To me probably the best looking as well as the best raw performance numbers of WWII came from a single aircraft that never made it to production. The Martin Baker MB.5. It has earned itself the name the British Mustang from its obvious similarities to the North American P-51 Mustang. I think however that it has better lines that the P-51 and it certainly has better performance numbers. I've read that only two of these aircraft were ever built the first having been lost in a crash during the initial testing. The second was destroyed later in the 1960's I believe an a British artillery range. Today there is a group in the Western United States working to build a replica of this aircraft, but it is not an exact replica and is somewhat shorter than the original. It has parts that have been borrowed from several other aircraft including its lookalike the P-51. My goal is to someday have the time and the money to build an exact replica of it, the problem is that I don't believe that there a plans for this aircraft out there, although I have a feeling Martin Baker probably has the somewhere in an archive. If I really have a lot of time I'd like to go to the artillery range that the second was destroyed on and try and see if there is anything left. I think that is a bit ambitious though.
Another aircraft that I have a bit of an affinity towards from the WWII era is the Goodyear F2G sometimes referred to as the Super Corsair. From a basic glance it looks just like a normal Chance Vought F4U Corsair, until you notice the bubble canopy and noticeably longer cowling. There is something about that bubble canopy that makes me like the Super Corsair better than the standard Corsair. It also has under that cowling a considerable increase in power, I believe it is something on the order of nearly 1,000hp but I don't really feel like getting up to get the book I know it's in. Other than the canopy and the cowling it shares the same awesome inverted gull wing as the original Corsair.
Now on to the Korean War Era, from which I think only one aircraft emerges, the North American F-86 Sabre. This plane is always a stunner except when it is a D model and has the radar in the nose which just wrecks the aesthetics of the aircraft. When ever you see a nice one with the polished aluminum, swept wings, bubble canopy, and crucible tail you know you've seen something special. This I would argue is the first REAL jet that the United States produced. Sure there was the P-53, P-80, F-84, etc., but the Sabre was the first that actually looked fast, and it was. I just cannot say enough about how cool it looks when it is in the air, whether it has the speed brakes deployed, gear down, or totally clean, it just looks awesome.
From the Vietnam era came possibly the best looking series of jet aircraft. The Northrop T-38 Talon, F-5E Tiger II, and the F-5 Freedom Fighter. Of these I have a particular interest in the T-38, and the two seat models of the F-5E and F-5. Something about that extra bit of canopy makes them look just a bit better. When it comes down to it there cannot be a simpler aircraft out there. Okay there probably is, but from first glance you can tell it was meant for one thing, going fast! I think the stubby wings that look razor thin, the long pointy nose, and the contours on the engines make this jet look positively brilliant. When they are kept up well and shiny and in the all black schemes of Holloman or Beale Air Force Bases are when I like them the best, but I won't make a fuss over any of the others.
Now we are into the modern stuff and I can get back to possibly my favorite company Dassault. With the next several aircraft I mention I am going to be extremely specific as to the model of the aircraft that I like best, because in most cases it makes a world of difference. The Dassault fighter aircraft that I think has the best lines is the Dassault 2000D Mirage. The D is the two seat model and like with the T-38 something just looks better with that longer canopy. This aircraft again has an extremely pointy nose, intake spikes, a beautiful delta wing, and an F-16 style afterburner ring. If you've seen the videos on Youtube and Google video of these aircraft you know what I'm talking about when I say how impressive they are airborne. I've yet to see one in real life but I'm really looking forward to that day. If you've not checked it out the movie Les Chevaliers du Ciel, Skyfighters in English, is a great movie to see this aircraft in, in a variety of forms. It is a pretty cheesy movie, but it does have some of the best flying scenes I've ever seen.
The next aircraft that is up is the McDonnell Douglas F-15E Strike Eagle. This is the plane that I grew up wanting to fly, although that will never happen since the Air Force does not like nut allergies, but I really don't want to get into that whole story right now, maybe some other time. The Strike Eagle in its dark grey paint scheme just looks better than the normal Eagle. I think it also helps that it is a two seater, again with my liking the longer canopy, I also liked the fact that you worked as a team in this aircraft with your WSO. The other major plus for this aircraft are the conformal fuel tanks that seemed to round out the aircraft and give it a somewhat cleaner look than the normal Eagle. Outside pure aesthetics the another factor that drew me so much to this aircraft was the dual role that it can play. While maintaining the same capability as the typical air to air arena that has the slogan, "Not a pound for air to ground", it can also slug it out in the attack role. The biggest draw though came from what I had read, and later saw what it can do near the ground. With its terrain following radar, FLIR pod and other accessories they fly the Strike Eagle at a hundred feet off the deck in all weather, day or night, that is cool! I heard somewhere that pilots describe that type of flying as being 1/2 second from the ground, WOW!
Next we have an aircraft that I do have the possibility of actually flying in the future the Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet. Let me just get this out there for anyone who actually cares the Navy is considerably more lenient when it comes to your medical and they won't disqualify you for stupid things that don't really affect anything. Back on topic, again the F/A-18F Super Hornet is the two seat model of the Super Hornet and more closely fills the role previously occupied by the Grumman F-14 Tomcat. Again that longer canopy just does it for me. There are a couple of things that I like about the Super Hornet better than the Hornet. The first of these and the most obvious is the change in intakes from the round to the square. I think the square just look a lot better. The next less obvious is the fact that the aircraft in general is cleaner than the original Hornet. If you look at the normal Hornet you'll see that just aft of the cockpit mounted on the leading edge wing root section there is a large metal plate, that looks almost like a strike. It is secured there by only two bolts and is actually there because of the slip stream that the Hornet was producing was putting to much stress on the vertical stabilizers. These are noticeably absent on the Super Hornet as well as the the fact that the leading edge wing roots are much larger and on the Hornet. In general the Super Hornet is a much larger aircraft, nearly three feet longer than its predecessor and with more than 100 square feet more wing area that allows the ability to carry two more weapons pylons for a total of 11.
Anyway I have a bit of a bone to pick with some pilots and mechanics, if your going to be a pilot or mechanic you should know exactly what you are talking about when you speak. On both occasions two military guys have come across to me as being somewhat ignorant of their respective branches of the military. The first was an ex A-10 pilot who interviewed me for admission to the Air Force Academy and when he asked what I wanted to fly I told him the F-15E Strike Eagle, he thought it was a pure air to air aircraft and that's the whole reason they put the seat in for the guy to operate the radar. I kind of explained to him how it was a multi role aircraft but I don't think he believed me and I did not really want to push during an interview. First of all Strike is right in its name, second it has earned the nickname Beagle, for Bomb Eagle, and third Mudhen for its low level flying, what would a fighter be doing down low? Anyway the second guy was a young Marine Corps F/A-18 mechanic that I bumped into in a store wearing a WMU flight team shirt and I got talking to for a while. I explained how I had just received an NROTC scholarship and one day might be flying the very aircraft he works on. Then he proceeded to tell me how the Navy and Marines were going to be getting a new aircraft right about the time I graduated from college and would be entering the pipeline. He told me about the wonders of the F-35 Raptor. I just sat there and played dumb like I had no idea what he was talking about and how cool of a new aircraft it would be, all the while thinking to myself how incredibly ignorant this guy was sounding. It was only a couple of weeks earlier that I had been at the United States Air Force Museum and overheard a grandfather telling his grandson about the F-11 Raptor, hmm another aircraft I don't know about apparently. Anyway I hate it when people talk like they know a lot about something, especially aircraft, and then end up coming off like they know nothing at all. I feel sorry for that little boy who now has no idea what the F-22 RAPTOR actually is. By the way if any of you are thinking why didn't he write F/A-22 I'm still ahead of you, because from what I've heard the Air Force is not actually going to use the F-22 for the attack role, which I think is a good idea since they cost so much. I may have to come back and change this bit here in the future as I just read in Air Forces Monthly I believe it was that the first production F/A-22 just rolled of the assembly line. If the Air Force is producing two versions of the Raptor as a pure air to air, and a dual role aircraft this is the first I've heard of it. That's the end of my rant I guess.
No comments:
Post a Comment