Favorite War Era Aircraft.

Hence why I mentioned the Mikoyan 25 Foxbat, huge engines, high speed long range missiles, made for a one pass go at any B 52s closing to close to Soviet Airspace.

Just observing that the concept was not entirely new, nor the notion entirely origonal for the Soviets.

The Komet still is a very very interesting approach to what history could have been.
 
The British SR-53 project was a post war offshoot evolution of the Me-163 and it was relatively successful or at least showed great potential.
 
The British SR-53 project was a post war offshoot evolution of the Me-163 and it was relatively successful or at least showed great potential.

It did indeed show potential, until it was scuppered by Lockheed and the F-104.
The problem with the Saunders Roe 53 was that the rocket engine was dead weight when not in use, a bit like the Yak-38 Forger and its vertical lift engine.
The problem with aircraft designs that have two separate engines for different roles, is that it is dead weight, and as shown with the Forger, you have to rely on it starting up again when needed.
The Harrier was successful because the engine that made it go up and down, also made it go forwards, and backwards!
 
It did indeed show potential, until it was scuppered by Lockheed and the F-104.
The problem with the Saunders Roe 53 was that the rocket engine was dead weight when not in use, a bit like the Yak-38 Forger and its vertical lift engine.
The problem with aircraft designs that have two separate engines for different roles, is that it is dead weight, and as shown with the Forger, you have to rely on it starting up again when needed.
The Harrier was successful because the engine that made it go up and down, also made it go forwards, and backwards!

Don't forget sideways. It was a brilliant aircraft and as I have mentioned many times before, what a pity that the supersonic version wasn't built.

As a boy I remember the tests which were carried out on the "flying bedstead." Very strange concept at the time.

A lot of aircraft with potential have been scrapped because of Duncan Sandys infamous white paper regarding piloted aircraft. It really peeves me when politicians poke their noses in where they have no expertise at all
 
Last edited:
You've got to give the Meteor its due.
First flew in 1943.
Retired from RAF service in 1980.
A good basic design with a lot lot of longevity in it.
The DC3 Dakota is another good example.
First flew in 1935, and still being used.

The Meteor also served with the Belgian Air Force from 1948 - 1963, most of them were F.8

320px-Gloster_Meteor_F.8_EG-121_Belgian_A.F._BLA_06.09.55_edited-2.jpg
 
In the early 70s when there was the "crisis" in Belize with the neighboring Guatemalans, the carrier, Ark Royal was dispatched and her Buccaneers did a fly over as a deterence to any hostile action.
Guatemala's airforce was still equiped with Mustangs.
That would have proved interesting, but saying that, during Korea, a Sea Fury shot down a Mig 15.
That was mainly because the Mig slowed down to engage the Sea Fury and flew within the Fury's envelope.
The Argentinian Mirages did the same with the Sea Harriers.
They gave up their advantages in speed to engage a more maneuverable adversary.
It can be said the pilot is the key. A more experienced pilot in a lesser aircraft will win over a less experienced pilot in a better machine.
When the USA got hold of a Mig-15 during Korea, it was being tested by Chuck Yeager.
A General claimed it was a better airplane than the F-86 but Yeager said that it was the skill of the pilot that mattered more.
He took on the General flying in the Mig against him in the F-86, then vice versa, and "waxed his tail" both times.:-D

What about this pilot?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jyBDEG9dg-Q
 
The Meteor also served with the Belgian Air Force from 1948 - 1963, most of them were F.8

320px-Gloster_Meteor_F.8_EG-121_Belgian_A.F._BLA_06.09.55_edited-2.jpg

I think the Meteor served with nearly 20 airforces and had 20 variants, opperational and test versions.
Another example of getting the best out of a solid design.
 

Thats awesome! and a bit of a flash git!
In Chuck Yeager's book, "Yeager", He tells of an F-104 pilot who had engine failure at take off, but because it was an early A model, it still had a downward firing ejector seat:-(
To avoid rocketting into the runway, he tried to roll the aircraft before ejecting, but he mis-timed it and went out sideways, slamming into a hangar!
 
To avoid rocketting into the runway, he tried to roll the aircraft before ejecting, but he mis-timed it and went out sideways, slamming into a hangar!

I bet that hurt.

We heard numerous in the RAF tales of ejector mishaps. I think one of the worst was when a Hawker Hunter was being worked on inside the hanger. The red safety pin wasn't inserted and when a mech was working in the cockpit he inadvertently pulled the ejector handle. From what I hear the fire section had to hose bits of him off the rafters.

I have vague memories of a Lightning pilot ejecting at Tengah in Singapore, the aircraft inverted as he ejected slamming him into the runway. A black bag and shovel job.
 
I bet that hurt.

We heard numerous in the RAF tales of ejector mishaps. I think one of the worst was when a Hawker Hunter was being worked on inside the hanger. The red safety pin wasn't inserted and when a mech was working in the cockpit he inadvertently pulled the ejector handle. From what I hear the fire section had to hose bits of him off the rafters.

I have vague memories of a Lightning pilot ejecting at Tengah in Singapore, the aircraft inverted as he ejected slamming him into the runway. A black bag and shovel job.

I like the story of the RAF engineering officer sat in a Ligthing cockpit which had the ejector seat removed for servicing.
He was sat on a box and trying to solve a glitch with one of the engines, a sticky throttle or something.
The machine was running and he managed to jump the chocks and get the thing in the air!
If that wasn't enough, he flew a circuit and landed safely. (and the canopy was missing too!)
Apparently the Aircraft in question was Lightning Mk 1A XM135
 
Last edited:
I bet that hurt.

We heard numerous in the RAF tales of ejector mishaps. I think one of the worst was when a Hawker Hunter was being worked on inside the hanger. The red safety pin wasn't inserted and when a mech was working in the cockpit he inadvertently pulled the ejector handle. From what I hear the fire section had to hose bits of him off the rafters.

I have vague memories of a Lightning pilot ejecting at Tengah in Singapore, the aircraft inverted as he ejected slamming him into the runway. A black bag and shovel job.

I can tell of two mishaps but I didn't hear then first hand.

One was in Somalia when Belgian paratroopers inspected a Mig fighter. The one who climbed in the cockpit was able to give himself a free "ejector seat flight". It was also his last.

The second was when Belgian pilots went to Sweden to test the Viggen as a replacement for the F-104's. During a fast and very low flight just above the waves of the sea the Belgian "passenger" (it was a two seat Viggen) somehow managed to eject. I don't know if he thought he was going to crash or that he could not keep his hands off something. But I'm told that a such a flight is very scary and difficult.
 
I can tell of two mishaps but I didn't hear then first hand.

One was in Somalia when Belgian paratroopers inspected a Mig fighter. The one who climbed in the cockpit was able to give himself a free "ejector seat flight". It was also his last.
.

Something similar happened in the Falklands.
Some playful Paras triggered the ejector seat of a Pucara.
I believe they did it remotely, using rope tied to the firing handle.
This Pucara is the one on display in the Imperial War Museum Duxford.
 
I can tell of two mishaps but I didn't hear then first hand.

One was in Somalia when Belgian paratroopers inspected a Mig fighter. The one who climbed in the cockpit was able to give himself a free "ejector seat flight". It was also his last.

The second was when Belgian pilots went to Sweden to test the Viggen as a replacement for the F-104's. During a fast and very low flight just above the waves of the sea the Belgian "passenger" (it was a two seat Viggen) somehow managed to eject. I don't know if he thought he was going to crash or that he could not keep his hands off something. But I'm told that a such a flight is very scary and difficult.

So Belgium pondered to purchase Wiggen? I did not know that, there is a story about when a MIG pursued a Wiggen, the Wiggen went low over the Baltic sea and the MIG...tried to be a submarine
 
There is some controversy over the Sea Fury vs. MiG happening - but I’m willing to go along with it. Better documented is Cpt. Clinton Johnson in a USN Skyraider shooting down a MiG 17 over VN on 20 June 1965.

I totally agree that the pilot experience is often key to victory. A great example of this is Saburo Sakai, flying an old “Zero”, engaging, and surviving, several Hellcats over Iwo Jima.

When it comes to Gen. Yeager - I think he may have won flying a WWI fighter!
 
Last edited:
In terms of technical know how, Yeager might have actually pulled something like that off.

Goes to show you that it often helps to know your machine inside and out.

His performance in the P 51 during this time period can been seen as an example of that. Real Tech guy, not really an academy type when he approached flying.

Really enjoy researching his career.

As with any type of flying during the World War and inter war period.
 
There is some controversy over the Sea Fury vs. MiG happening - but I’m willing to go along with it. Better documented is Cpt. Clinton Johnson in a USN Skyraider shooting down a MiG 17 over VN on 20 June 1965.

There is no controversy at all over the Sea Fury v Mig engagement.
On the 9th August 1952, Commander Peter Carmichael of 802 Naval Air Squandron was leading four Sea Furys when they were bounced by eigth Mig 15s.
In the ensuing dog fight Carmichael shot down one Mig.
All four Furys returned undamged.
Had the Migs made a high speed, guns blazing pass, they would have more than likely shot down the Furys but, by slowing down and try to mix it with the Sea Furys, they gave away their advantage of speed and handed the fight to the Royal Navy on their terms.
 
Last edited:
So Belgium pondered to purchase Wiggen? I did not know that, there is a story about when a MIG pursued a Wiggen, the Wiggen went low over the Baltic sea and the MIG...tried to be a submarine

Yes, and a lot of pilots liked it. The other contenders were the Mirage F-1 and the F-16, wich was choosen.

There was another Swedish plane , the Saab 105, that the Belgians tested for the Fouga Magister replacement. The Dassault Alphajet was choosen.
 
Back
Top