The carrier with the hull number 41 as designated on the flight deck is the USS Midway, CVA 41, now a museum located in San Diego, CA. I am proud to say I was a part of this ships company during the Vietnam War.
Thank you Dennis. Would you mind telling a little about your life on the ship and the feeling on board? Many could learn from this I'm sure. Best wishes.
Never did an aircraft carrier, did time on an LHA, Amphibious Assault which is also a flat top but deals with helos and harriers, or did in the past when I was in. I did about 7 years on frigates and destroyers and worked with the computer systems that ran CIC. Cool beans dude. I hope that time was good for you and had a good life afterwards which seems to be a fairly common problem for people who serve. I retired and got the benefits so I've done OK. Peace to you.
@@johndoh5182 I was a Radarman - later they changed the rate to Operations Specialist and then split it into OS and Intelligence Specialist, so I guess I got to break the stuff you fixed - LOL
I grew up playing in an fj3 Fury at my local JC Park in Taylorsville North Carolina later on it was airlifted by helicopter to the Hickory North Carolina airport where it was completely restored by the Hickory North Carolina saber Society and now is on display if anybody wants to see it
@@treebuck I have since gone to the museum and can confirm it is there alongside an Orion, phantom 2, tomcat, Beach craft, speaking, huoy, thunder chief, a blue angels f18 hornet, and the last Curtiss XF15C, among other. There's a nice tour of the Orion too.
The FJ-2 was basically a navalized F-86 for carrier use....the FJ-3 was very similar but upgraded in its systems and a few details. The FJ-4 (and FJ-4B) was a whole new airplane, somewhat similar but fuselage and flying surfaces were fairly different. It also had nuke capability. I used to see them and A3s coming into NAS Alameda for landing when I lived in San Rafael. Good times.
The transitional period between the dominance of piston engines to the ubiquity of jets is fascinating! So much innovation, so much needed to be relearned. Those early jets were remarkable and very interesting to look back on.
From the P-80 Shooting Star in 1945 to the F-4 Phantom II in 1961. That's straight wind sub sonic, swept wing sub sonic, Mach 1, Mach 2 specialised and then Mach 2 multi-role in just 16 years over 27 US built jet fighters. After the F-4 entered service in 1961 the US didn't adopt another till the F-14 in 1974 13 years after the F-4. While the F-111 did enter service in 1967 it was a strike aircraft and not designed for air to air combat and very rarely carried carried any air-to-air missiles in US service though I believe Australia did more often. The F-5A-C also entered service in the 1960's but mostly to help international sales with a limited deployment over Vietnam and then adopted for aggressor squadrons not front line combat roles.
One of the tings I really like about you channel is that you have a minimal introduction. You get right to it. No " I m Yak-a-ty Yak from Yak-a-ty and today we going to yak etc. Good work! ,give me to facts!
I flew the Avon Sabre. 50% more thrust. 6 minutes to 35,000’. 30 mm cannon and sidewinders. M1.1 in a dive and 600kts low level. Great pilot visibility but only a 6G limit so best dog fighter at high altitude. Milked one to 53,000 feet.
.....I had a friend named "Hambone" that flew FJ-2's. He told me that everytime they landed, they had to replace the "board" that held the tubes for the VHF radio, as the shock from landing was too much for the material to absorb.......
At about 10 minutes in the bit about the saphire makes no sense, you say an engine is powered by an engine. The Saphire IS the engine, the J-65 was a licenced built version of that, it sounds like you're saying the Saphire is the plane.
fucking hell my man, thank you for all your work, its incredible the wealth of information I get from youtube thanks to people like you! Have a good new year, hopefully even more productive!
Dark Guy, I think it’s high time you and the team took a small vacation. I’ve never seen a channel(s) put out content as long as y’all do. I adore your work and videos. I did notice a few editing slips on though. Please don’t fall into burn out! Take a break! ❤
Lessons learned (over and over)... A Carrier based aircraft has to be designed for that environment... just can't sling a hook and catch a wire... (that's what McNamara had to learn with his F/B-111... the Navy got the F-14...).
The only thing that we learn from “lessons learned “ is that we learn NOTHING from lessons learned! Frustrating for safety conscious folks who bother to read
Very interesting stuff.... I don't get why the F86 Sabre was fitted with 50cals, with all of the experience of WW2...I even read of an "experimental" Sabre, sent in to combat with cannon. It read as if "no one knew" what would happen when the pilot pressed the trigger, as he creapt up on a Mig's 6 oclock. But shocking....The cannon destroyed the Mig faster than 50s would have. Military amnesia ?
My understanding is that the various militaries chose their aircraft arms based on surpluses of ammo and weapons intended for WWI era anti-tank roles that were made obsolete by WWII. For the US that meant .50 BMG. Later variants of the Sabre had cannons. I also think that earlier cannons had lower rates of fire that Americans thought might cause a miss because of the 'gap' between rounds.
ye they had tons of 50 ammo still around from WW2, and the US tried to use cannons on their planes in WW2 but most had reliability issues and carried less ammo,
Story time. The ship I was on in the late 70s in the Navy was armed with 20 mm single barrel canons. Defensive armament. Always jammed. Even in the F8 Crusader they had jamming problems. Crusaders did a vast majority of their kills with Sidewinders. Not until the development of the Vulcan Gatling gun did the American Military get a reliable 20mm cannon.
@@jeffh3568 the thing was that the 50 bmg was already in service, and compared to the m2 machine gun any cannon available had way more malfunctions than it, so really why use this new weapon that is less reliable and needs new ammo, when i can just strap on more and more M2s to a plane?
I think a story on why the Navy took so long to develop the angled flight deck would be interesting. I have heard it was a British idea, but it seems to me so obvious, and this should have been put into practice long before.
@@ROOSTER333 angled flight deck is still flat, it’s just at an angle to the direction of travel for the ship. It’s safer, but it also makes it more complicated to use the speed of the carrier to assist with takeoffs and landings. Those high speeds for carriers aren’t just for convenience - they help the planes.
Poor old Marines getting everybody's cast offs and unwanted failures and yet they still adapt, adjust and overcome to provide one of the worlds best fighting units.
That was pretty well S.O.P. It seemed that the War Dept., then later the Pentegon, considered the needs of the Marine Corps after the other branches got theirs met. The Corps always seemed to get the surplus equipment from the previous war issued to them, while the Army got the latest gear.
I have never been able to find any information on how much loss of performance was lost when the F-86 Sabre was modified for carrier operations as the FJ-2 Fury.
The real story is of experienced soviet pilots vs experienced US pilots often with long service in WW2 fighting each other, That's not such a 1 sided rosy picture,
US invested a lot in the pilots, one of their big advantages against both Germany (who had aces flying and getting killed in combat instead of working as instructors) and Japan (that just ran out of qualified pilots).
I really hate when people talk about the sabres 'weakness' as if the sabre was woefully inferior to the mig. It was heavier thus slower climb rate but had a massively superior roll rate, more powerful engine and better high speed performance along with radar gun sights just to name a few.
Did they invent the airplane? I mean, Brazil has some good claims too, but finding credit for other countries is kinda quaint when it comes to flying machines.
Um... There was a lot of repetition in the script in the first few minutes, and then mention of a contract-built British engine "powered by" an American engine...?!? An interesting video (Dad was crew aboard the Coral Sea during those tests & spoke about it from time to time), but I was expecting a bit better....
You only hear about the USAF f86 Sabre from the Korean War But nothing much from the F2 sea fury Sabre Like I said it’s mostly from watching dog fights from the history channel F86 vs mig 15 dog fights It’s always been a friendly rivalry between the navy and Air Force on which aircraft is suited for both missions Roles Air Force says this Navy says that Shalom dove 🕊️ of peace ☮️
Another aircraft better with a British engine ( helped with our German engineers ) coupled to American designed aircraft ( helped with their German engineers) same swept wing as the Mig ( helped with their German engineers ) 🤣
You show a Skyraider when mentioning the Navy's "straight wing fighters". It was not designed to be a fighter and its designation "AD" (A for Attack) indicates that. The U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy had radically different operational requirements and it was much easier to adapt a Navy aircraft for the Air Force than vice versa (aggravated by traditional inter-service rivalries to some extent). The rather ludicrous attempt to "navalize" the F-111 is a case in point! That the Sabre was not carrier capable was NOT a "weakness" as it was not designed to be a Navy aircraft! That is like finding fault with a swan because it isn't enough like a peacock! It wasn't designed to be! Was the Mustang afflicted with similar "weakness" because it was not readily amenable to be operated from carriers (it was attempted)?
The 'navalizing' of the F-111 was allllll McNamara... political. He and his 'Whiz Kids' knew better than the Navy what they needed. Grumman saved the day... result? F-14.
They’re both influenced by the Ta-183 “Huckebein” which Kurt Tank designed during WW2 but wasn’t built by the Nazis (arguably later built by Argentina). Given the MiG-9 and F-84 (especially the 84F) though, it’s mostly just jet engine where a piston engine would have been, swept wings, and otherwise a WW2 fighter. The Saab Tunnan and Dassault Ouragan are also very similar in setup.
I remember watching one of these intentionally set on fire in Millington NAS just for the fire crews to learn how to put them out.😪 Seemed a waste but the crews need to learn how to put them out.
The carrier with the hull number 41 as designated on the flight deck is the USS Midway, CVA 41, now a museum located in San Diego, CA. I am proud to say I was a part of this ships company during the Vietnam War.
Thank you very much for your service.
Press on with pride, seaman. 👍
Thank you Dennis. Would you mind telling a little about your life on the ship and the feeling on board? Many could learn from this I'm sure. Best wishes.
Never did an aircraft carrier, did time on an LHA, Amphibious Assault which is also a flat top but deals with helos and harriers, or did in the past when I was in. I did about 7 years on frigates and destroyers and worked with the computer systems that ran CIC.
Cool beans dude. I hope that time was good for you and had a good life afterwards which seems to be a fairly common problem for people who serve. I retired and got the benefits so I've done OK.
Peace to you.
@@johndoh5182 I was a Radarman - later they changed the rate to Operations Specialist and then split it into OS and Intelligence Specialist, so I guess I got to break the stuff you fixed - LOL
The USS Boxer CV-21 was my father's ship, he was serving when these films were made. He was a radar technician but classified as Radioman.
My dad also served on the Boxer. I have his scrapbooks with pictures of Panther Jets, Corsairs, and AD's.
Was there a reason why he was designated for a different role?
I grew up playing in an fj3 Fury at my local JC Park in Taylorsville North Carolina later on it was airlifted by helicopter to the Hickory North Carolina airport where it was completely restored by the Hickory North Carolina saber Society and now is on display if anybody wants to see it
Where can I find it? I’m in Yadkinville NC.
Where can I see it I'm in guilford
@@MathewsGuitarWorks Based on what I can see on Google Earth it's at the Hickory Aviation Museum at the Hickory Airport.
@@treebuck I have since gone to the museum and can confirm it is there alongside an Orion, phantom 2, tomcat, Beach craft, speaking, huoy, thunder chief, a blue angels f18 hornet, and the last Curtiss XF15C, among other. There's a nice tour of the Orion too.
The FJ-4 was a great looking ride. Lots of attractive Navy fighters around that time.
The Cougar, Skyray, Fury, and Banshee were great looking.
The FJ-2 was basically a navalized F-86 for carrier use....the FJ-3 was very similar but upgraded in its systems and a few details.
The FJ-4 (and FJ-4B) was a whole new airplane, somewhat similar but fuselage and flying surfaces were fairly different. It also had nuke capability.
I used to see them and A3s coming into NAS Alameda for landing when I lived in San Rafael. Good times.
The transitional period between the dominance of piston engines to the ubiquity of jets is fascinating! So much innovation, so much needed to be relearned. Those early jets were remarkable and very interesting to look back on.
From the P-80 Shooting Star in 1945 to the F-4 Phantom II in 1961. That's straight wind sub sonic, swept wing sub sonic, Mach 1, Mach 2 specialised and then Mach 2 multi-role in just 16 years over 27 US built jet fighters.
After the F-4 entered service in 1961 the US didn't adopt another till the F-14 in 1974 13 years after the F-4.
While the F-111 did enter service in 1967 it was a strike aircraft and not designed for air to air combat and very rarely carried carried any air-to-air missiles in US service though I believe Australia did more often.
The F-5A-C also entered service in the 1960's but mostly to help international sales with a limited deployment over Vietnam and then adopted for aggressor squadrons not front line combat roles.
Agreed. For a military aviation nut the innovations, trials, and errors that happened during the early cold war were pretty darn interesting.
Very well interpreted and very well explained!.
Can remember being in my short trousers climbing into the cockpit of a RCAF Saber at the old Staravia scrap yard at Lasham
Can’t get away with stuff like that anymore
1:05 Straight outta' Inglewood: corner of Imperial Highway and Aviation Blvd
One of the tings I really like about you channel is that you have a minimal introduction. You get right to it. No " I m Yak-a-ty Yak from Yak-a-ty and today we going to yak etc. Good work! ,give me to facts!
I flew the Avon Sabre. 50% more thrust. 6 minutes to 35,000’. 30 mm cannon and sidewinders. M1.1 in a dive and 600kts low level. Great pilot visibility but only a 6G limit so best dog fighter at high altitude. Milked one to 53,000 feet.
True accomplishments!
wow
Get you some
Some F-100 pilots in SEA got surprised when they tried playing games with Aussie F-86's :)
@@raymondclark1785 AS Chuck Yeager explained in his Autobiography, Even 86 v Mig 19, it is about the Pilot
Thanks for who you are and what you do.
Love the Navy version
I enjoyed this installment and the backing track was awesome
.....I had a friend named "Hambone" that flew FJ-2's. He told me that everytime they landed, they had to replace the "board" that held the tubes for the VHF radio, as the shock from landing was too much for the material to absorb.......
Short service life but still sexy looking. The FJ4B is the queen of them all.
Wow, I didn't know that the Sabre, weren't a carrier jet. Good to know my history. Thanks buddy....
Great video!
Never heard of the FJ3, thanks.
Interesting aircraft
The music that starts at 2:10 reminds me of the old Newgrounds Portal music from the early 2000s???
At about 10 minutes in the bit about the saphire makes no sense, you say an engine is powered by an engine.
The Saphire IS the engine, the J-65 was a licenced built version of that, it sounds like you're saying the Saphire is the plane.
It's the editor/writers fault. They basically read the Wikipedia page with a good narrator.
Fury? It's adorable
7:27 first recorded instance of Danger Zone being played, Steam Catapults just make that sound
great video - how about a video on the F-100 super sabre
fucking hell my man, thank you for all your work, its incredible the wealth of information I get from youtube thanks to people like you! Have a good new year, hopefully even more productive!
He is a goldmine! Cheers!
Dark Guy, I think it’s high time you and the team took a small vacation. I’ve never seen a channel(s) put out content as long as y’all do. I adore your work and videos. I did notice a few editing slips on though. Please don’t fall into burn out! Take a break! ❤
Most wonderful documentary coverage video about FJ2 fury .... marine fighter of USA 🇺🇸 naval aviation force
Thanks for showing the super dog
Lessons learned (over and over)... A Carrier based aircraft has to be designed for that environment... just can't sling a hook and catch a wire... (that's what McNamara had to learn with his F/B-111... the Navy got the F-14...).
The only thing that we learn from “lessons learned “ is that we learn NOTHING from lessons learned! Frustrating for safety conscious folks who bother to read
@@captbart3185 not just for 'safety conscious folks'...
Very MiG15ish
Very interesting stuff....
I don't get why the F86 Sabre was fitted with 50cals, with all of the experience of WW2...I even read of an "experimental" Sabre, sent in to combat with cannon. It read as if "no one knew" what would happen when the pilot pressed the trigger, as he creapt up on a Mig's 6 oclock. But shocking....The cannon destroyed the Mig faster than 50s would have.
Military amnesia ?
My understanding is that the various militaries chose their aircraft arms based on surpluses of ammo and weapons intended for WWI era anti-tank roles that were made obsolete by WWII. For the US that meant .50 BMG. Later variants of the Sabre had cannons. I also think that earlier cannons had lower rates of fire that Americans thought might cause a miss because of the 'gap' between rounds.
ye they had tons of 50 ammo still around from WW2, and the US tried to use cannons on their planes in WW2 but most had reliability issues and carried less ammo,
Story time. The ship I was on in the late 70s in the Navy was armed with 20 mm single barrel canons. Defensive armament. Always jammed. Even in the F8 Crusader they had jamming problems. Crusaders did a vast majority of their kills with Sidewinders. Not until the development of the Vulcan Gatling gun did the American Military get a reliable 20mm cannon.
The Germans, Japanese, and the British made their aircraft cannons work. The P 38 even used cannons, why did we have problems, just curious?
@@jeffh3568 the thing was that the 50 bmg was already in service, and compared to the m2 machine gun any cannon available had way more malfunctions than it, so really why use this new weapon that is less reliable and needs new ammo, when i can just strap on more and more M2s to a plane?
There used no be one still in flyable condition but I haven't seen it lately
I think a story on why the Navy took so long to develop the angled flight deck would be interesting. I have heard it was a British idea, but it seems to me so obvious, and this should have been put into practice long before.
The reason Americans don't use the ramp is because simply we don't need too. Our carriers are bigger and the catapult system is strong enough.
@@ROOSTER333 Our aircraft are already quite expensive to maintain as well. Adding a ramp to their service hours would dramatically increase costs.
@@ROOSTER333 angled flight deck is still flat, it’s just at an angle to the direction of travel for the ship.
It’s safer, but it also makes it more complicated to use the speed of the carrier to assist with takeoffs and landings.
Those high speeds for carriers aren’t just for convenience - they help the planes.
Angle deck, steam catapult, mirror landing system.... All British innovations.
@@paulwoodman5131 Looks like they didn't do much with it thou.
I just realized that this was just released.
Nice video, thanks.
Whats that variant in the Thumbnail? ... I cant find it
4 minutes from post let's goooo
Poor old Marines getting everybody's cast offs and unwanted failures and yet they still adapt, adjust and overcome to provide one of the worlds best fighting units.
That was pretty well S.O.P. It seemed that the War Dept., then later the Pentegon, considered the needs of the Marine Corps after the other branches got theirs met.
The Corps always seemed to get the surplus equipment from the previous war issued to them, while the Army got the latest gear.
Sounds like blade techno music at 2 minutes 12 seconds I like it
Why so many shots of pilots landing with the canopy open? To get out if the go over board is my best guess.
Hate to break it to you, but I he F-86 was based on the FJ fury.
Quite a comely little ship, isn't it?
I have never been able to find any information on how much loss of performance was lost when the F-86 Sabre was modified for carrier operations as the FJ-2 Fury.
I Like the Four 20mm Cannons More Than the Six 50 cal. Longer Range and More Hitting Power.
Happy new year. 👍🎄🎂👼🌲🎅😊
I still prefer the AJ to the F-86, the AD to the A-1, and the F4J to the F-4. Screw Robert McNamara!
Let me guess... Phantom II up next?
Now I want a mini expose' of the j4
The real story is of experienced soviet pilots vs experienced US pilots often with long service in WW2 fighting each other,
That's not such a 1 sided rosy picture,
Another awesome 50’s fighter, thankfully the British engine saved this aircraft future
A major contributor to quick air superiority by the f86 in korea was also the poorer quality pilots
US invested a lot in the pilots, one of their big advantages against both Germany (who had aces flying and getting killed in combat instead of working as instructors) and Japan (that just ran out of qualified pilots).
I really hate when people talk about the sabres 'weakness' as if the sabre was woefully inferior to the mig. It was heavier thus slower climb rate but had a massively superior roll rate, more powerful engine and better high speed performance along with radar gun sights just to name a few.
This so much. The F86 and the Mig 15 were actually fairly evenly matched. They each had their strengths
The wings folded themselves?
Had no idea that the saber had a navy’s variant
that a4 here in 11:25 was better
The steam catapult was a British invention .
Did they invent the airplane?
I mean, Brazil has some good claims too, but finding credit for other countries is kinda quaint when it comes to flying machines.
It’s soccer
Aint noone thinking about the british navy when the subject of aircraft carriers comes up...
@@Justanotherconsumer no, it was a Yorkshireman George Cayley.....eyup!
@@paulnutter1713 *patpat* it’s so cute when nationalists get desperate to take credit for everything.
Um... There was a lot of repetition in the script in the first few minutes, and then mention of a contract-built British engine "powered by" an American engine...?!? An interesting video (Dad was crew aboard the Coral Sea during those tests & spoke about it from time to time), but I was expecting a bit better....
The first jet fighter carrier landing was on December 3, 1945 on a UK carrier, *that* is the flight that ushered in the new age. ✌️
Winkle, yet again.
You only hear about the USAF f86 Sabre from the Korean War
But nothing much from the F2 sea fury Sabre
Like I said it’s mostly from watching dog fights from the history channel
F86 vs mig 15 dog fights
It’s always been a friendly rivalry between the navy and Air Force on which aircraft is suited for both missions Roles
Air Force says this
Navy says that
Shalom dove 🕊️ of peace ☮️
Wasn't the mig aswell LEGENDARY?!?
Another aircraft better with a British engine ( helped with our German engineers ) coupled to American designed aircraft ( helped with their German engineers) same swept wing as the Mig ( helped with their German engineers ) 🤣
Mr worldwide
Gee… are you trying to make a point about “German engineers”?
"Only the British could make such a great engine and still be incapable of supersonic performance"
Genghis Khan always preserved and stole the artisans of defeated enemies. He put talented people to work for him. Brains are one of the spoils of war.
Go USA?
Blade?
The most important reason why the US lost the war was that it did not dare to cross the 17° north latitude.
🦫 hello and merry Christmas ⛄🎄
Merry Christmas.. and happy new year 🎉🥳
Not to mention the Great British Electric Lightening .
No notice from screw tube.
I don't see any similarities to the P-51 Mustang and the FJ-1 fury.
Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up
Glory To Ukraine!!!
Don't forget the USA got the jet engine off the UK for FREE..
Britain bankrupt at time , no resources to develop it but USA only few months behind
@@garypeatling7927 don't be stupid the UK were shooting down v2 rockets with the jets in late 1944
@@smegheadGOAT I think you mean V1's. There is not a fighter made then or now that could catch a V2
@@johnyrebbaron2618 yep, v1 but the yanks still got the jet for free
@@smegheadGOAT We didn't get it for free remember all the lend lease you got during WW2
"Wind Screen" really, what a ditz?
Must say; the American tax payers has produced some of the most sexy military aircraft known to avionics!
Just look at the cars, of the same time around the world. ULGY
These are interesting subjects, but I just can't stand the computer-generated voice. What a pity.
@8:18 Did you seriously say "fitteded" as in the past tense of fitted, itself the past tense of fit. Am I hearing things?
You show a Skyraider when mentioning the Navy's "straight wing fighters". It was not designed to be a fighter and its designation "AD" (A for Attack) indicates that. The U.S. Air Force and the U.S. Navy had radically different operational requirements and it was much easier to adapt a Navy aircraft for the Air Force than vice versa (aggravated by traditional inter-service rivalries to some extent). The rather ludicrous attempt to "navalize" the F-111 is a case in point! That the Sabre was not carrier capable was NOT a "weakness" as it was not designed to be a Navy aircraft! That is like finding fault with a swan because it isn't enough like a peacock! It wasn't designed to be! Was the Mustang afflicted with similar "weakness" because it was not readily amenable to be operated from carriers (it was attempted)?
the Skyraider was to be the next Navy Dive Bomber... replacing the Helldiver and Dauntless...
The 'navalizing' of the F-111 was allllll McNamara... political. He and his 'Whiz Kids' knew better than the Navy what they needed. Grumman saved the day... result? F-14.
This is an AI voice is it not?
So... which came first, the MiG-15 or the F-86? Who copied who, or parallel development?
They’re both influenced by the Ta-183 “Huckebein” which Kurt Tank designed during WW2 but wasn’t built by the Nazis (arguably later built by Argentina).
Given the MiG-9 and F-84 (especially the 84F) though, it’s mostly just jet engine where a piston engine would have been, swept wings, and otherwise a WW2 fighter. The Saab Tunnan and Dassault Ouragan are also very similar in setup.
It was parallel development. Even today you'll see many fighters that have similar jobs with similar designs.
pole
Smoker?
Maybe the Navy Blue paint is making it hard to see the sleek F86 fighter variants !
Dark Skies Views.?🙏🙏🙏
Subscribed To Yankees Avenue.🙏🙏🙏
wtf back and forth round and round WHAT plane is this video about.!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
The overhanging nose embarrassed everybody, that's why it didn't go into service. 😉
Show America.
2nd
Nobody cares. Go seek validation elsewhere.
OK is this video about the F86 or the Fury. Stop dragging this our the Fury was lost to time when the Grumen Cougars entered the scene.
STOP that music b.s. !
Drinking game - have a slug every time he starts a sentence with "still".
You never mentioned the radome nosed F-86D of which you showed several times. Kinda sloppy video making again.
I missed this YT un-subbed me
AMERICA DID NOT BUILD THIS AIRCRAFT. NORTH AMERICA AVIATION, IS NOT THE NAME OF A CONTINENT. AMERICA IS A SINGLE AND INDIVISIBLE CONTINENT saludos
Weaknesses lol ????
F-86 major flaw not having a tail hook , NOT a flaw . It was never designed for carrier landings .
MIG 15 COPY OF GERMAN DESIGN AND UK ENGINE AND CANNON FROM JEWISH - DON't make too much of him F86 Better
Stop hating certain beliefs. Grow up.
I remember watching one of these intentionally set on fire in Millington NAS just for the fire crews to learn how to put them out.😪 Seemed a waste but the crews need to learn how to put them out.