[hubbahubba]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

Ok, I was career military, and even *I* have to go "WTF" for a jet that costs TWO BILLION PER COPY.

Has the Pentagon lost it's ever luvin' mind?

What the hell are you going to use it for? How are you going to justify taking the risk flying it on low-level training missions? Or somewhere where it can take a birdstrike? Or run it around the pattern where you run the chance of a crash via pilot error.

No matter *how* good the simulators for this thing are, the crews (pilots, maintainers, etc.) will have to actually FLY it.

And other than full-on Global Nuclear War (and yeah, nuclear triad, subs, missiles, yada yada)-- what is it GOOD for?

If you use it for ANY conventional role, you have to ask yourself- what *possible* conventional target is worth risking a TWO BILLION (with a "B") asset?

I'm sort of boggled. I sure as hell wouldn't want to sign for the jet.

TWO. BILLION. DOLLARS. PER.

This is insane. The Military-Industrial complex at its VERY worst.

R.

Point taken, but I'd rather have 15 of those than $30B/year of student loan forgiveness every day. Just saying.

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by kscarrol

One of my favs…

The F4U Corsair is one of my favs too. My dad flew the Corsair in Korea with the Checkerboard Squadron. Looking through his log books I discovered that flew many planes, but his favorite was most certainly the Corsair.

Here's a pic of my dad back in the day.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

One of my favorite jet aircraft.

I spotted my first view of an F-86 when I was in 6th grade. That would've been in 1958. Much to the annoyance of my teacher, I was gazing out the windows of our classroom when I saw an F-86 pass over our school at a low altitude. Flames were intermittently coming out of the tail pipe. I could hear popping sounds. Later, on the playground, I saw smoke out towards our local airport, about 3 miles away.

Later news reports stated the pilot was experiencing engine problems and tried to land at our little airport. The f-86 stalled and crashed about 1 mile short of the main runway. Unfortunately, the pilot was killed.

The sight of the flaming F-86 passing overhead has never left me.

The ultimate development of the F-86 was the Navy FJ-4. Bigger wing, more fuel, etc. The FJ-4B version added provisions for more underwing stores, including nuclear weapons and also added an extra pair of airbrakes below and behind the regular ones. But what the FJ-4 lacked in the mid-50s was speed. It was a transonic aircraft and could only exceed the speed of sound in a dive. The FJ-4 fighter version had a very brief service history and then ended up in utility and reserve squadrons. The Navy/Marine fighter of choice ended up as the F8U (F-8) Crusader. Here are a few FJ-4B photos -- the first of these, illustrating the speed brakes, is of a civil-registered FJ-4B, one of the rare civilian-operated jet fighters. The second shot shows a Mark 7 nuclear bomb under the wing of an FJ-4B. The sharp-eyed will note that the last photo of an FJ-4B with four underwing fuel tanks has only one pair of speedbrakes deployed; that was because when the landing gear was down, only the front pair would deploy, presumably so as to avoid scraping the rear pair if on the ground in a nose-high attitude.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

The F4U Corsair is one of my favs too. My dad flew the Corsair in Korea with the Checkerboard Squadron. Looking through his log books I discovered that flew many planes, but his favorite was most certainly the Corsair.

Here's a pic of my dad back in the day.

The irony is that in 1943-44 the F4U was kept off carriers because of "lack of carrier suitability." That changed in 1945 and by the Korean war period, the Marines, such as your dad, operated F4Us off of smaller carriers (USS Bataan CVL 29 in your photo) and even smaller escort carriers (CVEs). The F4U stayed in the fleet until past the end of the Korean war before finally being replaced by jets.

[Boysie56]

Originally Posted by hubbahubba

The one that always brought my dad home. If not, I wouldn't be here. Thanks dad and Boeing!

Well thats ultra low emission and planet friendly..

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by Boysie56

Well thats ultra low emission and planet friendly..

You don't go to war throwing granola at your enemies.

[Boysie56]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

You don't go to war throwing granola at your enemies.

You just choke them to death with fumes

[sygazelle]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The irony is that in 1943-44 the F4U was kept off carriers because of "lack of carrier suitability." That changed in 1945 and by the Korean war period, the Marines, such as your dad, operated F4Us off of smaller carriers (USS Bataan CVL 29 in your photo) and even smaller escort carriers (CVEs). The F4U stayed in the fleet until past the end of the Korean war before finally being replaced by jets.

My dad told me how the pilots had to land on carriers. Even after they altered the landing gear to make it softer, it was still a bitch to land on a carrier because of the long nose. I wish he was around to tell those stories. What a time it was.

After Corsairs were replaced by jets, he started flying the early version the F2H Banshee. He hated it for lack of power.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by sygazelle

After Corsairs were replaced by jets, he started flying the early version the F2H Banshee. He hated it for lack of power.

The Royal Canadian Navy flew the Banshees off the HMCS Bonaventure, Canada's last carrier. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMCS_Bonaventure

[Lady Jane]

The Westland Wyvern. Carrier-based strike aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_Wyvern

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by Lady Jane

The Westland Wyvern. Carrier-based strike aircraft.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westland_Wyvern


Attachment 3049566

Attachment 3049567

That is some serious propeller!

[3.0L]

Sometime in the late '50's or early '60's two F-8's landed at our local airport because they were getting low on fuel. The first pilot set the main wheels on the ground and just short of the runway. We could later see the missing strips of grass. No harm to the landing gear and he got the big jet safely stopped before going off the end of the runway.

The second pilot managed to set his F-8 right on the approach end of the runway, but in his excitement, locked up the brakes and blew the left tire. This caused the airplane to veer slowly to the left and off the runway.

Hours later a big crew of Navy guys showed up with some heavy equipment, changing the blown tire. Both aircraft sat on the ramp overnight, much to the excitement of the locals. Both aircraft were refueled and left the next day. I can still remember the loud roar - so unusual for our little airport.

Since the F-8 with the blown tire went off into the mud, it flew away without retracting the landing gear. I remember seeing that from our house as well.

I imagine those 2 pilots had some 'splaining to do back at their home base (probably Lemore).

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by Boysie56

Well thats ultra low emission and planet friendly..

IIRC, until sometime in the 80's, jets had to have at least one "dirty" engine so they could be seen by slower aircraft easier. This was before all the controlled airspace around airports (and above FL180 [roughly 18K feet]). I had a coworker call traffic on a DC8 once and the pilot said all he could see was smoke. In typical controller fashion (when we could get away with such things) he said to "follow the smoke there's a DC8 at the end of it."

[3.0L]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

IIRC, until sometime in the 80's, jets had to have at least one "dirty" engine so they could be seen by slower aircraft easier. This was before all the controlled airspace around airports (and above FL180 [roughly 18K feet]). I had a coworker call traffic on a DC8 once and the pilot said all he could see was smoke. In typical controller fashion (when we could get away with such things) he said to "follow the smoke there's a DC8 at the end of it."

Never heard of that one before. I thought jet engines quit smoking (for the most part) because of ever increasing efficiency.

[Fly320s]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

IIRC, until sometime in the 80's, jets had to have at least one "dirty" engine so they could be seen by slower aircraft easier. This was before all the controlled airspace around airports (and above FL180 [roughly 18K feet]). I had a coworker call traffic on a DC8 once and the pilot said all he could see was smoke. In typical controller fashion (when we could get away with such things) he said to "follow the smoke there's a DC8 at the end of it."

The smoke was a bug, not a feature.

https://jalopnik.com/why-were-old-je...wer-1720531271

[vreihen16]

.

[charlie fairmont]

Not an airplane guy but I thought this had some cool retromod vibes

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by Fly320s

The smoke was a bug, not a feature.

https://jalopnik.com/why-were-old-je...wer-1720531271

I can't believe someone in the FAA gave me bogus information (*sarcasm*)!

Saw a Tristar light-off one winter morning in SLC. I had to ask if everything was OK as the plane was pretty much engulfed in smoke. The pilot said that was quite normal in cold weather.

[Lady Jane]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

I can't believe someone in the FAA gave me bogus information (*sarcasm*)!

Saw a Tristar light-off one winter morning in SLC. I had to ask if everything was OK as the plane was pretty much engulfed in smoke. The pilot said that was quite normal in cold weather.

I asked my dad one day why some airplanes were smoking a lot on start-up during the winter. He said that de-icing fluid spayed in the engines caused that.

[Dang3r]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

I can't believe someone in the FAA gave me bogus information (*sarcasm*)!

Saw a Tristar light-off one winter morning in SLC. I had to ask if everything was OK as the plane was pretty much engulfed in smoke. The pilot said that was quite normal in cold weather.

Thats absolutely normal at those engines, those are RB-211s' and the key of the smoke are the labyrinth seals at the combustion chamber. As long as the fan hasn't brought enough air pressure through the engine, the seals are hanging literally through and let slip off some moist. As soon as the internal pressure increases, the seals are springing outside and sealing the very tiny gaps off, the smoking disappears. Also nice to know, those are 3-shaft engines with indication N1, N2 and N3 into the cockpit. [/end of tec lesson ]

[Llarry]

A great shot of an F-4 Phantom in the vertical. Two 370-(US)gallon underwing fuel tanks but no armament. What a beast!

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by Llarry

A great shot of an F-4 Phantom in the vertical. Two 370-(US)gallon underwing fuel tanks but no armament. What a beast!

Douglas's proof to the world that if you put big enough engines on a brick, you can get it to fly!