It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

F-80 and F9f-2

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2008 @ 10:28 PM
link   
Is it just me or is it that the shooting star and panther look alot alike besides the air intakes and manufacture?




posted on May, 13 2008 @ 12:34 AM
link   
What are you taking about???



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by jkrog08
 


OP is using codenames for the model references - the same as when the british refer to their standard issue battle rifle as "The Queen's Rifle", whether they're the official codenames of the planes or not i cannot be certain.

As for the actual OP's question, i would imagine the manufacture would differ in the design somewhat, yes.

This has been done before with small arms in order to get them through arms embargoes and security check-points - they just stick a different hand-grip or a modified stock and it'll slip through the checkpoint without so much as a raised eyebrow.

I wouldn't be surprised if it started happening with more technologically advanced equipment.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   
maybe this would help...what im stating the fighter design is almost the same except who manufactured them and the air intakes.

strategic-air-command.com/aircraft/fighter/f80_shooting_star.htm
aviation-history.com/grumman/f9f.html



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 12:53 AM
link   
reply to post by alienstar
 


Thanks for the added info.

I was thinking along the lines of one of the articles being the original and the other being a modified version of it so that the arms companies could sell their wares' to foreign nations despite trade restrictions.

You'll have to forgive me for not knowing the codenames and associated aircraft for every single american weapon of war.

[edit on 13-5-2008 by Anti-Tyrant]



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:09 AM
link   
Oh thats quite fine that u dont.Im only a novice at aircraft identification,you ask me about ww1 or ww2 prop driven and im lost.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:10 AM
link   
reply to post by alienstar
 

heres some info on the diferances
Zindo

www.warbirdalley.com...

aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu...



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 01:19 AM
link   
Thanks Zindo,i didnt even know those sites existed.



posted on May, 13 2008 @ 05:43 AM
link   
reply to post by alienstar
 


What you have to bear in mind is that almost ALL fighters in the mid 1940's were being designed to a fairly rigid template around a straight wing mounted on the CG and a conventional straight tail and single vertical fin and the advent of the jet engine had not yet really started to break the pattern.

Aerodynamically the P-80 was the same as the Hawker Hurricane from a decade earlier despite having a jet engine with the pilot still being closer to the CoG than he is to the nose (also to be seen on the Me 262). British designers basically swapped the pilot and engine positions around to put the pilot in the extreme nose and the engine in the middle of the plane (ie Vampire, Attacker, Sea Hawk etc) but this was about as adventurous as it got in these early days.

Having established that fact look at the detail of the design and you can see they are actually completely different from each other.

P-80 = low wing, low tail, straight rudder/fin, lateral fuselage intakes, oval nose section, long jet pipe, drop tanks.

F9F = mid wing, cruciform tail, delta fin/rudder, split-root intakes, circular or 'barrel' nose section, short jet pipe, integral tip tanks.

In fact there is nothing similar about them at all except for the fact they used a tricycle undercarriage and a centrifugal type jet engine.



[edit on 13-5-2008 by waynos]



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join