 |
| Not a lot of flat surfaces or sharp corners. |
 |
| You can see the openings for the nose-mounted Browning .50s quite nicely. |
It may border on blasphemy to say this, but I think the Republic F-84F Thunderstreak is much prettier than the North American F-86 Sabre.
Gasp! Heretic! Sinner! Banish the non believer!
ReplyDeleteThat out of my system, I always thought the F-102 and F11F were what jet fighters should look like.
When I was a boy one of our regular routes took us past an old airbase that by then was just the fringe of a muni airport. And right up against the fence were a couple of mobile racks stacked with those fuselages, forlornly lying on their sides and (I suppose) waiting for somebody to remember them long enough to send them to a scrapyard.
ReplyDeleteTo this day that mental image is strong in my memory, and the subject of complicated feelings. What it must have been like to fly one of those things! How sad they're dead.
Prettier ... maybe. But inferior in performance.
ReplyDeleteThere used to be a saying that the Air Force could build the longest runway in the world, and Republic would build a fighter that used every foot of it to take off.
ReplyDeleteStranger to the ground
ReplyDeleteRichard Bach was my favorite writer until he let his goofball new agey side take over.
Have you read Richard Bach's book Stranger to the Ground?
ReplyDeleteA good read if you want a driver's procedural on the F-84.
Sabre.
ReplyDeleteNorth American put good DNA in that. That little bulge in the upper intake lip for the AN/APG30 radar in the A,E, and F models gave it an organic look, like a living being. Like the Spitfires of WW2, it just "looks" right.
And as far as making ugly fly, nobody ever came close to what the British have done (Buccaneer comes to mind).
ReplyDeleteThe British used all of thier pretty aeroplane points up with the Spitfire and Hurricane
ReplyDelete"The British used all of thier pretty aeroplane points up with the Spitfire and Hurricane"
ReplyDeleteHawker Hunter. (Prettiest jet fighter ever, IMO.)
English Electric Canberra.
Hawker Sea Fury.
The Hunter? I will have to be your pardon and disagree ma'am.
ReplyDelete" (Prettiest jet fighter ever, IMO.)"
ReplyDeleteEh...wait, who am I kidding? I think the Phantom II is one of the most beautiful* things made by human hands, so I'm hardly one to judge these things.
*That's not the right word, but I don't know what is. I look at the Phantom II, and it just works.
The song of the Canberra pilots was "All I Want for Christmas is My Wings Swept Back".
ReplyDeleteThe Vampire and the Venom were elegant airframes in my opinion.
Canberra? Seriously, those look like something a 5-yo drew up.
ReplyDeleteF-16 is beautiful to me with all the sweepy, curvy bits and yet totally built for function.
My personal fave is the McDonnel F101B Voodoo. It was like you were dating the Voodoo and the phantom was what it looked like after you got married. ;)
I'm more partial to the A-4 in that 'lean, mean, flying maching' kind of way.
ReplyDeleteF-111 Aardvark
ReplyDeleteAccept no substitutes.
the canadians had a saying about the 101A, when you opened the throttle you were either going to go up or blow up
ReplyDeleteluv the f86, nothing like it
striker 1
I'll deal with your heretical remarks as soon as I'm done dealing with that paint job on a bird from that era.
ReplyDeleteAnd as a grunt, I don't give a squat what anyone -- especially Air Farce brass -- says, the most beautiful jet ever is the A10.
Anything left of Freeman air field in south central Indiana where this film was made? https://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1723870789084
ReplyDeleteI'll see your F-84 and raise you an F-100...
ReplyDeleteNorth American all the way...
B-58 Hustler gets my vote.
ReplyDeleteIt looks fast park in a hanger.
Gerry
I have to vote for the Hawker Hunter as the prettiest subsonic fighter and the later Griffon-engined Spitfire as the prettiest piston engined one, the longer fuselage and shrink-wrapped cowl make it look fast whilst parked. The DeHav Mosquito has to be in the top 5 pretty warplanes, too.
ReplyDeleteAl_in_Ottawa
If you want to talk, "My God! It just LOOKS fast!" go no further than the F-104.
ReplyDeleteIt would seem that there was a price to be paid for that swoopy, not much straight lines look. Apparently, Republic couldn't draw a straight line when it NEEDED to. The kink in the tailpipe cost 10% of the engine's output, making it an also-ran. Shame.
ReplyDeleteCurious if you've ever looked in to the FICON project combining the F84 and B36. One set involved a trapeze with an F84 like an overgrown XF85 Goblin inside, and another involved a pair of F84s, mated to the wing tips of the giant bomber.
ReplyDeleteThose were some crazy times back then. Not everything nostalgic is good.
I have to agree with Drang about the A-10. Ugly as sin, but BEAUTIFUL in function.
ReplyDeleteI have always said that the Marine Corps missed the boat with not having the A-10 modified to work aboard ship to use in a close air support role.
Sure as shooting, someone is going to say "the A-10 is a tank killer and not what the Marines need" but I find that argument to lack imagination. Just think about how effective an A-10 could be at close air support.
Ok, I shut up now...
s