Outstanding aircraft types that didn't see combat

[Asturias56]

Originally Posted by Brewster Buffalo

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 Korea

Yes, fighter escorting bombers prior to the arrival of Migs, reconnaissance and ground attack.

[pr00ne]

Originally Posted by Asturias56

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]

Originally Posted by BEagle

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Quemerford

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]

Originally Posted by Self loading bear

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]

Originally Posted by Gordon Brown

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.