# Early post WWII aircraft = GORGEOUS!
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166
**Category:** In My Humble Opinion
**Created:** [April 7, 2003, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166 "2003-04-07T21:22:47Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 4
### Author:  [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/61 "2003-04-09T04:41:29Z")
re: **Zem** ’s last paragraph…
I’ve heard/read that somewhere, too. I seem to remember it being said something like: “It eats up the sky.” Or something like that. Not a verification, I know. I’m going to do a little searching of my books/sites for that.
**Speaker** , the link no workie. See if Jane can salvage it from your net console. And thank you very much. I’ll check the link again a little later, probably just a glitch.
---
### Author:  [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/62 "2003-04-09T04:42:58Z")
**Gorsnak** , now that’s something to get a stiffy over. Whudda beaut! Thanks for sharing.
---
### Author:  [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/63 "2003-04-09T04:46:43Z")
**Gorsnak** , is that a _recent_ photo? Subtle litlle clues make me think it is. That would be such a cool plane to see IRL.
---
### Author:  [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/64 "2003-04-09T04:51:09Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by NoClueBoy \*
> \*\ ***Gorsnak** , is that a _recent_ photo? Subtle litlle clues make me think it is. That would be such a cool plane to see IRL. \*\*
Click on the link above the picture. There’s a whole website devoted to it. The original is in the Smithsonian, the picture is of a recently built replica, which I believe to be on the airshow circuit.
---
### Author:  [@Santos\_L\_Halper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Santos_L_Halper)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/65 "2003-04-09T04:55:44Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by ChalkPit \*
> \*\*The Blohm und Voss Bv141. \*\*
Oooh, another cool one. As a matter of fact, I’ve got an original WW II Navy ID poster of the BV141. It’s got drawings of the plane from all sides, and points out the various features to train US flyers how to identify various enemy planes (like someone could mistake the BV141 for anything else :)). it’s framed and hanging in my hall.
Eric
---
### Author:  [@AncientHumanoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AncientHumanoid)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/66 "2003-04-09T04:56:05Z")
Oh man! That is so nice! Thank you, rebuilders of cool old planes!
WooHoo!
Something about that H-1…
---
### Author:  [@bernse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bernse)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/67 "2003-04-09T04:56:18Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Zenster \*
> \*\*The YB-70 was painted white and flew at triple-sonic speeds. \*\*
Thats what I was getting at. The Valkyrie was a monster… and it was white.
---
### Author:  [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/68 "2003-04-09T05:25:18Z")
Yes, and if you read the YB-70’s extensive web page, you’ll see that it was plagued with skin delamination problems. An excerpt:
“As this was sorted out, concerns were voiced that AV/2 might also suffer skin separation problems under the heating caused by sustained high-speed flight, despite the improved construction and assembly techniques. It was decided that with AV/2, early flights would involve “heat-soaking” at speeds less than Mach 3. This way, unlike a quicker “dash” up to speed, the airframe would reach the full temperature created by flight at that speed.”
I believe that the SR-71 had a top speed of around Mach 5 or 6. Try to imagine the exponential increase in heat factor at that speed. If it more than **triples** in the transition between Mach 2.2 and 3.2, what must it have been like up at nearly **double** Mach 3.2?
I managed to report some errata on the YB-70 page, so I’m hoping that Steve (the editor) will investigate these questions for us. I’ll post his reply when I get it.
---
### Author:  [@Zenster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zenster)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/69 "2003-04-09T05:29:23Z")
I’m with you **NCB** , that H-1 is the Jaguar XKE of propeller aircraft.
**Gorsnak** , thank you for cherry-picking the best photo from that website to share with us. A real stunner!
---
### Author:  [@owlstretchingtime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/owlstretchingtime)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/70 "2003-04-09T12:03:43Z")
You want pretty? You want Mach 2 performance in 1950? you want a huuuuge great plane? You want the fastest plane ever to fly for the Royal Airforce? You want to redefine intercept figher?Of course you do.
You want the English Electric Lightning:
[http://www.lightning.org.uk/photo.php?lg04.jpg](http://www.lightning.org.uk/photo.php?lg04.jpg)
Accept no substitute.
---
### Author:  [@El\_Marko](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Marko)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 12:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/71 "2003-04-09T12:43:26Z")
[This Aero L-39](http://www.flyvintage.com/gallery.pl?op=display&size=normal&pic_id=165) looks like it would be a kick to fly. IIRC it was either one of these or its predecessor, an L-29 that was in one of the Pierce Brosnan Bond movies (the name escapes me).
For my money though, nothing beats the P-51D and the P-38 with the Spitfire coming in a very close second.
The [Hawker Hunter](http://www.flyvintage.com/gallery.pl?op=display&size=normal&pic_id=1145) is also a beauty, not to mention having one of the best names ever.
For modern planes, nothing beats the F-14 Tomcat. Whoa, Nelly!
🆒
---
### Author:  [@ChalkPit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChalkPit)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/72 "2003-04-09T13:02:03Z")
I can see a Hawker Hunter right now, just out my window in the hanger opposite. They were flying them here up til year before last for spinning trials. Been replaced by ugly Alpha jets :(.
---
### Author:  [@bernse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bernse)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/73 "2003-04-09T13:39:34Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Zenster \*
> \*\*Yes, and if you read the YB-70’s extensive web page, you’ll see that it was plagued with skin delamination problems. An excerpt:
>
> “As this was sorted out, concerns were voiced that AV/2 might also suffer skin separation problems under the heating caused by sustained high-speed flight, despite the improved construction and assembly techniques. It was decided that with AV/2, early flights would involve “heat-soaking” at speeds less than Mach 3. This way, unlike a quicker “dash” up to speed, the airframe would reach the full temperature created by flight at that speed.”
>
> I believe that the SR-71 had a top speed of around Mach 5 or 6. Try to imagine the exponential increase in heat factor at that speed. If it more than **triples** in the transition between Mach 2.2 and 3.2, what must it have been like up at nearly **double** Mach 3.2?\*\*
The Blackbird flew nowhere near Mach 5 or 6. It is generally accepted it topped out at low 3s.
I am actually “relatively” familiar with the XB-70 (Actually, I have a 1/72 model of it in front of me now) and IIRC, they had paint peeling problems even at speeds below Mach. While I do believe that at high mach speeds (2.5+) it may have been a problem, I am not convinced the Valkyrie’s paint issues were just heat related. Wasn’t there a theory that it was mostly due to the titanium in its skin?
---
### Author:  [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/74 "2003-04-09T15:22:58Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by flight \*
> \*\ ***ElvisL1ves** , too cruel. The final judge of aircraft designs is the air, and the air loves a beautiful airplane. Generally, the more aestetic an aircraft the better it flies. On those lines, thank God Boeing lost the JSF competition. It would have been a loss for aestetes everywhere.
The old “If it looks right, it flies right” theory? There are far too many counterexamples of that either way. The F-104 was sexy but a killer, the X-3 was even sexier but a pig, the A-10 looks like a warthog but does its job beautifully, as does the aptly-nicknamed F-117 “Roach”.
The Boeing JSF lost for a number of reasons, and would have even it were more classically beautiful than the Lockheed design.
I’m not being cruel about the back seat aesthetics takes now, just wistful - an aircraft can be functional, reliable, economical, and still beautiful; but there does seem to be too much influence in the aerospace industry by people who don’t really care about the product as a creation that includes their souls.
To me, naturally, the best-looking airplanes are the ones I’ve had some hand in creating.
---
### Author:  [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/75 "2003-04-09T15:43:07Z")
Can’t believe I forgot to mention the Vulcan :smack: ! Gorgeous aircraft, I had a look over one at Baginton, Coventry, but was too fat to get onto the flight deck ☹
The Peregrine wasn’t RR’s only visit from the \*\*\*\*-up fairy; the Vulture was a disaster too, and meant Avro had to come up with a Plan B for the Manchester. This involved a slightly bigger wing and four proven Merlins: the **Lancaster**. The sound of those four babies warbling in harmony is worth the price of admission 🆒
Whirlwinds needed lots of runway too: I used to live by one of the only airfields that could accommodate them, Colerne. Sadly, though they used to have a good collection at Colerne, a Whirlwind wasn’t among them. There aren’t any left ☹
Oh, and I’m sad enough to know the difference between a Blohm und Voss Bv141a and Bv141b. (The b version had only half a tailplane, to give the gunner a wider field of fire.)
Let’s toss in a vote for the old “Flying Porcupine”, the Short Sunderland. Beautiful, beautiful flying-boat, an even more beautiful sight if you were on one of the Atlantic convoys. Pic, anyone?
---
### Author:  [@ChalkPit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChalkPit)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/76 "2003-04-09T16:08:07Z")
Talking of flying boats, the Germans did some lovely ones. The Dornier Do24’s were extremely graceful.
Yes, I certainly second the Vulcan too…
---
### Author:  [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/77 "2003-04-09T16:11:03Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Malacandra \*
> \*\*Let’s toss in a vote for the old “Flying Porcupine”, the Short Sunderland. Beautiful, beautiful flying-boat, an even more beautiful sight if you were on one of the Atlantic convoys. Pic, anyone? \*\*
Check the link I posted earlier. It’s got a whole _library’s worth_ of aviation photos–including the Short Sunderland.
---
### Author:  [@ChalkPit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ChalkPit)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/78 "2003-04-09T16:56:31Z")
Nice pic of a Do24
[http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/Do24-4s.jpg](http://www.luftwaffepics.com/LCBW/Do24-4s.jpg)
---
### Author:  [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/79 "2003-04-09T17:11:57Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Coldfire \*
> For slightly patriotic reasons, I’m partial to the [Fokker 27 Friendship](http://www.fokkerf27.nl/en/foto00_en.html). It’s not a great looker per se (though I really DO like its looks), but this plane has made an impact both on the Netherlands and the world. Examples of this model still fly today, mostly in Africa.
And they were flying in the U.S. within the last decade. My Dad was the director of F-27 flight operations for a small airline in the midwest. They phased them out sometime in the '90s and bought a couple dozen Avro RJs. (According to a website I just found, they’re the only U.S. operator of that type, too.)
Nice plane, though. I never got to fly in one, but I had a good look at one in the hangar once. They had one cowling off and you could practically see Frank Whittle’s fingerprints on the engine. And I wear my F-27 tie pin all the time.
And if we’re talking about beautiful flying boats, it’s gotta be the [Boeing 314](http://www.flyingclippers.com/B314.html).
---
### Author:  [@bernse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bernse)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2003, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166/80 "2003-04-09T17:12:32Z")
Actually, the Do335 Arrow was an amazing late warbird as well. [http://www.luftwaffepics.com/ldo3351.htm](http://www.luftwaffepics.com/ldo3351.htm)
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166.md?page=3)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/early-post-wwii-aircraft-gorgeous/167166.md?page=5)