Someone tried to tell me the RAF haven’t used a single ugly aircraft from 1944-2025. Help me think of a few others..

[-]

f22raptoradf@reddit

What, no mention of the Nimrod? Thing looks like it took a massive beating from the ugly stick

[-]

longsite2@reddit

Always looked like it was sucking in its cheeks.

[-]

fart_huffington@reddit

That's just the postwar rationing malnourishment

[-]

fireinthesky7@reddit

Planes with cancer can still be pretty.

[-]

ctesibius@reddit

Are you thinking of the Nimrod AEW? The MRA was pretty elegant and a real loss.

[-]

HH93@reddit

‘Cuse me ! There was no other efficient was of defrosting a frozen Turkey !

Frigg out the ground switch, turn on the rear radar on transmit, throw a frozen turkey through the beam, catch a perfectly cooked turkey on the other side.

[-]

superspeck@reddit

The Nimrod is so ugly that it's actually pretty sexy.

[-]

SaunteringOctopus@reddit

Nothing ugly about it. The Victor is peak hotness!!!

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

Nahhh, Nimrod is sexy.

Recessed engines are automatically cool.

[-]

Traditional_Ad6611@reddit

Armstrong Whitworh Argosy AW660 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong_Whitworth_AW.660_Argosy

[-]

Revolutionary-Pin-96@reddit

Love the EE Lightning but the thing has the belly of a pig and a face only a mother could love. Olus look where they put the external tanks...

[-]

InvisiblePinkUnic0rn@reddit

The second picture looks like something Fischer Price made

[-]

Mobryan71@reddit

Lightning.

Supersonic airplane with a beer belly.

[-]

fuggerdug@reddit

Look, it might have had a drinking problem, but it could go.

[-]

Anytime you put the drop tanks on top of the wing you lose. While the Lightning could accelerate impressively and climb like stink, it had short legs and garbage IRMs. So IMO it’s just an ugly F-104 with much less interest in becoming a lawn dart.

[-]

Federal_Cobbler6647@reddit

But it is still wild how they managed to use 2 engines and did not get any performance improvement over Draken with one of same engines.

[-]

DazzlingClassic185@reddit

Ironically the beer belly was added to resolve whitcombe area-rule issues, and improved performance!

[-]

Radioactive_Tuber57@reddit

Thanks! I never knew why. Assumed it was engine plumbing related, or internal fuel tankage.

[-]

charlesflies@reddit

2 engines for max thrust. Minimal wings for maneuvering. Saddle for the jockey. Then, “oops, it needs a fuel tank”.

[-]

iamalsobrad@reddit

I was lucky enough to see some fast taxi runs a few years back.

When you are within 10 metres of a Lightning in full reheat you realise it is not an aeroplane as such; it is more of a giant 'FUCK YOU' to everything else.

[-]

NotoriousREV@reddit

Engine, wings, seat: send it.

[-]

BreadUntoast@reddit

Lightning 🤝Trust the Thrust🤝Phantom

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

Excuse me sir, this is an airframe positivity subreddit. >:c

Take your fat and/or alcoholism shaming to r/aviationmemes

[-]

UptonDide@reddit

My wife and kids gave me a model of the Sea Hornet, it’s pretty terrible with the radar system installed in the nose.

[-]

BoboGooHead@reddit

Vickers Valiant (the 'forgotten V-bomber' - for a reason!) Looks like something cobbled together in Cold War USSR!

[-]

Double_Minimum@reddit

I thought I would get yelled at if I brought up a V bomber.

I thinking that thing is weird, and the rest, they are certainly half weird and 100% half baked ideas.

[-]

Foreign_Athlete_7693@reddit

nah that's only if you brought up the other 2 (more advanced and more successful, i should add) v bombers......everyone knows that the Valiant (and the '4th' V bomber, the Sperrin) are fair game

[-]

BoboGooHead@reddit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vickers_Valiant?wprov=sfla1

[-]

Minute_Split_736@reddit

Canberra

[-]

t12lucker@reddit

Handley Page HP.115 might fit

[-]

dv666@reddit

That was a testbed. Not sure it counts

[-]

Hellothere_1@reddit

So is the Short SC1(OP's third picture). It's an experimental VTOL test aircraft.

[-]

KeyInteraction4201@reddit

I think the Short looks pretty cool. Though I'm not surprised that it never went to production.

[-]

Hellothere_1@reddit

It wouldn't. That thing pretty much screams pure tech demonstrator. First of all I very much doubt it would have any real payload capacity to carry weapons or equipment. Secondly, out of the 5 identical engines, 4 are mounted vertically, while only one can provide forward thrust. So you've got a VTOL plane that can't fly very well because 4/5 of it's thrust are devoted to hovering, but it also can't hover very well because it uses turbojet engines that are incredibly inefficient for providing high thrust at low speeds and would probably eat through the available fuel after just a few minutes of sustained hover.

It was pretty much only ever intended to prove that going from hover to forward flight was technologically feasible and to develop the avionics needed to do so. The actual airframe was always going go be a technological dead-end.

[-]

R3myek@reddit

That looks like 2 smaller aeroplanes trying to make aeroplane eggs.

[-]

KeyInteraction4201@reddit

Though with that intuitively discordant way of interspecies copulation.

[-]

fuggerdug@reddit

That's frigging awesome.

[-]

Specialist-Ad-5300@reddit (OP)

Wow I’ve never seen that one and I think I kinda like it..

[-]

ctesibius@reddit

It’s pretty elegant when you see it in person, other than the smoke box on one leading edge. The plane cost something like £200k, had fixed undercarriage, and only half an hour of endurance - which was more than enough for its intended role of testing a delta wing at low speed as part of the Concorde research. Apparently it was viewed as a great success.

[-]

cauliflowerandcheese@reddit

Looks like something out of Thunderbirds.

[-]

404-skill_not_found@reddit

Yah, that’s kinda wild

[-]

Minimum_Zucchini1572@reddit

I knew the fairey gannet made this list before I scrolled

[-]

Specialist-Ad-5300@reddit (OP)

Truly an ugly beast

[-]

KeyInteraction4201@reddit

It's the mole toad of aircraft.

[-]

murphsmodels@reddit

Don't forget the Short Seamew

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Short_Seamew_landing_on_HMS_Bulwark_%28R08%29_1955.jpg/1200px-Short_Seamew_landing_on_HMS_Bulwark_%28R08%29_1955.jpg

I've always joked that the British will design the perfect plane, sign off on it and send the prints to the factory. At which point some lowly machinist will ask "hey guv, where's the bloody pilot supposed to sit?"

So they bolt a cockpit on to wherever it'll fit.

[-]

KeyInteraction4201@reddit

omg that's ridiculous

[-]

jatroep@reddit

Puffin would have been a better name: cute but far from elegant

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

FAA though

[-]

IAmNotAnImposter@reddit

I don't believe the RAF ever flew the Gannet. It was purely flown by the Fleet Air Arm in UK service.

[-]

KeyInteraction4201@reddit

And who could blame them?

[-]

sunrrrise@reddit

I would say that it's hard to list not ugly planes, especially British ones.

Tornado? Hawk? Merlin? The list ends here.

[-]

erhue@reddit

not sure if RAF, but there's a stunning amount of ugly British aircraft from the inmediate postwar period.

[-]

stardestroyer001@reddit

The last one looks like a DH Comet with bolt-ons

[-]

fireinthesky7@reddit

That's basically the tl;dr of the Nimrod.

[-]

erhue@reddit

there's a good reason for that

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

guess what...

[-]

ComposerNo5151@reddit

Blackburn specialised in ugly aircraft, with just one or two notable exceptions! The Beverley was far from their most offensive effort. It looks like what it was, a big flying truck.

The de Havilland Dove shouldn't be in contention, it looked great in the air. On the ground I will concede that it looked like someone took nosewheel a bit too literally.

[-]

robbudden73@reddit

And it is not ugly

[-]

EffectiveConfection8@reddit

No idea what it is, but I like the first one.

[-]

OhWhatAPalava@reddit

Such a weird title. No one told you that did they

[-]

FavoriteFoodCarrots@reddit

The Whitley was still in service until 1945. That thing makes ugly sound like a compliment.

[-]

rly_weird_guy@reddit

2 and 3 is cute in their own way

[-]

PCPaulii3@reddit

The Bristol Bombay.. One of them was flown by my Grade 11 French teacher in '43-44.

[-]

chaz_Mac_z@reddit

You should have a photo of the Gannet sub hunter, with the huge radome under the chin!

[-]

Specialist-Ad-5300@reddit (OP)

Ugly as sin

[-]

Ceratopsia@reddit

The Sturgeon 💀

[-]

GurthNada@reddit

Honestly, many post war British designs were kind of weird. This is good, because at least that put some originality in the air, but apart from the Hunter, they did not have the effortless elegance of British WW2 machines.

For example, Gloster Javelin proportions don't feel quite right.

[-]

broncobuckaneer@reddit

Pretty incredible to think about how they pulled off vtol in the mid to late 50s with the technology of the day.

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

Gannet was FAA, not RAF to be fair, and the sc1 was a prototype never actually in service.

[-]

nxmjm@reddit

How dare you diss the Dove.

[-]

magnumfan89@reddit

The dove is a great looking airplane, but it's 4 engine cousin, the heron, isn't so nice

[-]

notepaddy@reddit

Australia said "Hold my beer" and added a third engine (DHA 3 Drover)

[-]

magnumfan89@reddit

I actually like that one!

[-]

Anchor-shark@reddit

How dare you. The Dove and Heron are both gorgeous planes. Although I will conceded that the Heron 1 with the fixed landing gear is a bit ugly, but the Heron 2 with retractable gear is fabulous.

[-]

cs_csanad@reddit

Agreed, two engines make it look so much better than four

[-]

Intergalatic_Baker@reddit

The Dove looks smashing to this day. Would def for need a range boost for today though. :)

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

https://tenor.com/en-GB/view/tom-jerry-bonk-gif-23808790

[-]

fuggerdug@reddit

Let's be honest, most early helicopter designs at best looked like a lorry cab attached to a bunch of scaffolding; they were all function over form. Plus I think the Belvedere is really cool, but it does look like they ran out of money as they built the landing gear.

[-]

Sixshot_@reddit

and the sc1 was a prototype never actually in service

Indeed, operated by the RAE not RAF, as with the HP115 mentioned below.

[-]

cromagnone@reddit

The Dragonfly was just a rebadged Sikorsky, wasn’t it? I’ll give you the other two: the Belvedere in particular is a deeply unique design.

[-]

cat_prophecy@reddit

Disagree on the Gannet. I think it looks interesting and the contrarotating propellers are always cool.

[-]

PowerFinger@reddit

Pretty much every British aircraft after the spitfire is very odd looking.

[-]

3_man@reddit

Start with the Blackburn portfolio up until the Buccaneer.

[-]

isaac32767@reddit

British esthetics are unique to them.

[-]

Useful_Razzmatazz270@reddit

and i agree with him

[-]

Glum_Variety_5943@reddit

The two that come to mind are the Blackburn Buccaneer and the Handley Page Victor. Good planes, but butt ugly.

[-]

Specialist_Pop_8411@reddit

Uglier than a bag of rump holes.

[-]

iffyJinx@reddit

Fairey Gannet is actually kinda cute

[-]

DaveB44@reddit

Phantom F-35

[-]

pdf27@reddit

Gloster Javelin and Supermarine Swift. All the ingredients are OK, but they add up to much wrongness.

[-]

Figarella@reddit

You forgot the Eurofighter 😘

[-]

S_Dakota_Kola@reddit

Muffin top, chonker, peen jet

[-]

joeyjoejums@reddit

Yikes. These are horrible.

[-]

Apprehensive-Soft573@reddit

The Wellington MK6 pressurized prototype and the ASW version of the Short Sturgeon are both pretty ugly

[-]

SquiffSquiff@reddit

I wouldn't call the Reaper (MQ-9A) pretty

[-]

Drenlin@reddit

That thing is downright elegant as drones go. Look up an MQ-5B Hunter.

[-]

irlin10@reddit

Oh come on Ganet is a cool and unique plane.

[-]

Pocket_Fox846@reddit

They are all of them, beautiful.

[-]

Thermodynamicist@reddit

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_aircraft_of_the_Royal_Air_Force

Mostly ugly because crimes against aerodynamics tended to have short, unhappy lives.

Airco made a career out of abominations which flew because the earth repelled them:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airco_DH.10_Amiens

Avro didn't always make Vulcans

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Bison

Note also that many of Wikipedia pages linked to above do not contain any photos at all. This may not be coincidental.

[-]

OldJim@reddit

They are all beautiful

[-]

Rocketeer57@reddit

Nimrod is the answer.

[-]

deserthistory@reddit

They made a plane with a greater than 30% loss rate, where one guy lived in a "coal hole" and its air to air combat tactic was "wait until they run out of gas then shoot them as they flee".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Havilland_Sea_Vixen

[-]

Double_Minimum@reddit

That thing is awesome it just seems it missed the period for twin boom jets. Or, maybe twin boom jets don’t make sense at all, but it looks dope

[-]

flopjul@reddit

It looks dope doing so

[-]

fuggerdug@reddit

Twin boom so automatically awesome and cool.

[-]

StandingInTheHaze@reddit

The Canberra is a bad looking aircraft. Bizzare wing shape, off centre cockpit, tail looks like it's about to fall off - overall looks like a child drew it. T.17A was especially bad.

Onto the FAA I think the Supermarine attacker is a frumpy looking machine. Fuselage too thick, wings too thin, silly little tail and it's tail sitting landing gear does it no favours when parked.

And of course the Westland Wyvern. No explanation needed there.

[-]

Muschina@reddit

"Your Honour, the prosecution rests".

[-]

DazzlingClassic185@reddit

Blackburn Buccaneer (once tarred with the epithet “double ugly!”)

Phantom (an admiral once suggested “ah, it appears to have been delivered upside down”)

[-]

duga404@reddit

There’s the Nimrod AEW3

[-]

farina43537@reddit

Beauty is in the eye of……naa they are fugly

[-]

Longjumping-Dog9476@reddit

Ahahah whole of english jets are ugly ! Vulkan, lightning, Harrier...

[-]

superspeck@reddit

The Blackburn Beverly and the Armstrong-Whitworth Argosy are really cut from the same cloth, and it was a particularly ugly orange and puce tartan.

[-]

murphsmodels@reddit

Anything Blackburn should automatically be put on this list. I think the ugly tree that everybody gets the ugly sticks from grew in their factory's back yard.

[-]

raven00x@reddit

I dunno, the blackburn buccaneer was pretty sexy.

[-]

superspeck@reddit

Except for the Royal Nosecone

[-]

mw71963@reddit

Fairey Gannet

[-]

Top_Investment_4599@reddit

Short Seamew

[-]

Sir_flaps@reddit

some might disagree but, I dislike the sea vixen

[-]

Corvid187@reddit

Perish.

Wizzos don't deserve sunlight anyway.

[-]

psunavy03@reddit

Guns kill . . . terminate, terminate, terminate. Guess you wish you had a second set of eyes checking six.

[-]

StonkDreamer@reddit

Surprising lack of Short Seamew in these comments (yes it was FAA but so was the Gannet).

[-]

IYFace@reddit

Outside of the spitfire & mosquito weren’t they all a bit ugly?

[-]

Artyom1457@reddit

The meteor has class

[-]

Artyom1457@reddit

We are not shaming anyone, since every plane is beautiful on it's own right. Now that we got the politically correct out of our system, the lightning. Fat ass British mig 21 wannabe. (I am going to be crucified for this).

[-]

Tenkehat@reddit

I love them, they are beautiful!

[-]

0utlook@reddit

These aren't ugly. They look like the inspiration for some stuff in VOTOMS.

[-]

2ndHandRocketScience@reddit

Avro 716 Shackleton Mk3

[-]

Hattix@reddit

The RAF has three of the most beautiful fighters in my opinion, the English Electric Lightning, the Blackburn Buccaneer, and the Hawker-Siddeley Hawk. Heck, it even used the utterly fantastic Vickers VC10.

That's where it ends.

The Short Stirling was a plane only its designer could love and the Vickers Valiant had everything going for it, until they decided to give it the cockpit off a B-47 and designed the wings after the description given by a toddler who had seen a Handley-Page Victor at Farnborough.

[-]