Two Vintage Jets

[kalizzi]

These were gathering dust in my hangar, so I took them out for a stroll today. Beautiful thoroughbreds. I hope you like. Best wishes.

 

 

Republic F-84F Thunderstreak in Dutch colours.

 

In a dive with brakes deployed

 

On final, they needed long runways.

 

The North American B-45 Tornado

 

Bomb bay open: the business end of a bomber!

 

Commencing a turn

 

The twin GE J47 pods powered this aircraft with around 5000lbs of thrust per engine, these pods were also used in B-47 and B-36 bombers. Another variant of this turbojet powered the landmark F-86 delivering just under 6,000lbs.

 

The RB-45C unarmed reconnaissance version, with cameras installed in the nose

 

This one is in RAF colours

 

Operating from RAF Sculthorpe in Norfolk, three such aircraft carried out "special duties" carrying out secret reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union in the early 50s, before the advent of SAMs.

[Rupert]

God don't you hate it when some of your best aircraft are left gathering dust in the hanger!!! Thanks so much for sharing your wonderful aircraft with the rest of us!!!!

 

Michael

[kalizzi]

Spot on Michael I loathe nothing more than installing a plane and then it goes into oblivion. I think some you fall in love with from the test flight, and some you form this irrevocable first impression that this is a bitch to fly (mind my French). The amount of right rudder you apply with power during the take-off run of the F-84F is (or was) a huge put-off, and so is the grossly-underpowered feel, but mind you these aircraft were underpowered in reality. I think somebody mis-programmed it to react like a singe prop model. Once you get around to addressing these little nuisances you start to take them out for more rides. Thank you for your kind words.

 

Khalid

[Rupert]

Khalid,

 

From everything I've heard all the F-84s were considered, slow, pigs, etc. which had limited load capabilities and required super long runways. But apparently they were about as good as we had at the time. And an axial flow engine was a huge improvement over the old centrifugal flow engines!

 

As to the torque factor on takeoff, I hadn't heard or read that. So I can't say if that is an accurate sim or not. My only RW experience with a J-65 was turning up one in a Fury in the 60's. The throttle was mechanically stopped at about 45% thrust so I have no idea if it torqued up the aircraft similar to a single equipped with a prop at max power.

 

Michael

[mikeandpatty]

Spent a career as a Naval Aviator, Test Pilot School grad, fleet A-4/A-6 pilot - jets don't have torque, period. asymmetric thrust - obviously yes, torque, no.

[peer01]

Both beautiful birds, and very well displayed! :cool::cool::cool:

[kalizzi]

Khalid,

 

From everything I've heard all the F-84s were considered, slow, pigs, etc. which had limited load capabilities and required super long runways. But apparently they were about as good as we had at the time. And an axial flow engine was a huge improvement over the old centrifugal flow engines!

 

As to the torque factor on takeoff, I hadn't heard or read that. So I can't say if that is an accurate sim or not. My only RW experience with a J-65 was turning up one in a Fury in the 60's. The throttle was mechanically stopped at about 45% thrust so I have no idea if it torqued up the aircraft similar to a single equipped with a prop at max power.

 

Michael

 

Spent a career as a Naval Aviator, Test Pilot School grad, fleet A-4/A-6 pilot - jets don't have torque, period. asymmetric thrust - obviously yes, torque, no.

 

Yes you are correct although I when I said that these aircraft were underpowered I meant the early jets in general. Mike's remark is very true too, they do not have torque and with one engine no asymmetry effect obviously, yet it just veers sharply to the right upon sudden application of power. Interesting fact you mention how the J-65 was physically stopped at 45% thrust, reminds me of diesel engines in big trucks and buses when they lock the injection pump at a certain limit! If I humbly speculate, reasons could be because if they allow it full thrust it may rip off its mount or cause structural stress to the aircraft. Sometimes designers opt for a harnessed down stronger-than-needed engine because that was what was available or feasible to use at the time. One great -yet old- book that teaches the layman how aircraft are designed is called "Design for flying" by Bill Thurston. Its an awesome book that I read many times and one can get it used on amazon for the price of a beer at the pub. Still, that Fury experience is a very interesting thing to know, thank you. :pilot:

[kalizzi]

Both beautiful birds, and very well displayed! :cool::cool::cool:

 

thank you Jan for the nice words. Who was at the controls of that Dutch F-84F? The visor hid the face.

[adamb]

Like Jan said, very well displayed Khalid, great job! :)

[Rupert]

Spent a career as a Naval Aviator, Test Pilot School grad, fleet A-4/A-6 pilot - jets don't have torque, period. asymmetric thrust - obviously yes, torque, no.

 

As I said, I have very limited knowledge of turbojets. I was a turbo-prop, as in chopper, guy. Thanks for your input. I assumed that to be the case, but really didn't know.

 

Michael

[kalizzi]

Thank you Adam for your kind words.

Like Jan said, very well displayed Khalid, great job! :)