Outstanding aircraft types that didn't see combat

[AnotherFSO]

There must be lots of combat aircraft types over the years that didn't ever get to see action. Of them, which are your favourites?

I'm discounting here the myriad aircraft types that might be considered experimental, odd, lacklustre, humdrum or uninspiring, or were solely involved in non-combat duties (training etc). I'm really looking for examples of mainstream, frontline historic combat aircraft. I'm also discounting types in current air force inventories, on the basis that they might still see combat one day.

So which are your favourites? I had hoped to nominate the English Electric Lightning, but a bit of research shows they were apparently used in a ground-attack role in Saudi Arabia in 1969.

[BEagle]

Harrier GR5 in Gulf War One!!

[chevvron]

Short Seamew.

[jimgriff]

Martin Baker MB5

[Quemerford]

Convair B-36.

[megan]

Martin Baker MB5Never entered production, only one built.

Fairey Gannet

Supermarine Attacker

Supermarine Scimitar

[DAHenriques]

Grumman Bearcat; last of the cat single engine prop fighters.
Dudley Henriques

[sycamore]

Dudley,think the French used them in VTnam....

[DAHenriques]

Dudley,think the French used them in VTnam....
You know, I think you're right. More correct for me to say they never saw combat as a US military fighter.

[sycamore]

DH,..and possibly Algeria...?

[sycamore]

Another a/c also along the line of` if it looks right,it`ll fly right` was the `FORD `, really the Douglas F4D Skyray;;first carrier-borne supersonic jet,could go Mach 1+ in level flight,and held World Airspeed Record..Really shapely aircraft,almost as good-looking as a Hunter...!!...but I`m just a bit biased...

ed..Douglas and Ed Heinemann certainly knew how to design and build great aircraft...until Mcd..came along...

[treadigraph]

I was thinking Tigercat but I think they did see some action in Korea?

[VictorGolf]

The Supermarine Spiteful and Seafang.

[radar101]

The Supermarine Swift F1

[Asturias56]

The Supermarine Swift F1


thank god!!

[Dr Jekyll]

Sea Vixen. Javelin. Victor. F106.

[sycamore]

Dr J, ..SV,Jav,Vic were all in the Far East during Confrontation..

[Zionstrat2]

Maybe the b-58 wasn't perfect but..

[Quemerford]

B-47. That really is a strange one, given the numbers and longevity.

[oxenos]

The Supermarine Spiteful and Seafang.
Hardly outstanding. The idea of the laminar wing was that it would improve on the performance of the Spitfire. in fact, the increase in speed was marginal, the critical Mach No. was lower, and it had poor stall characteristics. They then tried to get the R.N.to accept the Seafang. A carrier aircraft with poor stall characteristics was not the best of ideas. The "Jet Spiteful" evolved into the Attacker, with the same wing, but was not in front line service for long.

[ericferret]

There must be lots of combat aircraft types over the years that didn't ever get to see action. Of them, which are your favourites?

I'm discounting here the myriad aircraft types that might be considered experimental, odd, lacklustre, humdrum or uninspiring, or were solely involved in non-combat duties (training etc). I'm really looking for examples of mainstream, frontline historic combat aircraft. I'm also discounting types in current air force inventories, on the basis that they might still see combat one day.

So which are your favourites? I had hoped to nominate the English Electric Lightning, but a bit of research shows they were apparently used in a ground-attack role in Saudi Arabia in 1969.

Martinsyde Buzzard

[DuncanDoenitz]

B-47. That really is a strange one, given the numbers and longevity.
If we include reconnaisance varients, and though outside of declared hostiities, RB-47s were intercepted, fired upon by MiG-15/17s and returned fire during flights over the Soviet Union. Several were damaged and some shot-down.

[Dr Jekyll]

Hardly outstanding. The idea of the laminar wing was that it would improve on the performance of the Spitfire. in fact, the increase in speed was marginal, the critical Mach No. was lower, and it had poor stall characteristics. They then tried to get the R.N.to accept the Seafang. A carrier aircraft with poor stall characteristics was not the best of ideas. The "Jet Spiteful" evolved into the Attacker, with the same wing, but was not in front line service for long.

Off topic here. But were the Attacker's stall characteristics much better than the Seafang?

[Quemerford]

If we include reconnaissance variants, and though outside of declared hostilities, RB-47s were intercepted, fired upon by MiG-15/17s and returned fire during flights over the Soviet Union. Several were damaged and some shot-down.

I did consider the RB-47s but was really highlighting that the standard bomber version didn't see combat. It does seem surprising, given that it was in service during Korean conflict and the early days of the Vietnam War. Can't recall if the 'bomber' B-50 saw service either. Possibly not.

[Fargo Boyle]

I was thinking Tigercat but I think they did see some action in Korea?
From Wikipedia ;

Marine Corps night fighter squadron VMF(N)-513 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VMA-513) flying F7F-3N Tigercats saw action in the early stages of the Korean War, flying night interdiction and fighter missions and shooting down two Polikarpov Po-2 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polikarpov_Po-2) biplanes.[9] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_F7F_Tigercat#cite_note-Grossnick-9) This was the only combat use of the aircraft.

[DHfan]

The Supermarine Swift F1

Only outstanding for being rubbish.

[Germaine]

D.H Vampire anyone? My father was ground crew in these with 16 sqdn in the late 40's. As far as I know it didnt see combat but I may well be wrong...

[Quemerford]

D.H Vampire anyone? My father was ground crew in these with 16 sqdn in the late 40's. As far as I know it didnt see combat but I may well be wrong...

Egypt/Israeli conflict would be one combat use. Not sure of others.

[Dr Jekyll]

D.H Vampire anyone? My father was ground crew in these with 16 sqdn in the late 40's. As far as I know it didnt see combat but I may well be wrong...

India used them against Pakistan, but they didn't fare well against F86s.

[AlphaMikeTango]

D.H Vampire anyone? My father was ground crew in these with 16 sqdn in the late 40's. As far as I know it didnt see combat but I may well be wrong...
The Rhodesian Air Force were using surviving RhAF and ex SAAF single-seat and dual-seat Vampires in internal ground attack operations right until 1980.

[galaxy flyer]

I did consider the RB-47s but was really highlighting that the standard bomber version didn't see combat. It does seem surprising, given that it was in service during Korean conflict and the early days of the Vietnam War. Can't recall if the 'bomber' B-50 saw service either. Possibly not.

If the B-47 had seen combat, none of us would be here

[oxenos]

But were the Attacker's stall characteristics much better than the Seafang?
Difficult to find out but they were only in service for a short time. The R.N. hedged their bets by ordereing a number of Sea Vampires to get experience of operating jets from carriers.

[Quemerford]

If the B-47 had seen combat, none of us would be here

You could say the same about the B-52.

[treadigraph]

RAF Vampires saw action during the Malayan Emergency and Mau Mau uprising, presumably ground attack.

[Dr Jekyll]

You could say the same about the B-52.
The B-52 has seen plenty of combat and will probably see more before it's retired.

[Quemerford]

The B-52 has seen plenty of combat and will probably see more before it's retired.

The point wasn't about the B-52: it was that "if the B-47 had been used, none of us would be here". The B-52 WAS used but here we are. OK?

[TCU]

Referencing the word "outstanding", in the OP's text, the SAAB J37 Viggen probably deserves a shout

[CoodaShooda]

The CAC “Avon” Sabre and the Mirage III O would fit the bill, I think.

[DuncanDoenitz]

I'll see your IIIO, and raise you IV.

[megan]

The CAC Sabre misses the mark Cooda, From 1958 to 1960, CAC Sabres of No. 78 Wing RAAF (78 Wing), comprising 3 Sqn and 77 Sqn, undertook several ground attack sorties against communist insurgents in the Federation of Malaya, during the Malayan Emergency.

[CoodaShooda]

Curse those commies…

[sandiego89]

Concur with Dr. Jekyl on the F-106. Arguably the best interceptor of its era (don't want to start any fights with EE Lightning fans...)

Mitsubishi F-2

Several mentioned I would not consider "outstanding", perhaps good, interesting or innovative (B-58, B-47, Javelin, B-36...) By all accounts the Attacker was pretty dismal.

[tonytales]

How about the Martin Mauler, AM-1? It had the bad luck to run up against the Douglas AD.

[Dr Jekyll]

Hawker Nimrod (the biplane not the converted Comet)? I think the only one of the Fury/Hind/Hart family that didn't see combat.

[DHfan]

By all accounts the Attacker was pretty dismal.

A couple of times James Kightly (JDK, late of this parish and the FP forum) lauded Joe Smith of Supermarine as a good aircraft designer.
He and his team did a magnificent job after Mitchell's death in keeping the Spitfire relevant virtually until the end of the piston-engined fighter era.

His aircraft afterwards - Attacker, Swift, Scimitar - were average at best.

[BSD]

Has anyone mentioned the Convair B58 Hustler?

I think the USAF had about 80 or so operational. I can't think of when it might have been used in anger...

[Asturias56]

never was - purely for the hi-speed delivery of atomic weapons - with a shed load of tanker support...............

[tdracer]

Has anyone mentioned the Convair B58 Hustler?

I think the USAF had about 80 or so operational. I can't think of when it might have been used in anger...
Pretty sure the number was a lot more than 80 - production was several hundred. If memory serves, they crashed more than 80...

[Quemerford]

Pretty sure the number was a lot more than 80 - production was several hundred. If memory serves, they crashed more than 80...

116, including prototypes. They certainly didn't crash anywhere near 80.

[Quemerford]

Has anyone mentioned the Convair B58 Hustler?

Yes: post #18.

[megan]

B-58 losses were 24, some incorrectly quote 26 because they include two that were damaged in accidents, one was repaired and returned to flight, the other survives as a static display.

[fitliker]

If the B-47 had seen combat, none of us would be here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqIJL8lx00o

[Deaf]

Fairey Gannet

Limited use on anti piracy in South China Sea. Rockets with concrete warheads. According to warries from a radar op, they were pissed off about the concrete warheads,

[tonytales]

Grumman F11F Tiger. - A stong comeback after the F10F Jaguar

[DHfan]

I've never heard of it but if Wiki is to be believed, it wasn't even vaguely outstanding but never saw combat.

[Asturias56]

Not that bad according to Bill Gunston - first aircraft designed from scratch to the Area rule, probably only beaten for low drag by the Gnat and the F-104. Better air combat aircraft than the F-104. First supersonic aircraft in USN service. V popular with the Blue Angels. around 200 built

"basically one of the best of is era , rather let down by it's engine"

"A nice aeroplane that had too many competitors".

[megan]

Not that bad according to Bill GunstonThe Blues were using the aircraft when I arrived for flight training, thought it the most beautiful and best aircraft they ever used. After they gave it to students for supersonic experience one student found he had difficulties, both wings had separated at the wing fold, a little over "g'ing". Also famed as being the first aircraft to shoot itself down.

[treadigraph]

A stong comeback after the F10F Jaguar

Ah, my awareness of that beast was purely through Corky Meyer's autobiography - I seem to recall he was not terribly gruntled with it!

[MAC 40612]

The CAC “Avon” Sabre and the Mirage III O would fit the bill, I think.

Think you can discount the Mirage IIIO since a number of them were supplied to Pakistan and the type is still in service there, so will have been used in the regular skirmishes with their Indian neighbours.

[Quemerford]

The Blues were using the aircraft when I arrived for flight training, thought it the most beautiful and best aircraft they ever used. After they gave it to students for supersonic experience one student found he had difficulties, both wings had separated at the wing fold, a little over "g'ing". Also famed as being the first aircraft to shoot itself down.

...and also used by the Blue Angels quite effectively, so obviously not a bad type.

[sycamore]

Ast56,please refer to my #11 ref the F4D Skyray....

[Asturias56]

Ast56,please refer to my #11 ref the F4D Skyray....

If we're talking first USN supersonic aircraft it seems to be somewhat uncertain - Googling it gets claims for the F4D, the F7U, the F8U & the F11

Seems to depend on how you define it - level flight/dive/first flight/ first supersonic flight/first in service

I quoted Bill Gunston who's normally quite reliable.

Not a big worry 80 years on TBH

[BEagle]

Perhaps the rather astonishing Westland Welkin?

I'm told that there was one at the Westland facility at RAF Merryfield after the war....along with a Hamilcar X.

[Self loading bear]

Bolkow Bo-105 was an outstanding helicopter but not used in combat?

[Quemerford]

Bolkow Bo-105 was an outstanding helicopter but not used in combat?

Given that there is/was one in use by the Ukraine military, I think it has been, if not elsewhere.

[MAC 40612]

Given that there is/was one in use by the Ukraine military, I think it has been, if not elsewhere.

Bolkow Bo-105 was an outstanding helicopter but not used in combat?

Iraqi Air Force had a number delivered in the late 1970s that were used in combat.

[Deaf]

The CAC “Avon” Sabre and the Mirage III O would fit the bill, I think.

CAC Sabre - One RAAF mission (Firedog?) in Malaya during Emergency

[pr00ne]

The Supermarine Swift F1

Very strange application of the term outstanding...

[Asturias56]

as in "Infamous"

[Quemerford]

So we've had B-36, B-47, B-58, Skyray but (IIRC) nothing else that fully fits the bill. Did I miss any?

And is it a coincidence that they are all US designs?

[Quemerford]

Oh how about FJ-3 or FJ-4/4B? The latter was the final and best evolution of the F-86 design philosophy. FJ-3Ms were on standby during the Lebanon Crisis and FJ-4/4Bs deployed to Taiwan but I can't recall any action for either.

[Allan Lupton]

How about the de Havilland Sea Vixen?

[kenparry]

Outstanding mainly for the duration of its development period

[Doctor Cruces]

So we've had B-36, B-47, B-58, Skyray but (IIRC) nothing else that fully fits the bill. Did I miss any?

And is it a coincidence that they are all US designs?
Not really. We Brits were involved in various hostilities from the end of WW2 until today so most of our our combat types saw service worldwide.

[Quemerford]

Not really. We Brits were involved in various hostilities from the end of WW2 until today so most of our our combat types saw service worldwide.

I'm sure many from across the pond would see Korea and Vietnam in a different light without the Berlin, Cuba (missile and Bay of Pigs), Pueblo, Grenada, Libya and goodness knows how many other Crises even being considered. Plus the many PQ4M, U-2, RB-29 (and other) shootdowns whilst "not being at war".

[Muddy Paws]

F104? Certainly would count as outstanding!

[treadigraph]

USAF F-104s saw limited combat in Vietnam and the Pakistan AF certainly used theirs against the Indian AF.

[Asturias56]

several Russian types never saw war service IIRC

[Brewster Buffalo]

USAF F-104s saw limited combat in Vietnam .....

In Vietnam there were 8 combat losses - 7 to AA or SAMs and 1 to a MiG19 - but no kills. Surprisingly it was used for close air support sometimes...

[Muddy Paws]

USAF F-104s saw limited combat in Vietnam and the Pakistan AF certainly used theirs against the Indian AF.
Vietnam, of course. Didn't realise Pakistan had them.

[Asturias56]

In Vietnam there were 8 combat losses - 7 to AA or SAMs and 1 to a MiG19 - but no kills. Surprisingly it was used for close air support sometimes...

Jeez - Lockheed (and Prince Bernhard) sold them as ground attack aircraft to the Germans - and that didn't work out too well...................

[tonytales]

Did the McDonnel F2H Banshee see combat in Korea? Its competitor, the F9F Panther did but don't remember anything on the Banshee. It never grew swept wings either like the Panther.

[megan]

Did the McDonnel F2H Banshee see combat in KoreaYes, fighter escorting bombers prior to the arrival of Migs, reconnaissance and ground attack.

[pr00ne]

Jeez - Lockheed (and Prince Bernhard) sold them as ground attack aircraft to the Germans - and that didn't work out too well...................

Actually it DID work out rather well!
F-104G’s were rather different beasts than what the US operated in Vietnam, in both airframe and avionic fit.
As fast and low nuclear delivery platforms (what they were bought for) they were excellent, and had a lower percentage loss rate than RAF Lightnings!
The Germans certainly lost a lot, but they did order a huge number.
Became far less useful after NATO went all flexible response and conventional weapons delivery, but that’s why the Tornado was their replacement.

[Asturias56]

Hmmm - I'm old enough to remember the F-104G saga - I don't think you'll find many people who thought they were "excellent"

[DHfan]

IIRC, the saying in the Luftwaffe was the way to get an F-104G was buy a field and wait.

[treadigraph]

I went to the Last Starfighter event at Erding back in 1986, certainly got the impression that the Luftwaffe liked theirs! I thought they were retiring them after that but they seemed to carry on for some years. Great event, can't recall how many they launched towards the end of the display, but it was quite a few. Scramble doesn't have a report... If I recall they lost about 25% in accidents over the years.

[Brewster Buffalo]

There can't be many combat aircraft where the export numbers vastly exceeded the home purchase. So, from Wiki, USAF bought 170 F-104 against 2000+ exports - 1 : 11.
MiG 21 maybe?

[Quemerford]

Northrop F-5 would be the obvious example where exports exceed home purchase.

[BEagle]

Luftwaffe F-104G loss rate was 32%

UK Sea Vixen loss rate was 38%

[Quemerford]

Luftwaffe F-104G loss rate was 32%

UK Sea Vixen loss rate was 38%

IIRC the RCAF F-104 loss rate was higher than the Luftwaffe.

[Self loading bear]

Handle Page Victor has never been used as bomber in action. In the Borneo conflict they were send to Singapore as deterrent.

[Quemerford]

Handle Page Victor has never been used as bomber in action. In the Borneo conflict they were send to Singapore as deterrent.

The Black Buck missions would count as combat I'd venture. OK not as a bomber, but in harm's way is in harm's way.

[Self loading bear]

The Black Buck missions would count as combat I'd venture. OK not as a bomber, but in harm's way is in harm's way.

the tankers kept well out of range of the Argentine airforce.

[Gordon Brown]

the tankers kept well out of range of the Argentine airforce.

If you extend that argument, then the E-3 has never been in combat.

[Self loading bear]

If you extend that argument, then the E-3 has never been in combat.

Exactly!
I think we would need to limit this to aircraft types which were intended to go in harms way. Otherwise we can include VC25A as well.

Fighters, Bombers, Ground attack.