Did he bomb Korea into stone age?

What was it like to experience America before the Democrats unleashed the gays onto society?

Small Correction/Clarification; the FICON project was designed to launch the F-84 as a parasite fighter, held in the bomb bay of the B-36

Furthermore, no the prop variant was NOT SUPERSONIC! It was a turbo prop capable of just over 500 mph

The confusion is in the fact that the edges of the prop blades spun at a supersonic speed, creating the incredible noise

@@FishFlys true about the tips - good point - I forgot that

It would have been far better than the P-51 at ground attack, (air cooled engine) but they weren't available anymore. A poor decision in hindsight.

@@momotheelder7124 Agreed...he made the comment years after the Korean War.

@@momotheelder7124 It's true that there weren't any P47's available for the Korean War but not for the reason everyone thinks, some time back I read an article about P47 myths in general and one of the myths it addressed is the one that by the Korean War they didn't have any P47's because by the end of WW2 the Army had fallen in love with the P51 and decided to completely give up on the P47 and scrapped or sold off all of them by the time the Korean War happened, that article listed the number of P47's in service or storage at sites in Europe as of when the Korean War was being fought and it was pretty big, I was surprised because like most others I thought they'd gotten rid of or scrapped all of the P47's by then, the reason none were "available" for the Korean War is because the commander's in Europe who were worried about the Soviets rolling through the mountain passes didn't want to give up what they considered to be the best ground attack aircraft they had in their inventory. An example of them being in Germany as of when the Korean War was being fought can be seen in the movie Decision Before Dawn, it's set in the final days of WW2 in Germany and was filmed in the Manheim area in 1952, since in 1952 Manheim like many German cities still had areas that were basically still bombed out it made the perfect shooting location for a movie set in Germany at the end of the war with hollowed out buildings and piles of rubble all around, shortly before the end of the movie actual P47's are used to film a ground attack scene, at the end of the movie during the credits the producers thank either the USAF or a particular USAF unit for the use of their aircraft in the filming of the movie, so there's proof of what I'd read in that article about P47's still being flown by USAF unit's in Europe during the Korean War. It really is cool seeing actual P47's used as P47's in a movie instead of the different aircraft used as stand in's in so many of them like Patton or A Bridge Too Far, with 5 airworthy P47's and I believe another one in the restoration pipeline that's real close to flying it'd be great to see a movie made about a WW2 US fighter group like the 56th, as with many of these latest movies all it'd take is that many close up with the rest being CGI'd into the background to film scenes both in the air and on the ground to make a really good movie.

@@dukecraig2402your run-on sentences and lack of punctuation is impressive

@@whirlingdervish69 Smart mouthed kids who think fantasy art for their meme is cool aren't impressive.

I have a tamiya F84 directly above my monitor...

I bet it was _Monogram._ They really enjoyed doing this in their earlier kits... 🤬

@@duartesimoes508I think my kit was older (1952?) than Monogram's venture into plastics though you could be right. My mind keeps flirting with Lindberg's range which were popular and early offerings but I don't recall other lots of theirs that had that feature exactly. I liked building any Monogram kits, especially the balsa mixed construction ones, a Corsair model was interesting and I was a novice youth. On further reflection it seems Aurora might have produced it but I built mostly WW1 models of theirs.

@@whalesong999 mine is from the French _Heller,_ in 72 scale. Pretty good. I Must have bought it around 1979 and of course decorated it as a Portuguese Air Force F-84G from the _São Jorge_ Aerobatic Team. The Crosses of Christ I had, but painting the red and green decoration fully by hand is one of these things you only do when you're young and eager... 😬 My model's aircraft is currently in the Air Museum. Tail number 5187. .

sweeping the wing and moving the horizontal stabilizers would have helped that.

@@ometec The F-84F "Thunderstreak" had swept wings and swept horizontal stabilizers. The spin recovery issue may have been (one of) the reasons for that change of design .

Certain aircraft had the flaw that the wings and/or part of the fuselage could "blanket" or block airflow over the rear control surfaces such as the vertical and horizontal stabilizers and the rudder and elevators within them. If memory serves, when oriented in a nose-up attitude. I am drawing a blank on types of aircraft known for that, maybe one of the professionals in the chat can help....

As a fellow Brit, I am also proud of the fact that, of all the countries listed who adopted the F84, Britain wasn't one of them. We could spot a ho-hum aircraft when we saw one. Besides, we had our own gallimaufry of mediocrity to draw from (Gloster Javelin, Supermarine Scimitar etc.)

@@Togidubnus The first generation of British Fighter Jets was composed of Gloster Meteors & Vampires, which were not very impressive either. But the Hunter and the EE Lightning were outstanding aircraft, each one in its own way. Even today the Lightning is a very impressive, intimidating aircraft. And I remember being overflown by Hunters in Switzerland as late as 1984. Regarding the seat, I guess he meant that the latter seats had a larger envelope. The ejection seats in the first generation Fighters probably only saved you above 3000 ft or more and above a given airspeed. They wouldn't save you on the ground or at low level and I bet you had to eject the canopy first - you still do nowadays if you are in a flat spin - and the seat didn't kick you out after ejection, nor opened your parachute nor pointed up automatically, nor selected your seat oxygen bottle, or waited for oxygen levels to open your parachute, nothing of these wonderful automatic features we take for granted today. Nowadays you can literally pull the ejection handle and faint, and the seat will take care of everything else.

I caught/heard that as well.

The seat even in the F was rudimentary. A no frills affair and the pilot sat with his legs straight out in front of him. Very uncomfortable, he had to bend his knees almost under his chin before ejecting to get them on the foot rests. The engines would flame out in a rainstorm, and if you were approaching your target at 50 feet, your options were limited.@@duartesimoes508

Like Richard Bong in his P-80. It was his last _Bong._

Yet at 6:20 it is stated "…around 25 F-84s were lost in arial combat in exchange for seven to eight Mig-15s". Doesn't really sound like it 'crushed' the competition.

With only marginal speed and climb for a fighter, the Hawker Hurricane made up for its shortcomings with rugged reliability, ease of operation, and ease of repair so much so that by the end of the battle of britain, the hurricane had downed more axis aircraft than the rest of the other RAF aircraft combined. None the less, in the hearts and minds of the british, it was always overshadowed by its flashier cousin. (the spitfire)

@@TeufelHandlanger that's wjat I said. "Which as it turned out wasn't many..." I think you may have misunderstood me; as a fighter, the F-84 sucked.

@@MarcoPono During the battle of Brittian, there were 32 squadrons of Hurricanes with 344 aircraft vs only 19 squadrons of Spitfires with only 226 aircraft. The Hurricane was a great Aircraft with just over half of the kills recorded against German fighters, but there was 50% more of them. If you were in such a situation as the pilots of that era was, I'd bet money that you would want your butt strapped into a Spitfire with every advantage you could get rather than a Hurricane.

The hurricane wasn’t half bad even though it was outdated idk if I understand what your trying to convey though

It's a bit of a form follows function the engine design. Once they started moving towards axial-flow designs, you can get more compact and aerodynamic.

😅

Not quit ! The F-84 has always been my favorite jet. The “ COKE bottle “ comes about when Whitcomb figures the “COKE BOTTLE” fuselage cross section IS needed to push the century series pass MACH.

I'll take the milk-jug.

😊😊😊

With Robert Mitchum. sitting in the DVD collection.

@@WALTERBROADDUS Touche' (smile)

The F-86, everyone did.

If there was a runway that circled the Earth at the equator Republic would have built a fighter that used all of it.😂. Not my quote.

@@jimmyjohnjames6397 The "This" comes to mind.

It's not so simple just to swap out engines. The airframe is literally built around the engine design. So getting a substitute that fits and everything is a bit of an issue. Curtiss-wright turned out to be a lousy company. And soon went out of business.

That's deceptive. Ground attack missions were very important on the Russian front, though the Germans didn't have many great aircraft for that. It's just that millions of people were on the ground and that gets the attention. After Kursk the Luftwaffe could not challenge the Russians in the sky. In the West, until the landings in Italy there were no opportunities for ground war. But the Allies could fly bomber missions.

To be fair, The F101 was built for a very different specification. And even an entirely different branch of the Air Force. It was originally intended as an escort fighter for strategic Air command. Eventually they did away with the idea of a fighter escort. And it got used mostly in the recon role. And some two seat models for interceptor missions.

The F84-H had swept back wings.

sorry, just another POS

Did u tell utube I made rude comments to u.

Coward

Did u google that answer?

Sorry I got your wife pregnant. How's my son?

@@briancooper2112 what are you talking about?

He mentioned both the F-86 and the MiG 15, saying that both aircraft were faster and more capable than the F-84.

But at least he is flying a F. That's why he survived the thunderstorm... 😂 But I really don't like Richard Bach books much. He is way too digressive for my taste. No pilot can afford to be digressive or he will end up lost, rebuked by the ATC or running out of fuel! Read Pierre Closterman's books, you're sure to enjoy.

@@duartesimoes508 But he did survive it. Inverted. With an engine intake covered with ice. Thank goodness for a robust compressor! A great part of the book. I understand his digressive style and should his wife get a pair of Siamese kittens? They climb drapes (a little ahead on the throttle...). I'm not familiar with Pierre Clostermann- but I'll look around - are you referring to the Big Show? Flames in the Sky?

@@jdos2 EXACTLY! And he wrote a lesser known book, _Intimates of death,_ a very beautiful, humane book in which he describe his own post war experience in Algeria under a pseudonym, flying a M.H.Broussard (sort of a Norseman) and the SNCASE Mistral (a Vampire manufactured under licence) fighting the FNL. In the end of his book, he is shot down by the _Fellagas's_ Flak and killed. I read _Fires in the Sky_ when I was nine, and did it so many times that even today at 57 I know entire paragraphs by memory. My parents became so concerned they even considered confiscating the book or taking me to a Psychologist, but it was just sheer fascination. One day, when I was 13, I kept "The Great Circus" for me from the _Lycée Français_ Biblioteque, alleging having lost it; I was well known for liking Aviation, the clerk did not believe me and I paid a _huge_ fine; but I still keep the book like a Relic. You couldn't find it anywhere else. He ended the war as Wing Commander after flying Spitfires VB, Mk IX, Typhoon for conversion and tempest V, with 27 kills. His writing is absolutely superb. As good as _Sir Martin Middlebrook's_ writings about RAF Bomber Command but with personnel experience. If I ever had an Idol, that's him! After the war he became _Deputat_ (like Senator, or Member of the Parlament) and was exempt from mobilization to fight in Algeria. But he went neverthless; the only other _Gaulliste Deputat_ that also went was _Jean Marie Le Pen,_ Father of Marine Le Pen from the _Front National_ I do recommend you buy the books - Amazon has them - as they are the very best I've ever read in my life. Mine are in Portuguese and French, very old editions from the fifties. The most impressive in Clostermann, apart from being an handsome and charismatic Man and superb writer and fisherman, is that he never had to go to war in first place; he was the Son of the French Ambassador in Curitiba, Brasil, and then went to the US before Pearl Harbor. But he did cross the Atlantic risking being sunk to fight for his beloved France. He was a pilot by then. After the war he worked as Salesman of Max Holste (which built the Broussard) and came to Portugal often since he spoke (Brasilian) Portuguese perfectly. Our Air Force bought several. The former Manager of the Aerodrome where I worked as Controller, near Lisbon, knew him personally. (and he knew Adolf Galland too!) Very decorated and honoured as _Compagnon de la Liberation,_ Pierre Clostermann passed away in 2006. Do take a look in Wikipedia.

The late model .50 cal. MG used on the F-84 and F-86 (and others) was also the M3. The M (Model) 1/2/3 etc. designation was used for all sorts of military equipment besides guns.

Swept wings did not become a thing until the late forties. When we started doing the X-Plane stuff. We are also able to study flight data research from the Germans. That's when you started seeing designs using swept wings and Delta wings. You have to understand the rapid change of technology here. Twenty years before they were still flying biplanes. Now the 1950s they're doing 600 Mph. That was why they were doing all the high-speed X plane research.

They did evolve to swept wings for the F-84F. It turned out not to be so easy. There was less commonality of parts than they had hoped hoped blowing the cost projections. They also needed a hot press forge for the wing spars that was in use for the B-47. By the time the Fs arrived they were relegated to the ANG units. They recce version the Thunderflash few on for quite a while even longer in foreign air forces.

If I recall correctly, because the F-84 was being developed late in WWII before the swept wing technology was well understood and tested, as a competitor to the F-80, so they weren't able to overhaul their design and production easily to incorporate it until later, with the Thunderstreak.

@@chrispierdominici3891 Well the whole thing was a Evolving change. And the wing is just one part of the puzzle. Research into high-speed flight in aerodynamics and the whole X-Plane program was underway. Things like fuselage design, tail design, engine output were all going radical changes over short. Putting a swept-wing is not a super instant answer to everything. There's how much sweep was adequate. Then there's the issue of low speed handling, how much lift and Wing cross section. Wet wig or dry wing? Nose or side intake? Weapon type? There's a lot of stuff going on in just a few years.

I was thinking the same thing. My dad was a radar operator in the F-89. He was with the 57th Fighter Interceptor Squadron in Keflavik, Iceland during the mid 1950s.

Oh sure, a fighter that never even got to flight test would have been the "greatest fighter" for 20 years. Just because of the promises made by the manufacturer. You know how many "greatest fighters" of the era turned out mediocre when actually built and flown? If the RCAF really thought it was that good they'd have moved heaven and earth to procure them.

Von Rosen never used modified Cessnas, he used a Swedish MFI-9B, better known as the Minicoin, completely unlike any Cessna.