Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

If it looks right, it'll fly right.

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

If it looks right, it'll fly right.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 26th Apr 2009, 13:27
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The comment of a USAF Pilot on seeing the Blackburn Beverley for the first time :-

"Well, I've figured out which way it flies - but how the **** do you get that undercarriage up?"

Last edited by cazatou; 27th Apr 2009 at 13:58.
cazatou is offline  
Old 26th Apr 2009, 20:06
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would like to think that the Hunter, Spitfire and all the other types mentioned above are all good examples of this theory.
Yet, other aircraft seem to disprove it, such as Shorts Belfast and Fokker triplane (yes I did mention the Belsow, as I think it looked like a winner).

One aircraft I would like others opinions on is the B1 in any of it's forms. I think it looks sleek, and to me looks like it should be in a similar speed range to Concorde. Is this so, as it constantly seems to have been left in the side lines during it's career, even after being revived.
barnstormer1968 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2009, 10:03
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: East Anglia
Age: 74
Posts: 789
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Cazatou,

The story I heard about the Bev's first visit to a USAF base was the crew chief saying to the captain as he climbd out "What in the world is that, sir?" "That, sir, is a Blackburn Beverley!"

"Uh, huh - make it yourself?"
1.3VStall is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2009, 13:05
  #24 (permalink)  
wub
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Scotland
Posts: 1,216
Received 14 Likes on 7 Posts
I remember reading that when the project pilot for the Northrop Tacit Blue programme Northrop Tacit Blue - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia first saw the aircraft, he asked if it was still in its crate!
wub is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2009, 21:33
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sorry, grew up in Belfast during Belfast development and can't resist comment. Plan A was a swept wing jet, cut back to a British Fat Albert (with a 'strategic' moniker, but iot would have got there by a week next Tuesday) by civil servants.

Hmm. A swept wing strategic transport jet? Nah, that idea would never have worked, otherwise somebody like the Yanks would have picked it up - wouldn't they?

Aw ****e, they did!
FrustratedFormerFlie is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2009, 23:50
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: east side
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MiG-15?

flew very nicely. looked like a busted beer keg.
Nick10 is offline  
Old 27th Apr 2009, 23:56
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Cambs.
Age: 83
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I know we all our favourite UK produced aircraft , but I also think some Post War US Operational types deserve a mention, in terms of Symmetry/design and "Looks right"
Just to name a few of my favourites

Convair F106 Delta Dart ,
Convair B58 Hustler
Boeing B47 Stratojet
Douglas F4D-1 Skyray
Grumman F9F-5 Panther/ F9F-9 Couger
McDonnel F4 Phantom
Lockheed F104 Starfighter, in original "Budlite" silver
Old Photo.Fanatic is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 02:38
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: GAFA - East
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Cool Common trait

OPF, with the possible exception of the Grumman iron works products, I believe your favourites all have at least one important 'look right, fly right' element in common - area ruling. Anyone care to nominate why and when it become unfashionable?

My favourite modern effort;

Northrop YF-23 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
BentStick is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 04:21
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by BentStick
area ruling. Anyone care to nominate why and when it become unfashionable?
A combination of:

Plenty of excess thrust so the supersonic drag isn't such an issue
and
better design capability lets you "area rule" (i.e design for transonic drag) without having to look like a flying barbie doll
and
less emphasis on raw straightline speed anyway

perhaps?
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 04:41
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: surfing, watching for sharks
Posts: 4,082
Received 55 Likes on 34 Posts
Old Photo
An excellent list, if I may one more. The A-5 Viggie.

A-5 Vigilante - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
West Coast is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 08:51
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wilds of Warwickshire
Posts: 240
Received 8 Likes on 6 Posts
Look Right

I had an almost identical list to OPF, but his inclusion of the F4 raised my eyebrows! Surely happy memories rather than good looks.

Can I add the Mirage 111 as another non-brit 'looker'.

KB
KiloB is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 09:11
  #32 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Sandhurst
Age: 50
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I'd say that the F-4 was more 'menacing' than good looking, like the original Typhoon, FW-190, F4-U Corsair, SAAB Viggen.
GPMG is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 10:43
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toulouse area, France
Age: 93
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Devil Another USAF comment ...

In the early days of the Victor's entry into service, a USAF Colonel (?) was reported to have said, after visiting the factory at Radlett: "Nice looking airplane, but why d'ja have to build it in a hobby shop?" T'was also said that Sir Fred was not amused ...
But then, if you're only building 50 or so, why not use ordinary scaffolding instead of the massive jigs which make high-rate production of much larger numbers possible ... and it would "do" for the similar number of B.2s to follow ...


The sound of those four Sapphires' intake resonance at idle was a "sound to remember", though ...

Last edited by Jig Peter; 28th Apr 2009 at 11:10. Reason: Add bit about sound, to stay "on thread".
Jig Peter is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 11:22
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: East Anglia
Age: 74
Posts: 789
Received 10 Likes on 7 Posts
Wink

How can anyone seriously include the F-4 Phantom in the "if it looks right, it'll fly right" debate. It was merely a triumph of thrust over aerodynamics!
1.3VStall is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 11:33
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: down south
Age: 77
Posts: 13,226
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Why has nobody mentioned the Lightning?
(no, not the P38).
Lightning Mate is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 11:40
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Glorious West Sussex
Age: 76
Posts: 1,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Don't worry, somebody has.
TyroPicard is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 11:46
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: England
Posts: 488
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe a senior RN type said when he saw the F-4:

"They've delivered it upside-down".

Looks right/flies right is often true, but there is probably something in the reverse idea that if we know something performs well then it's form starts to take on a beauty all of it's own. F-4 and Buccaneer probably fall into this category. If they were rubbish, they'd have been ugly too.
Brain Potter is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 13:50
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Cambs.
Age: 83
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Totally agree with you BP,
The inclusion of the F4 Phantom in my earlier list is a personal
choice.
I think over time it took on a beauty of its own.
From my standpoint as a Semi Pro. Aviation Photographer I have seen
countless F4s.
It has extra appeal to me in the earlier Operational Colour Schemes,
especially USN And US Marine Squadron markings.
Not forgetting some of the "Special/Anniversary paint jobs.
All adding up to a growing appreciation over time.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Last edited by Old Photo.Fanatic; 28th Apr 2009 at 14:14.
Old Photo.Fanatic is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 14:50
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toulouse area, France
Age: 93
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Good lookers

Well, what about the Canberra (before the odd job they did to make the B.8)? Clean, businesslike and very sleek ... and for "sleeker" there's the B-57 US-built variant.
Another business-like machine I find very attractive is the Sukhoi SU-24(?) Frogfoot, which again is in the unglamorous "mud-plugging" game.
Talking of mudpluggers, there's the fantastic Hawker Tempest whose mighty Sabre I used to hear when on Armament Practice camp at Sylt in 2 TAF. The mainly Polish target tug pilots used to demonstarte whenever they could that it would beat any jet fighter of the day up to 15,000 feet ...
Jig Peter is offline  
Old 28th Apr 2009, 15:20
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bristol
Age: 56
Posts: 1,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
FrustratedFormerFlie

I can't agree with you that the Belfast was just a UK fat albert, especially as it really did look much more like the C133, which was similar in role and a comtempory.
But then I did also state I thought it went against the rule, and theat it LOOKED right rather than flew right
barnstormer1968 is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.