CAC-19 Boomerang - Australian WW2 Fighter (Widescreen Upscale)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024
- The CAC Boomerang was a World War II fighter aircraft designed and manufactured in Australia between 1942 and 1945. The Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation produced Boomerangs which is significant as the first combat aircraft designed and built in Australia.
This re-edited and upscaled (for HD) clip shows the aircraft that displayed at the Classic Fighters 2001 airshow in New Zealand.
For more Boomerang info see: en.wikipedia.or...
--
www.aviationfil...
Copyright © 2016 Historical Aviation Film Unit
This video material may not be reproduced in any form (except as an embedded video on any other website), without the written permission of the Historical Aviation Film Unit.
I've always loved the shape of the Boomarang ever since I built a model of one as a kid.
It did very well in the ground attack role in support of infantry ops and target identification. We should be very proud of this little plane, the designers and our capability to produce it when needed. It’s colour scheme is fantastic, I love the blue and white roundels with the white tail plane. Magnificent.🇦🇺
I like them. Very cool they're proportionate. Nothing weird looking. They sound awesome too. They need to build at least 500 more of these.
2020, that smoke has almost disappeared!🤣👍
The Boomerang was a development of the NA-16/Wirraway. The NA-16 was developed into the T6 Texan from which the P64 fighter was developed. Therefore the Boomerang and P64 look very similar.
Amazing achievement at the time and I highly doubt that we will ever see it done again.
I saw one yesterday.
Such a cute stubby little fighter. Looks like a refined I-16
Heard of this indigenous plane and wondered how they using own resources. It appears structural robust for ground support to absorb battle damage and was very useful for the war effort.
Very interesting. I never heard about this aircraft. Excellent! :-)
For a reason lol. It pretty much sucked. Haven't watched the vid yet but if I recall this aircraft had not a single air to air kill throughout the whole war.
Not to crazy about the smoke displayed. But a real neat aircraft and an amazing amount of ingenuity to get it built in such a short time.
16 weeks from conception to flight. That stinkin' F-35 has been in development for over 20 years and still haven't worked out the bugs.
Yeeeeaaa you can't even compare a Generation 5 Jet to a below average prop aircraft from WW2. Besides the F35 is a lot more capable than some give credit for. When you combine it with a bunch of other F35s, ships and land and space based equipment that links up with it's situational awareness and targeting capabilities you end up with the most deadly aircraft in the sky. I don't care how maneuverable and sleek some Generation 4 aircraft are. They can dance around the sky and look sleek a they want but in the end they will never see the F35 or missile that destroys them. Sure there could be problems and it may not always work 100 percent of the time. It will close enough though. The only possible counter measure the Russians and Chinese have developed to detect it is to create an insanely powerful AESA that can essentially put out such intense and dense radar waves it could "defeat" some stealth. That's about it though...I don't think that's a sure thing but I'm not a military intelligence person and I am not privy to the most up to date knowledge on these things lol. I do know it's rumored Russian Electornic Warfare packages and abilities have become quite good. Considering the route we have gone developing our tech it makes sense that's the route they would go. They can't parody our technological gains but they can create counter measures to it.
@@jedimindtrix2142 Yeeeaaa I believe I just demonstrated that necessity is the mother of invention. If the prop aircraft had 20 years of development, a bunch of other prop aircraft and some ships and land and space based equipment then yeeeeaaa it would be the Bees Knees but could the F35 go from drawing to flight in 16 weeks? Nnnaaaaaa. It's not about the plane, it's about the people who pulled it off.
@@MrZeddy100 well of course they couldn't do that with the development of the F35. It was developed in "peace time" and politics always finds a way to impact development when it comes to stuff this. Look at the F22 and YF23 development. The F23 was probably the better plane. However we know how that story ended up. Comparing the F35 to this Australian aircraft doesn't really make sense. Two completely different eras and technology. Way different purposes for the aircraft and the politics/environment it was developed under was completely different. On a seperate note I think the the F35 will end up being a great platform for everyone who uses it. By itself as a fighter/interceptor it's ok but it's real strength is the situational awareness it brings to the battlefield. The ability to process all the information it receives from other friendly planes and combat platforms then be able to turn that information into tactical targeting information and data for the pilot who can pass it along to other pilots and operators in theater is one the craziest things about the plane. China and Russia both know how screwed their aircraft would be in a confrontation between Western and allied nations like Australia, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Germany, France and so on if we are all using the F35 and associated hardware.
Always good information in your videos!
Wow I can't believe I have never heard of this plane before
Kermit Weeks is rebuilding one
OK for ground attack but as it had no supercharger installed it performed abysmally at altitude. It had 20mm cannons and some had 4 cannons so it could do well against ground targets.
Chris Brent well not until the CA14 which was supercharged and increased its ceiling to over 6000ft but by then we didnt need it
@@roddevereaux1830 Yeah I know a bit about it. One grandfather was with the RAAF in Nth QLD during the war and the other was with the Empire Air Training Scheme in Canada training pilots from all over the British Empire. I have loads of really good photos of P51's flying in formation and P40's. One P40 taxiing up to the runway with a ground crew riding sitting on the wing. I presume to give the pilot directions as he worked his way out to the strip for take off.
All Boomerangs were supercharged. They didn't have the latest two-speed types though, and as a result, high altitude performance suffered. The CA14 was fitted with a turbo-supercharger, later shortened to turbocharger. Basically every type of WWII piston engined fighter had some form of supercharging.
Love to see a film of that typhoon/tempest in action. That screem would be enough to put the shits up the enemy thats for sure.
It also looks a bit like an American Brewster Buffalo. Look it up - ODD plane! And highly unsuccessful to boot. (Casting no aspersions on the Boomerang).
daveogarf I had the same thought! Not very effective against the Zero fighter I suppose.
The Brewster Buffalo was highly successful in the hands of Finish pilots fighting the Russians. A much maligned aircraft.
The Boomerang is somehow like the Grumman Wildcat - small, tough and pugnacious.
looks like a cousin to a Curtiss designed aircraft.
Looks like an AT-6 and a Douglas Dauntless had a child. Looks decent at low level.
in performance it was about equivalent to the A6M2 Zero, but the later A6M's became more powerful performance wise making the boomerang into it attacker role
Yes, I did listen to the audio portion of the vid.
bob dyer but they didn't state what model of Zero it was meant to combat, but thats neither here nor there
That's a scenic flight plane.
Zero fighter pilot.
Replic?
accipiter1961 it's the only original Boomerang still flying so I doubt it's a replica
ok friend
accipiter1961 Milingimbi ghost isn’t airworthy but there are now two other original boomerangs airworthy.
There is also nine or more boomerangs being rebuilt to airworthy and three being rebuilt to static.
There are two original ones flying now.