Sea Sabres; The North American FJ Furys
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 24 เม.ย. 2023
- Everyone has heard of the F-86 Sabre. But not so many have heard of the aircraft that originated it, the FJ Fury, nor the remarkable line of development that that aircraft went through.
Sources for this video can be found at the relevant article on:
militarymatters.online/
If you like this content please consider buying me a coffee or else supporting me at Patreon:
ko-fi.com/ednashmilitarymatters
/ ednash
Want another way to help support this channel? Maybe consider buying my book on my time fighting ISIS:
amzn.to/3preYyO
The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement. - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
![ความรักของยักษ์เขียว (ทศกัณฐ์) - เดี่ยว ไออุ่น [OFFICIAL MUSICVIDEO 4K]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yCCy-QVHqK8/mqdefault.jpg)
The US navy went through so many fighters in the post-Korean War 1950s it is mind boggling. All the while retaining a single heavy strike aircraft, the Douglas Skyraider :D
Keeping it simple
The skyraider was such a great little bomb-truck. What a legend.
External hardpoints for up to 8,000 lbs of ordinance. For reference, that is the B-17's max internal bombload.
Succeeded by the douglas A-4 skyhawk, which managed to fill the comically large shoes that the A-1 left, and then some.
yes. many WW2 aircraft survived the war and soldiered on for years longer (C-47, P-51, F4U, A-1, A-26, etc.).
Then you had this short era of rapid development following WW2 in which aircraft service lives were sometimes shorter than their WW2 ancestors. Lots of designs, lots of failures and some successes.
And then coming out of the late 50s and into the 60s we got a series of aircraft that just won't die. A-4, U-2, C-130, B-52, and many more.
we went from aircraft lasting 6-30yrs, to lasting 1-3yrs, to lasting decades.
@@NikeaTiber Good call! Many people fail to give the A-4 due diligence. It was small and easy to store in a carrier hanger or conduct deck ops. It wasn’t a supersonic monster just a capable little bomber that kept doing its job, just ask the Brits/Argentines at the Falklands. The A-4 was the Toyota Tacoma of bomb trucks. 😂
@@damndirtyrandy7721 correction: Toyota Hilux
The myriad post WW-II war naval jets are a really amazing aviation story. I'm fascinated by everything from the McDonnell Phantom up to but not including its bigger and more widely regarded grand child Phantom II. Those dozen or so designs were a huge struggle for the Navy because of the engine situation. You read about all the accidents and things like the Vought Cutlass being a horrible widow maker and one realizes Post War, the Navy had one of the hardest tasks incorporating the new jet technology into effective aircraft. The Fury series are very under appreciated part of that thanks for presenting it Ed.
If the designers were required to make the initial flights then poorly thought out planes like the F7U would never have been proposed.
My father flew FJ-4Bs with VMA-223 and said they were a hell of alot of fun. I've got some great pictures he took from the cockpit...very low level over the desert. Reaching mach 1.01 effortlessly in a shallow dive on quite a few occasions. He later flew F-8s which he thoroughly enjoyed...but an entirely different animal.
Those F8 known for noshing on deck crew.
@@rosiehawtrey He never carrier qual'd with one...but on the flight deck and in the air they were intimidating. Check out the videos of 60s flight ops... amazing.
@@rosiehawtrey In the late 1960s I worked on F8 Crusader avionics systems before and after test flights. When that plane engages its afterburner it soared like a rocket.
My dad flew the FJ-4 and FJ-4B in 1966, by then redesignated F1-E and AF1-E. Though technically not a supersonic jet, he said that he also broke the sound barrier in a dive, glad to get confirmation that that’s possible. He flew 29 different planes in his 10 years in the Navy and the Fury was one of his favorites. He said “it LOOKS like a jet!”
In early 1980 I watched South Korean F-86s flying out of Kun-san Air Base. They were well maintained and expertly flown. I was part of an installation team installing new comm gear and had to spend time in the control tower as the new equipment "burned in". As an airplane buff I enjoyed sitting in the tower and watching the Sabers taking off and landing.
One pilot that flew the Saber/Fury off of carriers was F Lee Bailey
Very cool video, Ed. That USAF/Navy rivalry was very real, and was based on Congress pretty much pulling budget from the Navy -- who had enjoyed more or less a blank check during WWII -- and giving it to the new service, who would be fielding intercontinental atomic bombers and missiles that were seen as the future for military strategic thinking. So the USN had to beg, borrow, or steal to get whatever budget they could. The FJ-4 was a pretty cool little hot rod. Move the wing up to the top of the fuselage and you almost have a baby F-8.
Curtis LeMay was quoted as saying that while the Soviet Air Force was the rival of the US Air Force, the Navy was the enemy of the US Air Force.
Ed - love your work!
Fun fact. An Aussie Avon Sabre is up a pole in the states dressed up as an FJ-3! They do have a similar look vis-a-vis the fatter fuselage and air intake for the larger engine. The best looking Sabres/Furys imho!!
I do love Furies, particularly the FJ4 which was practically a new design.
Nice to see coverage of these oft forgotten naval fighters.
Great video. About the value of having the pilot sit high in the cockpit. The Soviets recovered a Sabre that had pancaked into a swamp during the Korean War. While they never got this example to fly, one of their priorities was to find out why the Sabre was a challenge to sneak up on. They were looking for a radar warning device but the mystery was solved when a pilot sat in the cockpit and was amazed by the view (especially compared to that of the Mig-15).
I think someone's pulling your leg. The Migs at the time had no radar, so a radar receiver would not have been necessary.
@@memonk11 didn't the F-86 have a small rearward facing radar to warn pilots about enemys on their tail? Actualy, I am pritty sure that even late war P-51s had that feature.
@@jakobc.2558 Not that I'm aware of. And a radar warning on a P-51 would have been inconceivable.
@@memonk11 You should educate yourself a bit before stating things so matter-of-factly. The AN/APS-13 tail warning radar system was deployed mainly on the P-47 but also on many mid- to late-model P-51s. They were withdrawn from service in mid-1944 after the Germans deployed the FuG 227 passive radar reciever, which allowed the Luftwaffe to easily locate flights of escort fighters.
The TWR system - just to clarify on this as you seem confused, judging by your statement regarding the MiG’s lack of radar - was not a receiver system. As in, it didn’t pick-up on other radar signals in any way. All it did was alert the pilot when it’s own ‘beam’ was interrupted (ostensibly by an aircraft approaching from the rear). This warning took the form of a chiming alarm and the AN/APS-13 could be toggled on and off by the pilot, in case they were flying in-formation and didn’t care to listen to alarm bells.
I’m sure a TWR was considered for the F-86, but I’m sure the line of thinking was that if the Luftwaffe could ‘hack’ the system, so could the Soviets.
@@memonk11 No, the radar was thought to be in the tail of the Sabre. My source was the Smithsonian Aviation magazine which I think is a good source.
In 1956/57 I wrenched the FJ-3 serving in vf-191 at moffer field and on the yorktown -- thanks for the memory boost --
...there used to be a Fury as a gate guard at the entrance to the War Memorial Auditorium in Ft Lauderdale, FL
Fury's arrived on my dad's carrier, the USS Randolph CVA-15 (an Essex class 27C) in 1956.
I got to see an FJ-4 up close at Naval Air Station Lemoore back in the mid 2000s, it flew in and parked on the t-ramp which was one row over from our Hornet squadron. Decided to go over and talk to the pilot and he gave me a walk-around. Really cool machine.
I love your channel. May you never run out of aircraft.
I grew up loving the Sabre. It was just recently that I learned of the Sea variant.
Once again, it’s the stuff I learn after I think I know everything that counts. And, the more I learn, the more I realize that I’ve got a lot to learn.
Love this channel. Thank you.
One of your best videos yet. I love all things Sable/Fury. Well done you!
Love the FJ , great video as always Ed. 👍
Extremely interesting. I had no idea the Sbre came from the Fury. I always thought it was the other way round.
The FJ-1: I've sim modeled in FlightGear. It's a remarkable if a little slow carrier operations jet. My Uncle flew carrier fighters in the Pacific during WWII and was stationed in Oakland after VJ day, where he was close to the operations of the first FJ-1 squadron. He said it reminded him of a jet powered Grumman Wildcat, sturdy and easy to fly but not exactly fast, He never mentioned flying it but he did send me models of US carrier planes for Christmas as a kid, and the FJ-1 was one of them.
I really like the chubby design of the FJ-4. Especially combined with the azorback-esque canopy. The 2 sets of divebrakes on the FJ-4B are also an awesome feature.
Wow that FJ-3 was a beautiful plane, especially with the Navy squadron markings of the era!
Ed nice dig at the navy "Sea Sabre'😂.
Love it, from this day forward the F-86 is now named the Land-Fury
May I suggest the Australian CAC 27 Sabre, the Sabre with a RR Avon engine, for a follow up video? It flew with the RAAF up until 1968 and there were some based in South Vietnam, although they did not fly combat missions, but did practice with the USAF fighters based there.
Arguably the best of the breed...
@Yulis You can call it imperial, but it's not a matter of ego. Both the Canadian and Australian Sabre outperformed the US original thanks to better engines. The latter also swapped the obsolete machine guns for autocannon.
The 50s was such a fascinating time for aviation.
I’d like to see a video about the history and production of cockpit canopies. From none on the first planes, to early windscreens, the bubble canopy, to today. And so forth. 😀
I have always wanted to know more about the Fury series…thank you for posting/ making this! Love your channel.
a great episode! You can certainly see the influence of the captured aero research flowing through this airframe much like the B 47 stratojet as well. Out of curiousity would you consider presenting a segment on the Royal New Zealand Airforce?
Is a video about the aj-2 savage on your list?. The photo of the Fury getting refuled reminded me of how interesting of a plane it is
You're right, the original FJ Fury prototype with straight wing, was predecessor of the F-86A swept wing.
Cool. I've been fascinated by the story and waiting for a while for someone to do a vid on the barely known *first operational Navy jet.*
I've always been surprised that 4 20mm cannon wasn't the standard armament for all Sabres from the start.
Maybe the Navy had better shots and didn't need the rate of fire that the Air Force did? 😜
Very cool. I remember growing up seeing the F-80 shooting star with straight wings that had fuel tanks on the wing tips. But also we saw what I eventually thought was F-86s. The only issue is we were in North Atlanta with no airforce base anywhere close. But we did have Dobbins Naval Air station next to Martin Marietta now Lockheed Martin.
Awesome episode- thanks Ed. Never heard of the Fury before this video, now I'm looking up everything I can on it.
I never saw the FJ4 and it look great. Very agressive
The FJ4b was the best looking of the bunch.
I'm not the sharpest star in the sky, but I always thought it would be very hard for saber pilots and mig pilots to tell each other apart at distance. I'm sure there had to be mistakes made at some point.
The filthy trail of exhaust coming out the back of a Sabre was one giveaway.
@@jimdavis8391 Disnt Mig-15 have a horizontal stabilizer mounted on the top of the vertical??Another clue… but agree that to the majority of people you couldn’t be 💯 at distance..
With a little practice, recognition is pretty easy. Wing sweep angle, the size of the vertical stabilizer, the position of the horizontal stabilizer, the placement fore and aft of the wing. I'm sure the pilots at the time could differentiate a Sabre from a MiG at a couple of miles range in a split second. Recognition is an EXTREMELY powerful feature of the human brain. Think of how you can pick a familiar face out of a crowd. It's only been very recently that computers have come close to a human's recognition ability.
The short fuselage makes it look very MiG-like. Interesting video. Thanks.
Don't forget the RAAF version of the Sabre built by CAC with the more powerful Rolls Royce engine
Also, the Canadair Sabre. The mark 6 generally considered to be the ultimate Sabre version.
Nice to see the Sabre in Navy colors!
I always wondered how the F-86 D Sabre (the one armed with only air to air rockets) would fare if it maybe had two 20mm cannon and provisions for 4 AIM9 Sidewinders. I feel like the Fury probably wouldn't be as good as the F9F Cougar in terms of naval applications.
Later export versions of the Sabre Dog (the F-86K) resolved these issues and saw good service with foreign air arms (the French used them for sure)
I was about to say I tended to agree but had second thoughts & did some checking.
Turns out 'though both F9F & FJ4 were fairly similar in performance although the FJ4 edged it in all parameters in range / flight endurance the FJ4 seems far superior.
So, I think its the other way around the Cougar wasn't as good as the Fury.
BUT - and this is IMPORTANT - Kevin Bloody Wilson has a *great song about a Cougar* 😋
@@babboon5764you're probably right, I just mean probably the general ruggedness of the Cougar probably made it perfectly fine for shipboard use, and it already came in its earliest versions standard with the four 20mm cannon like the Panther. I just assumed maybe the Fury would have bad sea legs like the Seafire.
Australian F86s had 4x 20mm canon. I'm not sure about missiles. Ours were called the CAC-27 as we built most of our own
@@sergeipohkerova7211 The Seafire's main problems were it's non adjustable flaps and the weakness and narrowness of their landing gear. Also the Seafire was better landed on it's mains with the tail somewhat low but not 3 point, with it's tailhook this dynamic meant that it was better to 3 point land it but you are deep into stall while bringing it in with the tail that low.
Which the Panther shared none of these problems, their trike gear were wide enough and quite strong and the had a very effective set of flaps and airbrakes.
Could you do a story on the CAC Sabre maybe????
There are two of them that fly out of Driggs, Idaho. Driggs has about half a dozen of these early fighters flying in and out of there.
Was there ever a time before the 1980s when airframe and powerplant development were parallel? The F-14D was the beginning of a renaissance that has yet to peak. Let's hope that continues.
Always been a fan of Naval Aviation, the Fury is a favorite, though I thought the final version of the Fury was the F-6.
The F-6 was the post 1962 designation for the Douglas F4D Skyray. Post 1962 the FJ-3 became the F-1C, FJ-4 became the F-1E, and the FJ-4B became the AF-1E.
Yet another outstanding video.
Another great video from Ed! I am learing a lot. When you have the opportunity to visit New York, you should visit Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum. They have an FJ-3 in pristine condition.
You would think for the price point these types of planes would still be available
The FJ-4 was definitely the predecessor the A4 "Bantam Weight Bomber" high-subsonic light attack aircraft.
When the F4D and F8U supersonic fighters entered service in 1956 and 1957 , the FJ-3/FJ-4 were obsolete as fighters.
Incredible I actually didn't know the last model of the fury was so distinct thanks
Very interesting video and plane. Thanks
Hey, those are Delaware ANG Sabres in the opening! 👍👍
i always wonder what the CAC Sabre would of been like if it was nasalized.
That wing on the FJ-1 looks mighty familiar ;)
Thanks Mr. Ed Nash.....
Shoe🇺🇸
Great job thank you
Great video on a over looked Fabulous 50s fighter +A grade 👍
My Dad was a Air Force Fighter pilot on exchange duty with the Navy in 1957 and flew the Fury off the Bon Homme Richard on a 6 month tour of the Pacific
Excellent.
TY🙏🙏
the data captured from germany were kurt tank's Ta-183 drawings.
What a marvelous beautiful great interesting video and aircraft I knew nothing about. What was the twin prop aircraft that was air refuelling the Fury in the photo?Have a good one.How about a video about the Super Sabre?
The saber has a few mig 21 under its belt from the 1971 war
And the Indian's Folland Gnats nailed a few of the Pakistani Sabres
That said - All 3 were excellent aircraft.
The results reflect a combination of factors.
Who saw who first, who had the height advantage, what their status (fuel load & armaments) were at the time etc..
Its a 'real' pity the four 20mm cannon weren't adopted for the land braced fighter!! Many Mig 15's wouldn't have made it back!!
thanks for the punctuation,I would hate to miss the results of your hard work...
@EdNashsMilitaryMatters >>> 👍👍
FJ-1 is interesting, a sort of American parallel to the Supermarine Attacker: wings borrowed from an advanced piston fighter (Mustang; Spiteful) and grafted onto a jet design. In the FJ-1's case the result looks like a jet-engined T-28...
Re the interservice rivalry and naming of airplanes, the Navy would get its own back later with what the Air Force borrowed and, sheepishly, initially called the F-110 Spectre...better known as the iconic F-4 Phantom II.
Can you look at the MB326?
Always a great day when Ed uploads his Grade A content! just wanted to post this to appease the Algorithm Gods!
Can you do an episode on the Land Furys?😁
The original Fury looks like the Swedish Tunan a bit.
And the engine that was a near copy of the Jumo004? Seems pretty important to mention.
FJ4 Fury's ( nuke capable ), sat ready alert on the Randolf dury the Suez Canal crisis while on station at Point Moses
Ed, you might look at using a different phrase than “ crash program “ when discussing prototypes. 😅
At Camp Shields, Okinawa, about four clicks from Kadena, AFB, I would see an F86 in JDF paint trundle over with a huge missile under the starboard wing. Bastard load. A few minutes after, I'd see a bunch of F15's go over in pursuit. I asked a fellow at the Kadena PX what the fuck? He said the JDF operated the F86 as a target drone first-stage, once released the drone would be engaged by the 15's, eventually run out of gas and parachute into the water where the Air Force (!) would bring it in for refurbishment and re-use. The 15's are big planes by comparison and a whole lot louder. That little sewing machine going over was a super cool treat.
It probably wasn't a drone. It was more likely a towed target. There were a couple of kinds, one looked like the just the fins of a big missile, four triangular wings in a "+" shape and no body. The other looked like a big bomb but was made from styrofoam or something like it. They reeled them out on a long cable a few hundred yards long and the attacking fighters could shoot at them with the towing aircraft still safe. They'd drop them before the towing aircraft landed.
FJ-4 v MIG-17 in Vietnam would have been quite interesting.
the highlights of the air force's sabres is the f variant, then the Navy's is the -4 fury
The FJ-4B reminds me of a mini A7 Corsair (sort of)
I wanna see the landing gear on fj-2
As convoluted as that story was, I have to imagine that getting budgets through Congress (and fending off that arch-enemy, the USAF) had a lot to do with it.
Interesting that the Fury got 20 mm cannons while the Sabre still used the 50. calibre machineguns. This despite the fact that towards the end on WW2 the USAAF recognising that the machinegun no longer had the stopping power it once had.
This would be the basis for a great video !! Compare muzzle velocity, velocity drop at various distances, trajectories, projectile weight, rounds per second rate of fire of the system, gap between each round at the various distances, etc.
One advantage of the six .50 MGs was the sheer number of projectiles in the stream . Less likelyhood of the target flying through a gap in the bullet stream. During WWI they discovered that upping the rate of fire dramatically increased hits.
10 F-86s were tested in Korea with four FMC T-160 20mm revolver cannon (which had a significantly higher ROF than the Navy's Colt Mk 12) instead of the usual six .50 cal. This was highly successful and the T-160 was adopted as the M39, which became the standard armament for the F-86H, along with the F-100 Super Sabre, F-101 Voodoo, and F-5 Freedom Fighter/Tiger II.
@@RedXlV GUNVAL ?? I would have to dig out my copy of Mig Alley although I don't remember the author detailing the higher ra te of fire aspect. Thanks !
@@truthboomertruthbomber5125 1,000 RPM for the Navy's Colt Mk.12, 1,500 for the T-160/M39.
@@RedXlV I dug out my copy of Mig Alley and found the pilot interview detailing GUNVAL. No mention of any technical details just a pilot interview of his mission flying one of the test aircraft and getting a Mig 15 kill. The 20mm hits were so effective that he was temporarily mesmerized and flew through the smoke and debris fortunately not hitting anything but getting oil on his canopy. He said the Mig appeared to stop.
An issue that they were having was compressor stall and he ran into this and had a heck of a time recovering until he saw that the speed brake toggle sw handle was broken off in the ON position. He was able to get the nub pushed into the OFF position and teh brakes retracted and he was able to gain speed and come out of the compresssor stall.
I could never understand why the Navy stuck with the underwhelming F9F Cougar/Panther for so long. The low speed handling and easier carrier landing now makes sense.
That and they were basically indestructible. Did you ever see the picture of the Cougar trainer hanging by its tailhook from the deck edge safety nets on the carrier?
I think the Lear Jet has the same wing as the FJ-1
I think its a nice looking bird to be fair....didnt they tweak the airframe or the old designs slightly and used it as a night intruder in the early years of vietnam war...
Land Furies!
Exactly!
Fly Navy!
"Land Furies" Hah! Yeah, them''s fightin' words alright!
And the F//A-18E Super Hornet is just a new version of the older F/A-18C ....
Sort of. About the only things in common they have is a general outline similarity and the number "18". Sort of like the similarities between the Tu-22 and the Tu-22M.
The FJ-4B was probably everything the A-4, A-7 needed to be. Never mind the USAF.
*_Flies Feet Dry,.. and so! ...Dry Fury!_*_ it is_
And then there was … the super sabre..
The FJ-1 really looks like it has been fitted with a pair of spare P-51 wings whose machine guns hadn't been installed yet 😊
Including the kink in the leading edge root of the P-51 wing for the undercarriage.
@@birlyballop4704So the kink is actually larger on the FJ-1. Also the Mustang didn't have the kink until the D model. The wings were not exactly entirely from the Mustang, as they were tasked with holding two moderately sized tip tanks and had to be reinforced, were thicker and deeper in chord at the root, and had a heavier duty set of shorter, retractable main gears set further back from the wing's leading edge. Trike geared.
There's no doubt that the money game and playing congress was very important but, yes the navy really didn't like eating humble pie and soiling their lovely Carrier Fleet with Air Force planes. Or admitting they NEEDED it badly even with the Korean War over.
They did it again with the F-18 E/F…🧐
@@timgarrett203 but got it's own back with the Skyraider and Corsair 2
Douglas Skyrays anyone?
The Navy got its revenge on the Air Force when they adopted the F4H Phantom II (F-110), and the AD Skyraider (A-1) .
Also is this finally the F-1 I've been looking for all these years? Tri-Service Designation is weird man... gaping holes in the numbering.
Well not really; earlier USN types were assigned the first several new numbers while the USAF stuff ran out the Century Series, and then the types that began development later slotted into the new "start over" low number range...
F-1: FJ Fury
F-2: F2H Banshee
F-3: F3H Demon
F-4: F4H Phantom II (initially F-110 in USAF)
F-5: N156 Freedom Fighter
F-6: F4D Skyray
F-8: F8U Crusader
F-9: F9F Panther/Cougar
F-10: F6D Skyknight
F-11: F11F Tiger
F-12: interceptor variant of Blackbird
Then the newer ones...
F-14 Tomcat
F-15 Eagle
F-16 Falcon/Viper
F-17 Cobra
F-18 Hornet
F-19 (Stealth project)
F-20 Tigershark
F-21 Kfir (borrowed IAI Mirage variant)
F-22 Raptor
F-23 Black Widow II
Big gap exists above that, yes. This seems to be because the newest F series are an extension of the X series, not the original P/F series. Thus we have the Boeing X-32 followed by the F-35 Lightning II...
@@stevetournay6103 Good post👍, but....the Skyknight was the F3D, not F6D. You should also mention the gap between F-111 and F-117. Those spooky jets from Tonopah. Did you know that the original designation for the BOMARC missile was F-99?
Firefly On Basis Of No Job For The Weather Beuro Walking Out For Fair, fares..
Flared From Space In Near Earth..
Battlefield Earth The Gatherings Last Stand as well..
People argue about the merits of F9Fs & FJ4s
Objectively - the Fury was the better aeroplane
The Cougar has its *own song* 'though
th-cam.com/video/PDqchtH2Nvk/w-d-xo.html
:)
Sea Sabre is a better name.
No, it's just a British naming scheme.
well, Sea Fury was taken.