Departmental intransigence killed more than one promising design. Every single airframe modification was a move away from uniquity and one toward ubiquity. Every advantage was cancelled by the constant attempts to make it into a "looks right" plane, which moved the Skyrocket back to the centerline of fighter development. It thus became a mule- a racehorse designed by committee. "Oh! That is so cool! Now, can you make it look more like the P40?"
The fuselage nose back from the leading edge of the wing can also reduce interference drag without the need for complicated curved wing fillets. This is often offset by other types of drag elsewhere.
I worked 39 years in aviation engineering and also did some accident mishap investigations. The helo sadly kamikazed that airliner - it's mostly the fault of the helo pilot. When I went to the FAA aircraft mishap school they stated 80% of aircraft mishaps are pilot-related.
If you look at it just from the numbers, it is basically what the F/A-18 was. Two smaller engines coupled to a dedicated airframe with some aerodynamic novelties and a twin tail.
@@BenJamInn-q3oIt climbed very quickly. The Wildcat was "inferior" to the Zero, but shot down many. Proper tactics made the difference. Why not with this machine?
Typical that the distance between the propellor arcs is still about as wide as the fuselage. I assume propellor wash interference was a conceptual limitation.
The helo was head to head with the jet, with bright white city lights behind it and NVGs on. Really hard to make out what you are looking at in that circumstance.
Those RWT would be great for exploration vehicles where being shot at is less of an issue. But honestly, the Skyrocket is such a goofy looking piece of an aircraft, i like it, but i wouldn´t want to FLY it XD
@Ob1sdarkside good question, I can't remember. But it should be around 2.0-2.3 I think. When I started to have my first runs in the A6M2-N I tend to meet with one from time to time. Then again, I don't know for sure
I LIKE it ! Looks like a twin engine Zero . Bet it would have been a very agile fighter. I suspect navy pilots were biased against twin engine bottle rockets ? :D X
As the aircraft approached each other in a quarter view angle, the airliner probably appeared as a fixed object to the eyes of the heli pilot. Eyes quickly detect moving things, but less so fixed shapes that appear to be standing still relatively to pilot's eyes. The darkness and thousands of lights around may have made visual acquisition even more difficult.
It looks like one of those flatpack pieces of furniture where they keep supplying the wrong parts. And if they wanted w twin engined fighter why not just do a folding wing version of the P-38.
American supercharger quality in WW2 was actually quite poor....nost aircraft equipped with them had incessant issues with them.. The pilots werent allowed to go all out in the p38 as anything above 390mph led to the SC detonating.. thats why they werent used in the ETO and ones that ended up in the ETO were not successful
I don't find it annoying, it's a good visual cue that it isn't illustrative of what's being discussed. I'm sure if spitfires were being discussed and a picture of a hurricane was up, many people would point it out. Having said all that, they are a bit too dark. I'd say refinement is needed rather than throwing out the concept though.
Nice set of Dagmars you got on your plane there......the Jayne Mansfield of interceptors
Oh who wouldn’t deny the call of *HAWKAAA* when you see THAT plane?
Great video mate!
Thanks!
Been waiting on this one!!
Yoooooo skyrocket time!!!
Departmental intransigence killed more than one promising design.
Every single airframe modification was a move away from uniquity and one toward ubiquity. Every advantage was cancelled by the constant attempts to make it into a "looks right" plane, which moved the Skyrocket back to the centerline of fighter development. It thus became a mule- a racehorse designed by committee.
"Oh! That is so cool! Now, can you make it look more like the P40?"
The fuselage nose back from the leading edge of the wing can also reduce interference drag without the need for complicated curved wing fillets. This is often offset by other types of drag elsewhere.
I worked 39 years in aviation engineering and also did some accident mishap investigations. The helo sadly kamikazed that airliner - it's mostly the fault of the helo pilot. When I went to the FAA aircraft mishap school they stated 80% of aircraft mishaps are pilot-related.
If you look at it just from the numbers, it is basically what the F/A-18 was. Two smaller engines coupled to a dedicated airframe with some aerodynamic novelties and a twin tail.
Always a fan of the Skyrocket. With proper tactics it could have shredded the Zeros in 1942 - 43.
No it would not
@@BenJamInn-q3oIt climbed very quickly. The Wildcat was "inferior" to the Zero, but shot down many. Proper tactics made the difference. Why not with this machine?
The Skyrocket design was unique and to my eye its form is strangely appealing, perhaps more intimidating than adorable.
1:44 similar tyre/track things have been fitted to a few aircraft in the past
Typical that the distance between the propellor arcs is still about as wide as the fuselage. I assume propellor wash interference was a conceptual limitation.
Blackhawks!!
Now this is podracing!
Those Darpa WRT wheels tended to self destruct...
The helo was head to head with the jet, with bright white city lights behind it and NVGs on. Really hard to make out what you are looking at in that circumstance.
Those RWT would be great for exploration vehicles where being shot at is less of an issue.
But honestly, the Skyrocket is such a goofy looking piece of an aircraft, i like it, but i wouldn´t want to FLY it XD
The XF5U Flying Flapjack is frantically waving in the back of the class...
War thunder's low tier beast that sealclubs any other plane on its Battle rating. I was curious where it came from
Nah the XP-50 is much better at its tier compared to the XF5F
@@Badger_325they're kind of the same to me. But maybe you're right
XP-50 is the most OP plane in game rn
What tier is it? I've only started my aircraft journey
@Ob1sdarkside good question, I can't remember. But it should be around 2.0-2.3 I think. When I started to have my first runs in the A6M2-N I tend to meet with one from time to time. Then again, I don't know for sure
That moment at 12:16. I was listening to the video while doing something else and that memory of Patrick saying this sprung up. Same brain cell huh ?
It's amazing how quickly and easily people forget extremely important things. Even moreso with half-baked, expensive military projects.
Grumman is so conventional.... until they aren't.
I LIKE it ! Looks like a twin engine Zero . Bet it would have been a very agile fighter. I suspect navy pilots were biased against twin engine bottle rockets ? :D X
How much do one of those fancy triangle wheels those geniuses came up with cost?
Playing hotdog and forgot about the six feet of landing gear. Copter lost it's rotor, and that is all.
Hey IHYLS could you please make a video about the polish light bomber the pzl.p23 karaś?
PS it was the first plane to bomb Germany in WW2.
The highest speed the XF4u went 380mph tops.
And in a dive it went 422mph
...two videos in a day?!
Literally reinventing the fucking wheel.
Not really..
More like bashing aluminum like a caveman to try to make something
The chopper was at fault they should have been at 200 ft or lower, they where at 325 ft when they collided. RIP to the departed.
Apparently due to birds which they chose not to hit while hitting an airliner.
As the aircraft approached each other in a quarter view angle, the airliner probably appeared as a fixed object to the eyes of the heli pilot. Eyes quickly detect moving things, but less so fixed shapes that appear to be standing still relatively to pilot's eyes. The darkness and thousands of lights around may have made visual acquisition even more difficult.
It looks like one of those flatpack pieces of furniture where they keep supplying the wrong parts.
And if they wanted w twin engined fighter why not just do a folding wing version of the P-38.
Two smaller less powerful engines, but more drag. Wonder how fast it could have gone with bigger engines.
Its claim to fame was bringing Blackhawk comics.
Requirement of Twin engine under 9,000 pounds.
Good luck with that. When a single engine weighs as much as my mid sized car.
oh look, a pod racer. i swear this thing looks like something out of a comic book.
American supercharger quality in WW2 was actually quite poor....nost aircraft equipped with them had incessant issues with them..
The pilots werent allowed to go all out in the p38 as anything above 390mph led to the SC detonating.. thats why they werent used in the ETO and ones that ended up in the ETO were not successful
I get irrationally irritated looking at this aircraft.
The XFL haha
A modern tank couldn't move in the conditions of ww1. It would get stuck.
Adorable,,,roflmao. It is!
Please dump the annoying dark pictures between content.
I don't find it annoying, it's a good visual cue that it isn't illustrative of what's being discussed.
I'm sure if spitfires were being discussed and a picture of a hurricane was up, many people would point it out.
Having said all that, they are a bit too dark. I'd say refinement is needed rather than throwing out the concept though.
@@benholroyd5221 How about using a vignette in the corners to distinguish a transition between images?
Go cry someplace else!!!
Don't like it
The first 5 minutes.....why🤷
Too bad it wasn't put into production!