what's the worst aircraft

what aircrafts have you seen which have made you laugh or look at with a shock of disappointment?

I hate to do this because so many people on this site love it, but the Vulcan must be the worst looking plane in the sky. Dont know much about its performance though.

This topic is going to run into a lot of fighting because sentiments will be hurt!!

Originally posted by Daedalus3
This topic is going to run into a lot of fighting because sentiments will be hurt!!

Well at the first sign of that, it will be closed.

Skippy, thats intruiging! I'm one of the Vulcan lovers on here but I won't flame you for your opinion but tell me, what is it about the Vulcan you don't like? Is there anything you can put your finger on about it?

My own view is that in the main even the ugliest of planes have their own certain attractiveness, except for the Northrop F-5, I have never nor will ever see anything remotely impressive about that planes looks, perhaps oddly, I really do like the F-20 however. Through this I have deduced that at least part of my dislike of the F-5 stems from its two wimpy engines

edit ; I find that Vulcan photo above simply gorgeous!

[edit on 11-1-2005 by waynos]

Probably the "Christmas Bullet" designed by Dr. William Whitney Christmas. Two prototypes were built and flown in 1919 and 1920 (IIRC). Both crashed within ten minutes of takeoff; in both cases, the pilots were killed.

Only in Canada....


This has got to be the worst plane ever...hahaha




Lukefj

Originally posted by waynos
Skippy, thats intruiging! I'm one of the Vulcan lovers on here but I won't flame you for your opinion but tell me, what is it about the Vulcan you don't like? Is there anything you can put your finger on about it?

My own view is that in the main even the ugliest of planes have their own certain attractiveness, except for the Northrop F-5, I have never nor will ever see anything remotely impressive about that planes looks, perhaps oddly, I really do like the F-20 however. Through this I have deduced that at least part of my dislike of the F-5 stems from its two wimpy engines

edit ; I find that Vulcan photo above simply gorgeous!

[edit on 11-1-2005 by waynos]

Well, I have no idea what its capabilities are, but it appears to be so sluggish and clumsy. The first thing I think of when I look at that plane is Rodan from the old Godzilla movies. Im not trying to be mean, and I know my opinion is against the popular one, but its just how I feel about it.

Is it even capable of breaking the sound barrier? Those wings look like they would just break off.

ugliest plane..


funniest plane....


[edit on 11/1/05 by Klepto]

[edit on 11/1/05 by Klepto]

Originally posted by Klepto
funniest plane....

Yeah, but look at the slope of those wings.

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by waynos
Skippy, thats intruiging! I'm one of the Vulcan lovers on here but I won't flame you for your opinion but tell me, what is it about the Vulcan you don't like? Is there anything you can put your finger on about it?

My own view is that in the main even the ugliest of planes have their own certain attractiveness, except for the Northrop F-5, I have never nor will ever see anything remotely impressive about that planes looks, perhaps oddly, I really do like the F-20 however. Through this I have deduced that at least part of my dislike of the F-5 stems from its two wimpy engines

edit ; I find that Vulcan photo above simply gorgeous!

[edit on 11-1-2005 by waynos]

Well, I have no idea what its capabilities are, but it appears to be so sluggish and clumsy. The first thing I think of when I look at that plane is Rodan from the old Godzilla movies. Im not trying to be mean, and I know my opinion is against the popular one, but its just how I feel about it.

Is it even capable of breaking the sound barrier? Those wings look like they would just break off.

That "big bulky monstrocity" shot down 2 F-15 fighters in an excericise... before going on to bomb it's target and return to base unchallenged.

It was an amazing aircraft that also performed the longest bombing run ever recorded in history... flying from the Uk all the way to the falkand islands near argentina and back again

Originally posted by Lucretius:
That "big bulky monstrocity" shot down 2 F-15 fighters in an excericise... before going on to bomb it's target and return to base unchallenged.

...for a moment there I thought you were talking about Bjork...hehe!

funny looking!
and deadly, but not in the dogfighting,
...in killing pilots that flown them!

ladies and gentlemen,
Messerschmitt Me-163 "Komet"

The F104 Starfighter WAS the designer on drugs?

www.jetplanes.co.uk...

MASSIVE engine very small wings, hard to control F104 Starfighter 'the missile with a man in it'
True crap :-)

The F104 Starfighter has always been a striking aircraft to look at. This being mainly due to the very short wingspan of less than 22 feet (length nearly 55 feet). This earned the aircraft the nickname 'the missile with a man in it'.
Due to a series of accidents with the plane it also had the unfortunate moniker of 'flying coffin'.
A speedy machine for it's era the top speed was around mach 2 at altitude with an operational ceiling of 55,000ft

Originally posted by skippytjc
I hate to do this because so many people on this site love it, but the Vulcan must be the worst looking plane in the sky. Dont know much about its performance though.

- Personally I think the Vulcan is a beauty as were the Victor and Valiant (especially the B2 varient).

Considering when it was designed and the conditions it was developed under (post war Britain was a very austere place) the V-Bombers were absolutely cutting edge (as proved by their performance at various international exercises like 'Red Flag' for decades).

Certainly comparing a Vulcan to it's true contemporaries (especially design contempories) is pretty illuminationg.

Vulcan specs -
Max speed just under the speed of sound - mach .95

Ceiling (officially credited, but, er, ask the crews!) - 60 000ft

Range (without air to aire refuelling) - 2500 - 3000mls

Bombload - 21 x 1000lb bombs or freefall thermonuclear bombs or stand-off Bluesteel nuclear missile.

en.wikipedia.org...

Originally posted by Lucretius


That "big bulky monstrocity" shot down 2 F-15 fighters in an excericise... before going on to bomb it's target and return to base unchallenged.

It was an amazing aircraft that also performed the longest bombing run ever recorded in history... flying from the Uk all the way to the falkand islands near argentina and back again

Ok, for one, no it didnt shoot down two F-15s, IT DOESNT DO AIR TO AIR. Its a freaking bomber. What did happen was that two F-15s were tasked with protecting a target, the Vulcan came in on the deck, bombed the target and escaped without the F-15s ever finding it. This happened in the 1977 Redflag exercise.

Secondly, it DIDNT fly from the UK to bomb the Falkland Islands, the Black Buck missions took place from the Ascension Islands in the South Atlantic and involved 13 Victor and Vulcan tankers and a single Vulcan bomber. Which ALL flew to the Falkland Islands, refueling each other on the way. One by one the tankers dropped off and returned to the Ascension Islands, finally leaving one Victor that gave the Vulcan enough fuel to hit the Falklands and make it some of the way back. The real heroes of that mission were the tanker crews, the last of which didnt have enough fuel to make it back to the Ascensions, and werent allowed to break radio silence to request a tanker of its own. They had to rely on the Vulcan completing its mission and not being shot down for a tanker to be scrambled to meet it.

Not meaning to flame, but the Vulcan is one mean machine. It could outclimb, outdive and, at its operating altitude, out turn any fighter of its day. It was fantastically manoeverable, and routinely the RAF display pilots would barral roll the aircraft right off the end of the runway. It was so manoueverable that the RAF requested it be fitted with stick controls rather than control columns, because it reacted much like a fighter.


It wasnt supersonic, but we are talking about 1960s technology here, it didnt need to be. It was initially a high altitude bomber, but after Gary Powers was shot down, its roll was changed to a low altitude penetration bomber, and it excelled at both rolls.

Originally posted by RichardPrice
It wasnt supersonic, but we are talking about 1960s technology here, it didnt need to be. It was initially a high altitude bomber, but after Gary Powers was shot down, its roll was changed to a low altitude penetration bomber, and it excelled at both rolls.

- Totally agree RP....

.....but lets be 100% accurate here. The Vulcan (like the Victor and Valient) was most definiotely not a 1960's aircraft.

The design spec requirement that got it all started was Spec B.35/46 for which formal tenders were submitted in may 1947.

Avro's type 698 (the Vulcan's original design designation) began it's design life then in 1947 and (along with much help and incredible 'ground breaking with the various proving aircraft like the Avro 707 etc) the Vulcan first flew in aug 1952.

All of which simply adds to the enormity of the acomplishment(s) that each of the V-Bombers represented IMHO.

the starfighter looks like a flying tailpipe for suicide misions, The Dutch army quickly sold their their starfighters to Turkey once we got a taste of the F16

This one needs no explanation:




[edit on 11-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

I think one of the worst airplanes that have ever been made is the German Blohm & Voss Bv-141. It at least has to get the award for the ugliest airplane ever.

A prime example of lateral thinking... It looks really weird and it goes against the human preference for symmetrical shapes, but actually they put a lot of thought in the concept to make it a wide view recon plane...

The observatorium wasn't hindered by the propellor and you could look through the bottom and the rear, ugly but very functional...

[edit on 11-1-2005 by Countermeasures]