The British Jet that was faster than anything ever built... the Vickers 559
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- I need your help to support the channel, but I'll get you 10% off your first website at Square Space! Click the link below!
www.squarespac...
NEW CHANNEL:
• Launched from the bigg...
Discord: / discord
My News Channel: / @aviationstationyt
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @foundandexplained
Patreon:
/ foundandexplained
My dad used to work for English Electric and worked on the Lightning. A great aircraft. I witnessed many times its clever trick of standing on its tail as it shot up into the air. Power to all!
Best brute force interceptor ever! Even ballsier looking than Crusader/Corsair II's.
Did he ever accidentaly took off in one? I heard that tended to happen.
And break the sound barrier in a vertical climb 😎👌
I had a 1960s fridge made by English Electric.
It broke, so I threw it away but kept the "English Electric" badge.
If ever I get an electric car, I'll fit the badge to it.
I've also got some "Hawker Siddeley" badges from an old fire alarm system.
Might make people think my electric hatchback has VTOL capability.
@@raypurchase801lmao
The English electric lighting had vertical engines tho??
It did. Where did that idea come from? Haha you are commentating before the video is live? Like I don’t know what to tell you
@@FoundAndExplained watch and find out!
@@FoundAndExplained it’s ok
Same here, and there was also the Short Sperrin, but it wasn't (excatcly) a fighter jet, was more a attack/bomber type, the "Jet Mosquito", and if it were french, I'd tought that was about the SudEst Aviation Grognard
He never said it was the only vert stack ;)
As a Brit stuff like this makes me proud until I think of how much stuff we COULDVE built but DIDNT, and it just irritates me 😂😅
Same here mate had it not been for red tape finance issues more like greed we could of produced awesome stuff. It's out politicians that make us look pathetic nowadays
Like concorde, never even sold one but cost so much.
@andythoms8130 Concorde* and do you mean wasn't profitable? As it broke even, Buyers included Britain, France, China and Iran however it was only used by Air France and British Airways due to taking a cut from profits to run the damn thing however Britain and France did "purchase" said used Concordes, similar to how Germany have to buy things from rheinmetall, they aren't just handed over
@@spittyboii still money poorly spent. Typo fixed cheers.
@andythoms8130 oh yeah of course, that was the main problem with a lot of these projects 😂 the thing is we had all these ambitions but couldn't see them through due to red tape and poor financial management
My Father was in the RAF and when he was posted to Singapore in the 60s we went with him. I started school there and my school was right next to the airfield where my dad was stationed. At break and lunchtimes we'd sit on the grass and watch the different types take off and land. My favourites were the lightnings,which would take off on full afterburner and land deploying their chutes.
I went to Changi Grammar too. We used to sneak out to the runway at lunch times. I never forgot the day when some dad skimmed his Shackleton just over the rooftop of our school looking for his son or daughter as we were having sports.
@@richardjones7984 I loved Changi and Singapore and would like to go back. I saw a video on you tube of the flats in Singapore City where we lived before getting AMQ and it's now luxury apartments. Places like the botanical gardens and Tiger Balm gardens and swimming at Changi beach. Such great memories. ❤️😊
Proposed just 24 years after the Tiger Moth first flew. That's crazy advancement.
Well, the Tiger moth actually flew and is still flying. This never did.
@@gort8203 🙄
@@Mk1Male I designed an airplane once. It would have been fast, but it never left the drawing board. I don't expect it to get credit as an airplane, especially as one that was "faster than anything ever built".
@@gort8203 How about the English Electric Lightning. The fastest of it's time by a long way and first flew in 1954, just 23 years after the Tiger Moth's first flight.
🙄
@@Mk1Male The Lightning was actually an airplane, unlike the Vickers 559, which was just an idea that was not developed. The point here is that proposals do not count as if they are worthwhile.
I went to a British base in Germany. They had Lightnings. The engines were vertically stacked with the upper one slightly behind the lower. I thought they were pretty impressive.
The F104 starfighter only obtained the record for fastest rate of climb by strapping a rocket to it. The EE lightning was acknowledged as having the fastest operational rate of climb without rocket assistance until the McDonnell Douglas F15 was perfected and it took thirty years for the lightning to lose its lead.
@@obi-ron The F15 "Record Breaking" Strike Eagle was stripped out to the barest essentials and the pilot sat in a wicker seat. The aircraft was chained to the ground and explosive bolts used to let it go. The test was carried out at one of the Northern most airfields, on one of the coldest days ( to get the densest air possible) and it was far from operationally capable.
The Operational Eagles were never capable of beating the Lightnings and the RAF called them flying Squash courts due to the large rectangular silhouette target they made.
Developments to the Red Top missile also kept the Lightning relevant during it's many years of service.
@@sichere didn't know that about the F15 claim. Thanks. The Lightning was and still is one of my favourite all-time jets along with the Harrier. A friend of mine many years ago had been a Lightning pilot who had an accident when, during rotation at takeoff, the explosive charges shorted and blew out the canopy causing him severe injuries, but even having endured that, he still admired the plane.
Just to add my experience on the Lightning was as an engineering officer aircraft damage assesor on Repair & Salvage Sqn RAF Abingdon. I was callled to RAF Binbrook to asess an over g (gravity) flight. I had a ready reckoner airframe element inspection that would tell me g stress levels pulled. An oil pump (acceess panel just below the port side of the canopy) had its installation intercostal diaphragm joining two sub frames which I used as a "not to exceed" structural fuse determiing levels of overstress. The aircraft max flying limit was 8g. BAe considered 10g would seriously consider it compromising safety of flight.If the diaphram had a diagonal tension crease it was 7.5g, if cracked diagonally it was 7.5 to 9g and if cracked and ruptured it was upwards of 9g. I read the pilot' s report and it happened flying off the coast (punching holes in sky) at the time he had a redout and when coming-to he had to make a severe pull-up just 100s feet off the sea. The local Cleethorpes/Grmsby newspaper received a call later that day from two rod-fishermen reporting that they had seen a rocket come out of the sea!!!! To support my assessment I found the tail fin had moved 0.25 inches from neutral but the upper and lower wing showed no signs of creasing. Lucky lucky pilot.
Glad you are keeping this history alive
I had an older mate who used to do what you did on Buccaneers. He reckons that the pilots were always overstressing the frames due to the Air to Sea and Ground attack roles.
As a cadet at Bovingdon, we actually dug in and from the side about half a mile away, watched Buccaneers come in off the sea and rocket attack old tanks on the ranges. We couldn't believe that our TA and regulars were deliberately dug in very close to it all to experience such a thing first hand.
Mate, can you discuss the Saab Gripen in one of your future videos? This Swedish jet deserves more love. Thanks a lot.
Why not the whole chestnut of SAAB Designs from the Tunnan over the Lansen, then Draken, after that my love forever the Viggen, and then the Greif ahhh Gripen. All very special and capable. Sorry for the slip of my Austrian tounge. But Greif sounds so much more menacing in German than small gripen...
Love it. This Vickers looks like something Gerry Anderson would make for Thunderbirds or Fireball XL5.😁
ahaha ! I have thought the same thing! It would have been cool in "Thunderbirds" !
Me three. Gerry Anderson popped straight into my head.😸
Beautiful. Perfect if used as "rocket ships" in a remake of Flash Gordon. I see the allure. Eliminate the yaw problem of two engines and simplify one engine asymmetry; reducing it to a minor adjustment/trim of the tailplane.
I used to watch the Lightnings trying to land in a cross-wind at Farnborough - some went around six or seven times and they looked very difficult to land at the very high speed necessary with the very low lift in their wings.
The wing has good lift but the tail is a sail, needed to keep the Lightning straight at high speed - to limit the effect of cross wind problems some jets have two tails - The Lightning also had fins on the underbelly for straight line stability.
There was also the TSR2 I seem to recall. Wasn't it ditched by the Wilson government? Let us remember
the jet age contribution to global aviation made by Sir Frank Whittle.
Yes, we invented jet engines, vertical takeoff, swing wing, hypersonic et cetera.
@@richardjones7984 Oh that was you, was it? Well done! 🤣
I probably have the same passport as Richard (UK), but I have lived in Canada for thirty five years, so I hope Canada will be given due credit for these inventions also@@TesseractPleiadesOrion
The English Electric was a phenomonal plane just in itself, let alone these other designs.
The EEL entered service ass an Operational Development aircraft and was tested out with rocket boosters. The conclusion was that the rockets added no benefits to the EEL and actually reduced it's performance having to carry all the extra weight for hardly any gain in overall speed.
As a brit we loved seeing them stacked.
There is reason for that. If they have to go one-engine there is no offset. The Lightning had to keep its electrical generator running but the other engine could be shut down.
I see the inspiration for Fireball XL5.
Agreed. But I bet it wouldn't have sounded like a vacuum cleaner.
Considering the interest from Germany and Japan, and the fact that its prototype was 90% complete, the concept was tested and proven with the Saunders-Roe SR.53, I feel the Saunders-Roe SR.177 (the predecessor of the P187) probably deserves its own video as well!
They are such beautiful aircraft. The Saunders Roe SR 177 is a favourite. Destined for great things, (it looked amazing in the Luftwaffe colours), it was scuppered by the Americans, as were many British aircraft by aggressive and often dodgy business dealings - With the odd bent politician and a general lack of cash thrown in .
The Vickers had missiles planned to be loaded on top. If I remember correctly with the Lightning it did receive external fuel tanks placed on top.
In one of my Observer series aircraft books a Lightning is shown with double rocket pods on top of the wings, with more below. Funny to consider it as a possible ground attack aircraft!
Just went to my bookcase - 1969 edition, the drawing shows one with two rocket pods both above and below each wing giving a total of 144 rockets - still with two Red Top and two 30mm Aden! (says export version)
@@PaulP999 The Saudi F53 - Apparently capable of mach 3 too
The Vickers Swallow was a beauty!
never been this exited for one of your videos befor
Would love in depth videos for each of the proposed aircraft in the competition
0:58 - "nearly built" meaning "rejected at the proposal stage in favour of two other companies' proposals (neither of which went ahead either because the Operational Requirement that they were designed to meet was dropped)". In other words, didn't even reach the mock up stage.
Indeed. Also the title is clearly a clickbait. Saying "was faster than anything ever built" when Vickers 559 itself was never built is simply dishonest. The name of this channel should be "Found and Hyped". I hope people don't tolerate being screwed like this, and vote with their feet, so to speak.
I love this guy's videos🎉
Expand the delta wing, rotate the engines, shrink the design... and you will see something similar to a British Aerospace EAP... that went into mothball for nearly a decade along with the SRAAM.
Sometimes i do get peed off that Britain comes up with a design, gets told no one will buy it or parliament saying it's useless and pulling the funding... and then seeing something similar coming out much later.
Infact... i may have just gave you a video idea ;)
Peeves me off British up themselves cancelled Australia building the CAC CA23 calling it entire junk and then they USA and Russia stole designs off it and used on their planes.
British always was a thief stealing from it's colonies.
V.559 never got off the drawing board let alone a runway.
This was another great concept, and like the British Aerospace industry was butchered by the biggest enemy of all in a democracy,………… its own politicians!! Makes me as a Brit still so very angry. Having studied British air defence since 1945, i could really issue here a list of shame. If somebody would like to see it someday maybe i will.
Looks like a double-decker of the BAC canceled TSR-2 fighter-interceptor.
This instantly reminds me of the equally insane English Electric Lightning... 😎🤟
The e e lightning Not insane at all.... It was Very successful aircraft!
@@georgekforrpv6857 Something could be successful but be completely bonkers. The world is built on crazy ideas.
Brilliant video! Thanks for posting.
Glad you enjoyed it!
SO with an engine failure it would pitch up or down slightly...
All twin jets have this problem, usually yaw instead of pitch of course.
One EEL pilot managed to nurse his aircraft home by altering the engine thrusts after he lost pitch control.
I was staying in Preston England in late 1957 when an English Electric Lightning broke the sound barrier over the town. I remember most of the stuff on the table jumped. My cousin was working for English Electric at the time and told us what had happened.
Love it. thanks for provide us free and useful information
Throughout the video, I kept on having this feeling that this looked familiar. Than it hit me. The canard layout reminded me of the XFV-14!
Requesting videos on the following:
-switchblade aircraft designs such as the FA-37 Talon from the ‘05 movie “Stealth” or the X-02 Wyvern from the Ace Combat franchise (the concept, not the actual fighters I mentioned)
-Super Tomcat-21 and ASF-14
-the NATF program as a whole
-early ATF proposals/McDonnell Douglas’ ATF proposal
-Sea Apache
-F-20 Tigershark
-Bae SABA
-Lockheed Martin’s Advanced Technology Bomber proposal
-Northrop’s proposal for what would become the F-117 Nighthawk
-Interstate TDR
-JSF proposals OTHER THAN the X-32 and X-35
-XFV-12
-Gloster Meteor
-the proposals that didn’t win the F-X program that spawned the F-15 Eagle
-Erado E.555
-model 853 quiet bird
don't forget mbb lampyridae
Four minutes of adverts for a 13:20 minute show. That aside, one of the best documentary's, on the Vickers 559, of which there aren't many!
And the Lightning? Same engine assortment except it actually went into service.
Just a small thing, but "radar seeking" and "radar guided" are very different. Radar guided missiles like the AMRAAM use the launch aircrafts radar as well as its own to find it's target. A radar seeking missile, like a HARM, lock onto the enemies radar signature.
Well quite, the description is obvious from the name.
Do you feel the need to explain (for example) that green balls are different from red balls? How cute.
@@Failzoid Well I only mentioned it because radar guided missiles were first referred to as radar seeking in the video. Check 0:32
@@__-fm5qv Yeahhhhhh, I take that back. I was in a pi55y mood.
Can you make a video showing how you make your animations. Especially how you model the aircrafts.
You should do a collab with paper skies
"Canard layout was too unknown at the time". RAF
Saab has entered the chatroom. (development of the Viggen started in the 1950's)
I don't know why some RUclipsrs insist on trying to pronounce 'Tu-' or "Su-' as 'too' and 'Sue'. Is that how Russians say them?
I don't know if the Russians say it like that, but it makes sense since Tu stands for Tupolev and Su for Sukhoi.
Edit: Do you pronounce MiG as 'mig' or as 'M I G'?
@@lonelystrategosMig, m i g is just too weird for me
@@Camilo_Z Exactly, everyone says MiG like that, so the other Russian aircraft design bureaus should be treated the same rather than saying 'T U'.
@@lonelystrategos yeah, i say tu, and su, it's pretty weird for me because "tu" means your or other meanings in spanish, my normal language
To think that some people still wonder where Gerry Anderson got his ideas for the Thunderbirds.
There were many amazing things going on in the 50s/60s the economic realities caused by the European nations failure to pay for their liberty was only just sinking in. They should have been forced to pay for the entire cost of the war.
@@womble321 They tried to make Germany do that after World War I. Didn't work out too well.
We’re the British working on a replacement for the harrier and sea harrier before they joined the US JSF program, there are numerous drawings of super harrier and super sea harrier type aircraft.
There were plans for a supersonic version of what became the Harrier dating back to the 1950’s. Sidney Camm had the P1154 lined up for both the RAF and Royal Navy Fleet Air Arm. It was Mach 2 capable and would have been a world leader. However, the usual European intergovernmental issues and finally the Labour Party taking power in the U.K. in 1965 saw the final cancellation of the P1154 project. At least we still got the Harrier.
@@davidpope3943 There also was the issue that the RAF and Navy wanted very different aircraft. The RAF wanted a VTOL Lightning while the Navy was after something like a VTOL Phantom. the P1154 fell somewhere in between and pleased nobody. Eventually, Hawker just went with an upgraded P1127 Kestrel, the Harrier.
4:43 Lol, you butchered all those names in one big strafing run, and then you said "Armstrong" correctly a few seconds later, wtf?
I noticed that too. Literally all of them but English Electric.
Love these videos, but sometimes it feels like he does the voice-over in one take, and thats it.
Could you imagine the maneuverability, and power of that jet, in the 50's!!!
Rate of climb 60,000 feet in 2 mins. Flying this must have felt like trying to hug a black hole.
All of these planes look like the fever dream of Gerry whassisname. The bloke who made the Thunderbirds - Which is a compliment, in my book. I loved the Thunderbirds when I was a sprat. Still do. Mad designs, lots of character and that Euro weirdness that 50s planes from the UK and France had. Most of the time, anyway.
I'd say Gerry Anderson would have been inspired by the lightning.
Britain went though a phase of absurdly fast, but lightly armed interceptors that were basically just the first stage of SAM system. The missiles homed in a radar return generated from a ground station - again, much like a SAM.
I've never heard of this aircraft before. Then there was the TSR2, built, tested, loved by test pilots, then scrapped by a Labour government (Harold Wilson) after all the money had been spent.
Because the US persuaded them to buy the 111 which would be cheaper and in service far sooner, which then didn't happen. The Labour government tried to cancel Concorde, but couldn't because of the contract with France. The UK was a founding partner in Airbus but the government pulled out of that as well. And the UK also cancelled the UKs satellite launch capability. The UK is the only country ever to develop satellite launch capability and then give it up. We only ever launched one satellite.
@@karlbassett8485We have had a long line of incompetent and borderline traitorous leaders, before we even mention Tony Blair 🤮
You never heard of it because it was never an aircraft. It was just a design, like many others that never made it off the drawing board.
The Hawker design just looks "right", almost looks like something you'd see today in an elegant way. In a couple views it looks like an F16 with a dropped (mid) wing!
Definitely see the Hunter influence.
It might be my old age, but that thing reminds of Fireball XL5
If you achieve O.T. 9 in Scientology, you'll learn that Lord Xenu has a fleet of space versions of this plane in the Intergalactic Spaceforce.
American arms manufacturing is backed by billions of dollars, but with a much smaller budget and population, Britain has relied on some of the greatest engineering minds ever. Not to say we haven't made plenty of gaffs but that has often been to government interference and political red tape.
We had Firestreak IR-guided and Fireflash radar-guided missiles in the 50s, but they were never "nuclear tipped"...
The Americans had one in the late 50s, but it was only test-fired once.
Such a missile could have been effective against the massed bomber formations seen in WWII, I suppose.
Apparently the boffins had some "instant sunshine" tipped missiles ready for the Lightnings to lob at any Soviet bomber formation
I see the plane, I hear Thunderbirds background music.
Or Captain Scarlet. I can totally see Cloudbase having a couple of flights of these to supplement their Angel Interceptors.
T.U. not too-22.
M.E. not mee-262
Do you do the FW-190 as fwa-190?
AH-64 Apache as Aaahhh-64?
You're on the right track, but it's details that make you better.
Technically, he's correct in the way he pronounced it. "Tu" & "Me" as I'm sure you know are the 1st 2 letters of a word. Whereas A.H & F.W are 2 separate words.
He's actually right. At least for Russian planes you say "Too 22" etc
Sad that the AVRO Arrow was cancelled as it would have met the requirements and actually flew.
Did you watch the video? It explicitly stated that Arrow *didn't* fulfil requirements.
Fascinating.
Excellent video graphics and editing.
Lots of efforts went into this video.
Well Done, mate.
The British Jet that was faster than anything never built... the Vickers 559
Rename it to The jet that didn't exist. "Reheat, now called afterburning" - Nope It has always been called "Reheat in the the UK", and "Afterburning" in the USA. The "Endplates" are fins, - When you say the didn't need a tail, you mean Single fin. "Ready to go"? - Stop saying "It could do xxxx, fly at xxxx", "It's performance & handling was superior to..." *None were EVER built.* A design that had not yet been built or tested can't go any height, speed, or carry any weapon, or show how good it handles. because it is just a paper proposal. Ready to go implies a prototype had at least been built & accepted. If you are going to make stuff up, at least attempt to spell, and pronounce the name of the companies involved correctly, learn the correct terminology, cut the hyperbole & *stop quoting theoretical performances as fact.*
Chill out dude. We can all deduce that it wasn't built.
Please be patient, I have autism
When will you have the video about naval version of the Su 47, the S22 come out? I am so eager to watch it!
Bit more research and a little less hyperbole would do your channel the world of good. Mach 3? No. Nuclear tipped missiles? No. Nice visuals though.
This thing looks like a mutated version of the 747 mothership’s microfighters
I think the Fairey Delta 3 had the most potential. An interceptor that size would likely not have been limited to just two AAMs. Plus, it had more development potential.
The Fairey Delta series were experimental aircraft, testing the delta wing and droop snoot later used on Concorde. The Lightning was deliberately kept small to suit its purpose as a pure interceptor, which gave it its astonishing acceleration, the ability to acquire and get on target over Norway. With the best radar of the time (Blue Jay) it didn't need more weapons.
This Vickers 559 was obsolete tech before it left the drawing board. With jet development moving so fast, rocket-assist was quickly brushed under the carpet. Jets became more powerful and more efficient. The Lightning could super-cruise Mach 1.2 and dash 1.5 without reheat, the first aircraft that could super cruise at all. On its first test flight in 1953 it was later found that the prototype had gone supersonic.
@@jeffslade1892 The Avon 302 r's produced 40,000 lbs of thrust and were fitted to EEL's that weighed less than 26,000 lb - Their performance was exceptional and capable of mach 3. The reports were that that the aircraft would keep accelerating until the fuel ran out.
@@sichere Yes, but the limiting Mach number is down to intake pressure. The intake has to be reduced to subsonic speeds. which is what the cone is for (besides housing the radar). The other limiting factor is the airframe, the Lightning could pull 9g although quite what that might do to the pilot is another matter. There are reports of Lightning intercepting SR71 by diving down, and unconfirmed reports of exceeding Mach 7 in a dive. The zoom climb was found to be the best method of getting to very high altitude, and having fuel left for the job. It was possibly called the Frightening because of what it did to soviet aircrew trousers. We know from intelligence report that they were terrified of it. Every time they sent the bears out they'd get a pair flying alongside. They might as well have had "shoot me" painted on the sides. Now the Typhoon does that job.
Nuclear tipped missile don't hit their targets; they just get close enough to go BOOM!
All these Cold War designs look really futuristic to me today.
8:48 the DH117 looks like a two engined F-104 starfighter
Harrier Jump Jets first used in 1969 are still in use to this day...
Over & Under the classic British approach on a brand new hedge...
Been an aircraft engineer for all of my life, and love anything historical. I have problems watching videos that are full of advertising though. How would a website advert be targeted at a historical aircraft enthusiast? Only watched the first 3 minutes before I gave up.
Fuel is not injected into the combuster. You said so, it's injected after the power turbine, in the jet pipe - Which is the exhaust, not combustion.
Its like a Gerry Anderson concept!
Looks like it's straight out of a Gerry Anderson show. Wouldn't look out of place in an episode of Captain Scarlet.
The British jet that was never built. Eugen Sänger designed rocket aircrafts before 1945 that would have reached much higher velocities like Mach 14. The 1961 version of the Raumtransporter would have reached Mach 7. However, from 1955 on the French Nord 1 and later Nord II Griffon, designed by Sänger, were really built and reached Mach 2,2. The French Sud-Ouest S.O.9050 performed equally well.
Hello Found and Explained. Ever heard of the Violent project? Everyone knows the DeHavilland Sea Vixen, with it's twin Avons - but what if it had Twin SPEYS? Although it would have a development number rather than a name, it was informally nicknamed the Violent, and was on the drawing board but.....😉
This looks like something I would make as a kid
AVRO (named from the founder) was an English company not Canadian, although the company Hawker Siddeley bought out the Canadian company "Victory" to create AVRO, they did have a wholly Canadian manufacturing premises, but Avros founder was from Manchester, England.
Yes but AVRO Canada is the Canadian arm of the company
@@CrispyPratt no one disputed that
2:15 lmao "Don't Post On TikTok"
Love the brain-bending Stable Diffusion images in this one 😅
Sorry, was there a video about an aircraft mixed up in that cr*p ?
The featured aircraft reminds me of Fireball XL5 - you either get the reference or you're a young 'un ;-)
Yet most of this work and design was before we had computers let alone desk or lap top units!
What a joy of a car
AVRO Was a British company they built the Avro Lancaster
Is there a video on the TSR 2? That aircraft is something to be hold i only got to see the empty husk.
The 559 is sick!
That things look like a military version of batwing
fully sick bro,subwoofer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Website in the 1950s?!!
it's like a Lightning and an XB-70 had a kid.
Vickers... is that the same manufacturer as the WW1 Vickers MG?
Yep, they made all sorts of shit, planes, tanks, guns.
The first part is a little misleading! The English were not undefended. The English Electric lightning first flew in 1954
Knowledge of aircraft dinamics makes this looks and probably fly's like a no 73 bus 😂
Wouldn't be the only one
This feels like BTEC Mustard. Is this BTEC Mustard?
The Horten Ho-IX; Gotha Go-229, and several other German WW II project, would have overcome the requirements in this british fighter sheet.
ngl it kinda looks like the XF-32 from the front
you can literally see the progression form this to the Lightning
"That's a J2-"
Thunderbirds are go!
@ 3:41 - What plane is that???? Very strange propeller!!!
The onboard tea kettle malfunctioned and the project was abandoned.
Saunders Roe SR 53 JET and Rocket also stacked