A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Aircraft that never lived up to their promise



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 30th 03, 11:13 PM
Chad Irby
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article


The classic turkey: The Fisher XP-75 Eagle -- supposed to become an
escort fighter, built from parts of several production aircraft.


One of the first real proofs that you can make all sorts of things fly
with a big enough engine.

Mc Donnell F3H-1 Demon -- like the "gutless Cutlass," underpowered,
designed to be supersonic.


....and the corresponding "with a poor engine, any plane can be a piece
of crap."

Martin P5M Seamaster ("Seamonster") jet Medium bomber seaplane.


P6M. The P5M was the Marlin. (Although the P6M was based off of the
P5M). And let's not forget the corresponding fighter, the cool-looking
but problematic Sea Dart - I would have loved to see one of these in the
air.

Convair XFY-1 VTOL fighter, along with the Lockheed XFV-1 -- both
tailsitters. Pilots found the transition from flight to tail-first
vertical landing too hard to do.


Oddly enough, the tailsitter designs are coming back... without the
pilots. Some of the more promising UAVs look much like the pogo planes,
since the computers running them have much less trouble dealing with
that transition than people do.

For some reason, many pilots don't like trying to land an aircraft while
lying on their backs.


There are so many wonderful example of planes that sucked...

The XA2D Skyshark, which showed that early turboprops often weren't
ready for prime time, and reminded us that contrarotating props had
their own issues.

Then there's the slow but loud XF-84H, with a turboprop engine and a big
fat prop up front. Which shows that you can screw up anything if you
try hard enough.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.
  #2  
Old December 1st 03, 08:11 AM
Nele_VII
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sukhoi's SU-2. However, its engine (actuallu, its derivatives) proved itself
when mached to LaGG-3 airframe, resultig in La-5/7/9

--

Nele

NULLA ROSA SINE SPINA
Chad Irby wrote in message ...
In article


The classic turkey: The Fisher XP-75 Eagle -- supposed to become an
escort fighter, built from parts of several production aircraft.


One of the first real proofs that you can make all sorts of things fly
with a big enough engine.

Mc Donnell F3H-1 Demon -- like the "gutless Cutlass," underpowered,
designed to be supersonic.


...and the corresponding "with a poor engine, any plane can be a piece
of crap."

Martin P5M Seamaster ("Seamonster") jet Medium bomber seaplane.


P6M. The P5M was the Marlin. (Although the P6M was based off of the
P5M). And let's not forget the corresponding fighter, the cool-looking
but problematic Sea Dart - I would have loved to see one of these in the
air.

Convair XFY-1 VTOL fighter, along with the Lockheed XFV-1 -- both
tailsitters. Pilots found the transition from flight to tail-first
vertical landing too hard to do.


Oddly enough, the tailsitter designs are coming back... without the
pilots. Some of the more promising UAVs look much like the pogo planes,
since the computers running them have much less trouble dealing with
that transition than people do.

For some reason, many pilots don't like trying to land an aircraft while
lying on their backs.


There are so many wonderful example of planes that sucked...

The XA2D Skyshark, which showed that early turboprops often weren't
ready for prime time, and reminded us that contrarotating props had
their own issues.

Then there's the slow but loud XF-84H, with a turboprop engine and a big
fat prop up front. Which shows that you can screw up anything if you
try hard enough.

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.





 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 40 October 3rd 08 03:13 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 October 1st 04 02:31 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions List (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 September 2nd 04 05:15 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 April 5th 04 03:04 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 1 January 2nd 04 09:02 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.