Biggest mistakes in aviation history? Which projects should have been built?

helmutkohl

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2010
Messages
964
Reaction score
1,668
Japan
Original Mitsubishi F-2,
Do you have a picture or description of this?
Here is a 1987 model from Mitsubishi of their FSX, as what the F-2 was known before

origin_1.jpg


source: https://nordot.app/432476021603222625
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
5,351
Reaction score
4,726
Website
www.amazon.com
Lill Draken (Light fighter version)
 

Attachments

  • saab210-2.gif
    saab210-2.gif
    550.2 KB · Views: 30
  • Saab_210_final_3-view.jpg
    Saab_210_final_3-view.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 25
  • e256ded373e1532642a4e0e7917e53ce.jpg
    e256ded373e1532642a4e0e7917e53ce.jpg
    406.3 KB · Views: 23
  • 6267L.jpg
    6267L.jpg
    36.5 KB · Views: 20
  • saab210.jpg
    saab210.jpg
    27.3 KB · Views: 23

Elan Vital

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
25
Reaction score
22
I'm of the opinion that even if it wasn't suitable for long-term Army needs, the Bell 309 Kingcobra would have been preferable for new production than plain AH-1S variants. There is still a lot of commonality between AH-1Gs converted into AH-1Ses and the Kingcobra, but the latter offered a real night attack capability on top of generally improved performance in other parameters.

Considering we are talking about potentially some 609 airframes (production AH-1S series, Japanese AH-1 and production AH-1W), I think it could easily be financially justified. Moreso since the Apache didn't enter service until about 1984. That's excluding the AH-1T which itself reused many components of the Kingcobra.
 

royabulgaf

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
559
Reaction score
154
What if?
During the 1970s, two or more light-weight fighter programs combined their efforts to put one into production.
Yugoslavian Novi Avion, Israeli Lavi, Swiss Pirana, South African early single-engined Carver, etc,
Then more smaller nations could afford to field decent numbers of interceptors with a secondary role of ground attack/scaring citizens into complying with the gov't.
Hmm- SA at that time was a political pariah, and Switzerland and Yugoslavia wouldn't touch them. That leaves Israel to pair up with SA. Clearly some joint work was done here and there, but this was a fairly public project, with US technical assistance and money that would dry up if Israel joined up with SA. I think Switzerland and Yugoslavia would be too fussy to deal with Israel, which also has US strings attached to the Lavi project. Yugoslavia was working at that time with a Jaguar equivalent with Romania, and IIRC Romania was working on something along the Novi lines. Actually a Swiss/Swede co-design would make more sense, as both have similar defense scenarios.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,706
Reaction score
1,167
Lill Draken (Light fighter version)
Minor correction: Lill; Draken was built and flown as a sub-scale prototype to confirm the aerodynamic configuration of the full-scale Draken's double delta wing. Note how the early Lill has a very short nose radome, barely outside the engine intake, while the later version had a regular radome more like contemporary fighters.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
1,706
Reaction score
1,167
I'm of the opinion that even if it wasn't suitable for long-term Army needs, the Bell 309 Kingcobra would have been preferable for new production than plain AH-1S variants. There is still a lot of commonality between AH-1Gs converted into AH-1Ses and the Kingcobra, but the latter offered a real night attack capability on top of generally improved performance in other parameters.

Considering we are talking about potentially some 609 airframes (production AH-1S series, Japanese AH-1 and production AH-1W), I think it could easily be financially justified. Moreso since the Apache didn't enter service until about 1984. That's excluding the AH-1T which itself reused many components of the Kingcobra.

King cobra would have been most valuable to small air forces that could barely afford one type of helicopter. If Bell built a cargo and passenger carrying UH-1? that shared the same dynamic components as Kingcobra, it would greatly ease logistics, training and maintenance for a cash-strapped small air force..
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
6,341
I'm of the opinion that even if it wasn't suitable for long-term Army needs, the Bell 309 Kingcobra would have been preferable for new production than plain AH-1S variants. There is still a lot of commonality between AH-1Gs converted into AH-1Ses and the Kingcobra, but the latter offered a real night attack capability on top of generally improved performance in other parameters.

Considering we are talking about potentially some 609 airframes (production AH-1S series, Japanese AH-1 and production AH-1W), I think it could easily be financially justified. Moreso since the Apache didn't enter service until about 1984. That's excluding the AH-1T which itself reused many components of the Kingcobra.

Which bring us back (once again) to the Cheyenne, CAS USAF vs Army turf war of the 60's.
Which led to
- AH-56 Cheyenne
- AH-1 Cobra
- A-10
-YA-9
-Bell 309
- Sikorsky S-67
- YAH-63
- AH-64
- A-7F
-A-10B
-AF-16
All this because USAF was only sure about two things, related to CAS
- It can't be an helicopter
- We must piss the Army

Every single entry in that list was a fine flying machine (except the F-16 gun pod). And a lot of them ended wasted at great taxpayer dollar expense...
 

iverson

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 24, 2009
Messages
543
Reaction score
462
How about the decision to destroy the production tooling for the A-10? With a higher thrust engine, state-of-the-art FLIR and MANPDS countermeasures, it could remain a central part of the Air Force mission for at least another 2o years (which was, of course, exactly why the tooling was scrapped).
 

Conspirator

CLEARANCE: L5
Joined
Jan 14, 2021
Messages
232
Reaction score
86
Lill Draken (Light fighter version)
for some reason i do not see this having hardly any pulling-up-quick capabilities.... (sorry that was blunt.) i see this with the leading edge pulled back and having canards like a Chengdu. it would outperform even an F/A-18
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,155
Reaction score
690
I'm of the opinion that even if it wasn't suitable for long-term Army needs, the Bell 309 Kingcobra would have been preferable for new production than plain AH-1S variants. There is still a lot of commonality between AH-1Gs converted into AH-1Ses and the Kingcobra, but the latter offered a real night attack capability on top of generally improved performance in other parameters.

Considering we are talking about potentially some 609 airframes (production AH-1S series, Japanese AH-1 and production AH-1W), I think it could easily be financially justified. Moreso since the Apache didn't enter service until about 1984. That's excluding the AH-1T which itself reused many components of the Kingcobra.

Which bring us back (once again) to the Cheyenne, CAS USAF vs Army turf war of the 60's.
Which led to
- AH-56 Cheyenne
- AH-1 Cobra
- A-10
-YA-9
-Bell 309
- Sikorsky S-67
- YAH-63
- AH-64
- A-7F
-A-10B
-AF-16
All this because USAF was only sure about two things, related to CAS
- It can't be an helicopter
- We must piss the Army

Every single entry in that list was a fine flying machine (except the F-16 gun pod). And a lot of them ended wasted at great taxpayer dollar expense...
In which case Archibald, could your list also include the either the Fiat G.91/Northrop N-156F (F-5A)/Douglas A4D-2N?

Regards
Pioneer
 
Last edited:

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,347
Reaction score
6,341
I'm of the opinion that even if it wasn't suitable for long-term Army needs, the Bell 309 Kingcobra would have been preferable for new production than plain AH-1S variants. There is still a lot of commonality between AH-1Gs converted into AH-1Ses and the Kingcobra, but the latter offered a real night attack capability on top of generally improved performance in other parameters.

Considering we are talking about potentially some 609 airframes (production AH-1S series, Japanese AH-1 and production AH-1W), I think it could easily be financially justified. Moreso since the Apache didn't enter service until about 1984. That's excluding the AH-1T which itself reused many components of the Kingcobra.

Which bring us back (once again) to the Cheyenne, CAS USAF vs Army turf war of the 60's.
Which led to
- AH-56 Cheyenne
- AH-1 Cobra
- A-10
-YA-9
-Bell 309
- Sikorsky S-67
- YAH-63
- AH-64
- A-7F
-A-10B
-AF-16
All this because USAF was only sure about two things, related to CAS
- It can't be an helicopter
- We must piss the Army

Every single entry in that list was a fine flying machine (except the F-16 gun pod). And a lot of them ended wasted at great taxpayer dollar expense...
In which case Archibald, could you list also include the either the Fiat G.91/Northrop N-156F (F-5A)/Douglas A4D-2N?

Regards
Pioneer
I use to say: the more, the merrier
 

Similar threads

Top