Nothing but F-8s, Part 2 - f8u.jpg.jpeg (1/1) [60K]

[Netko]

--

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:21:42 +0000, Netko >
wrote:

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but the F-8's are one of
the ugliest things around. Performance wise I guess they were good,
but a design class would have really helped them out.

A newbie to the group.

[Wayne Paul]

Newbie,

Just curious, what is ugly about it? What do you consider the "design flaw"
that a design class would have solved?

Wayne
HP-14 "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/


> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:21:42 +0000, Netko >
> wrote:
>
> I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but the F-8's are one of
> the ugliest things around. Performance wise I guess they were good,
> but a design class would have really helped them out.
>
> A newbie to the group.

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 15:25:37 -0700, "Wayne Paul" >
wrote:


I guess it is the intake area of the plane. This huge open mouth
right below the pilot. An F-16 has the same mouth but it is behind
the pilot, leaving him hanging in air. The F-8 makes it look like the
pilot was put on as an after thought, like it had to go somewhere but
we don't want to starve the engine.

Looking at S-4 Tantalizing Takeoffs pic just sums it up for me. Put a
cover over the intake it it is all smiles.

Just a thought I still would like a ride in one. Gotta be a blast
going fast!

Thanks
Newbie



>Newbie,
>
>Just curious, what is ugly about it? What do you consider the "design flaw"
>that a design class would have solved?
>
>Wayne
>HP-14 "6F"
>http://www.soaridaho.com/
>
>
> wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 14:21:42 +0000, Netko >
>> wrote:
>>
>> I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but the F-8's are one of
>> the ugliest things around. Performance wise I guess they were good,
>> but a design class would have really helped them out.
>>
>> A newbie to the group.
>