counting. I guess not.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back