FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1948
1948 - 0865.PDF
JUNE IOTH, 1945 FLIGHT 639 ALL JET-FIGHTER AIR FORCE U.S. Air Policy and Fighter Development By " FAVONIUS " THE ripening fruit of political seed-sow ing by Presidentialand Congressional Aviation Commissions is due to fall inWashington, D.C., at any moment now. By overwhelm- , ing majorities in both Houses oi Congress, the proponentsof a 70-group Air Force are now bickering over the final details for Presidential signature—-or veto. Some idea of Congres-sional unanimity and, presumably, public feeling on this issue of keeping one's powder dry and the trigger cocked, may begauged by the landslide solidity of these majorities—343 to 3 in the lower House and 74 to 2 in the Senate. Despite the.fact that Congress has flatly over-ridden the Administration's fTMier plan to fill m the framework of the current 55-groupAir Force by bringing it up to full strength, a veto by President Truman is hardly likely. In any event it would be a uselessgesture, since legislative enactment is now a certainty. 70-Group Air Force Budgeting in round numbers lor the fiscal year 1949, thejoint congressional appropriation for Service aviation now stands at approximately 3,200 million dollars, the military orAir Force side getting some 2,300 millions and Naval Aviation about 900 millions. (We purposely refrain from cluttering upthe taxpayers' landscape with too many significant figures, since the last 8 digits are unlikely to have any perceptibleinfluence on the rate of income tax!) .Quickly following up Congressional sentiment, the Air Force has already announcedprocurement plans for the purchase of 2,727 new aircraft, com- . prising 1,575 let fighters (Lockheed F-80, Republic F-84,North American F-86 and Curtiss-Wright F-87), 243 bombers (Boeing B-50 and North American B-45), and a miscellaneousassortment of 909 reconnaissance, transport, training, rescue and liaison aircraft. All these are scheduled for delivery byJuly, 1950, as a down payment on a 5-year plan to modernize the 70-group Air Force by 1953. (According to Americanmilitary analysts, January 1, 1953, is being prognosticated as red-letter "A-Day," by which time the Iron Curtain may-become an atomic sun-blind.) All this talk of 55- and 70-group military aviation leavesthe man in the street (who pays the piper) slightly dazed, for the public, as well as aircraft manufacturers, are more in-terested in actual aircraft units, rather than Air Force logistics. There is no hard-and-fast rule whereby one can translate groupsin terms of aircraft, since the number of aircraft per group varies from 75 down to 30, in the case of fighters and heavybombers, respectively. Present planning indicates that the 70 groups call for a potential of 6,869 first-line aircraft, brokendown as outlined in the accompanying table. Current first-line strength is now about 4,000 aircraft, leaving some 2,800 stillrequired for immediate expansion. Buttressing these 6,869 first-line units will be a reserve force of 13,672 aircraft, dividedte#tween an Air Reserve, an Air National Guard, and a " moth- ball" storage pool. Total military aircraft units, therefore,amount to 20,541. Not to be too badly over-trumped by the Air Force, theNavy has announced procurement plans for the fiscal year 1949 calling for 1,535 new aircraft, comprising 807 lighters,515 attack planes, 113 patrol planes, 20 transports, and 80 helicopters-. Of this number," 746 will be jet-powered, andalready accepted for production are the following fighter types : North-American FJ-i Fury, McDonnell FH-i Phantom andF2H-1 Banshee, Grumman F.9F-2 Panther, and Vought F6U-1 Pirate. The new attack types will consist principally of FIRST-LINE AIRCRAFT Fighter, Day 1,898 Fighter, All-weather 125 Bomber, Light 276 Bomber, Medium and Heavy 709 Reconnaissance, Tactical ... ... ... --• •-• ••• .-- ••- 247 Reconnaissance, Long-range --. -.. ... ... ... ... ••• 203 Cargo/Medium ... .. ... ... ... • •- -•• ••• .-• 331 Cargo, Heavy 166 Transporc 411 Trainer 1,994 Miscellaneous : Liaison, Rescue, Target, etc 509 Total: First-line Military Aircraft (70 Groups plus 22 Squadrons) 6,869 Dougias AD-i Skyraiders, Martin AM-i Maulers, and GrummanA*-is, all of which are piston-engined. By the middle of 1949. iNaval A-.-iation is scheduled to reach a strength of 14,500aircraft, divided between 3,300 combat aircraft, 2,700 lleet support types, 2,000 trainers, 3,800 under overhaul and modifi-cation, and 2,700 in reserve. Dropping the last odd couple of digits from the Air Force score-board, the combined militaryand naval air arms thus call for a round total of 35,000 units American military aviation is now well advanced towardsan all-jet fighter programme; to the point, indeed, where flight students are shortly to be weaned from the basic-trainer stagedirect to the new Lockheed TF-80C two-seater jet fighter- trainer, recently developed from the F-80B Shooting StarThe well-tried and well-hked F-80B, which until recently was the Air Force s standard operational jet fighter (and is stillbeing turned out at the rate of one a day), has now been joined in service by the Republic F-84B Thunderjet. The latter isnow also completely operational and a total of 600 are currently under procurement. A top speed of 611 m.p.h. has been claimedtor the specially prepared rototype XF-84, but the production F-84B model is reported to be in the 590-595 m.p.h. bracket,with a cruising speed of 500 m.p.h. and a range of 1,400 miles with external wing-tip tanks. Top speed is slightly better thanthe 585-590 m.p.h. of the F-80B, which is a notable per- formance in view of the corresponding engine powers andweights. Technically., all this makes a pretty argument for the slide-rule jugglers. The difference is that whereas the F-80B is powered with the G.E.-Allison J-33 centrifugal turbo-jet, ratedat 4,600 1b static thrust, the F-84B mounts the G.E.-Allison J-35 axial version, rated at 4,000 1b. Apparently the smallerfrontal area (or wetted surface) of the F-84B fuselage, with its 37-5-inch diameter axial-flow turbine and nose air intake,more than counterbalances the higher thrust of the 50.5-inch diameter radial-flow turbine and side nostril ducts of theF-80B. There is, moreover, a weight differential in the argu- ment, which is seen reflected in the empty weights of the twoaircraft; thus the weight empty of the F-80B, with an engine dry weight of 1,735 lb. scales approximately 8,000 lb, whereasthe corresponding figures for the F-84B are 2,425 lb for the engine and 9,000 lb for the aircraft. Notwithstanding all these intriguing pro et contra, our per-sonal hunch is that both these jet fighter types are classic examples of the military designer's art, and the U.S. AirForce is well mounted in this branch of the air arm. The position, in this respect, is much more comforting than it wassome 18 months ago, when the earlier F-8oAs were having acute operational troubles with rivets popping and fuselageframes distorting during gunnery and bombing tests. This trouble at any rate has been cured. Sometimes, however, inour more pensive moments we could wish that all this clever engineering and pleasing aerodynamics might be devoted tosomething more useful than taking six machine-guns for a ride into the stratosphere ! Experimental Jet-Fighters Not yet operational, but on the production line with 223currently on order for the Air Force, the North American F-86A backswept-wing jet-fighter is an interesting augury ofthings to come, clearly showing the influence of the next Step up the sonic ladder. Powered, like the F-84B, with the4,000 lb G.E.-Allison J-35, the F-86A has obviously been designed to cater for much higher speeds and powers, in the600-650 m.p.h. class. Gross weight is 13,715 lb, span 37ft, length 37ft, and overall height 14ft. Ceiling is given as over40,000ft and range over 1,000 miles, and it is tolerably certain that the latter figure is nearer 1,400-1,500 miles with externalwing tanks Due to the backswept wing tips being located well aft of the C.G., the external wing tanks are mountedjust outboard of the main landing gear shock-struts—a fact which also somewhat penalizes the width of the landing geartrack. This track is about 22 per cent of the wing span, com- pared with 46 per cent for the Republic F-84B. The wing design of the F-86A is notable in several respects,for it clearly evidences some of the structural and aerodynamic penalties of the swept wing. Structurally, in order to providu
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
