[-]

Bogeyman5@reddit

Part of the parasite fighter program. I purchased the photo below years ago which is from an earlier phase. Eventually the idea of parasite fighters was ditched in favor of in flight refueling.

[-]

BigTim425@reddit

"I swear Doc I don't know how it got up there."

[-]

jorisros@reddit

Airplane caught in the act of making small airplanes 🤣

[-]

HocusThePocus@reddit

Very cool, why do we have all props facing forward nowadays?

[-]

A forward-facing propeller works in smooth, undisturbed air. If the prop were mounted behind the wing or fuselage, it would be pulling turbulent, disrupted air, which reduces thrust efficiency and can cause vibration and noise.

[-]

It's called a channel wing. From Wikipedia:

Custer's summary of his invention was that the key to the lift created by a wing is the velocity of the stream of air passing over the wing, not the velocity of the airplane itself: It's the speed of air, not the airspeed!

A wing functions because the air over the wing has a lower pressure than the air under it. The conventional aircraft must reach a significant minimum speed before this pressure differential become large enough that it generates sufficient lift to become airborne.

In Custer's channel wing the rotating propeller will direct a stable stream of air backwards through the channel. A propeller will at the low pressure side normally be supplied by air from all directions. Since the half-tube prevents air from being drawn from below, the air will be sucked through the channel instead. This creates a strong low pressure area in the channel, which again generates a lift.

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

[-]

Aggressive-Hawk9186@reddit

this is actually very clever, crazy tho

[-]

The role of a propeller is to get the plane moving fast enough for the control surfaces to become aerodynamic.

Drones aren't governed by aerodynamics. They use thrust to fly.

[-]

themilkyone@reddit

100% agreed. To add a little more, turns out putting the prop in the very front helps keep debris from hitting the prop when something accidentally comes off of the plane itself.

[-]

yobob591@reddit

I believe pushers have some advantages in very specific scenarios such as prop driven fighters, but since we don't use those anymore you'll really only see pushers on novelty and stunt aircraft and on aircraft where a prop would be obstructing (most drones due to their front mounted sensors)

[-]

Killentyme55@reddit

One disadvantage of wing-mounted pusher engines is that type of setup would take up a lot of trailing edge space, which is needed for control surfaces like flaps and ailerons. That's not so critical on a wings-for-miles bomber like a B-36, but for the average light aircraft there just isn't a lot of room to spare.

[-]

BigHardMephisto@reddit

I guess it’s up to what you prioritize.

Mushroom5940@reddit

Planes back then actually all flew in reverse.

[-]

evthrowawayverysad@reddit

All I can picture is airline pilots with one arm out the window craning their necks at the tailplane like someone reversing a cement truck.

[-]

skippythemoonrock@reddit

you're good, you're good, you're good, you're good

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

Your post/comment has been automatically removed due to Low Effort. Continued posts will create a permanent ban. I am an automated system.

They had forward facing props back then. It's not like we used to only use backwards props and then switched. In fact we still use backwards props in some planes today

The two layouts you'll see are pull props (forward facing props) and push props (backwards facing props)

pretty_jimmy@reddit

jeeze. project mx -1016... pilots of brass balls i tell ya, image conecting wing tip to wingtip in air. just banans.

[-]

Icepaq@reddit

Brass balls is flying a nuke mission in an A1 Skyraider.

[-]

RizzOreo@reddit

Having to mate your plane with the B-36 from the rear (hardy-har) must have been insane.

It is an F-84 Thunderjet being used as a parasite fighter. The program cost millions then and took a couple years to develop. The first concept fighter for this program was the stubby, goldfish looking Goblin parasite fighter that was discontinued as it was very unstable upon recovery into the trapeze.

The F-84 was a workable solution for the parasite fighter escort system. Approximately eighty(80) F-84s were converted for this SAC bomber escort fighter program. I believe they were active for about 6 months and the program was scrapped.

The parasite fighters were deemed not necessary as ICBMs became a viable alternative to completely relying on SAC bombers as the primary 'war-waggons of the Armageddon'.

Substantial SAC bomber penetration was less of a factor in DOD's nuclear deterrent/threat doctrine.

That's my story and I am sticking to it. 'I did not have sexual relations with that woman'.

[-]

Counter_stinger@reddit

Its giving birth to a new gen

[-]

var23@reddit

When two airplanes love each other very much… sometimes they show that love in a very special way.

[-]

yaenne@reddit

Planes making baby planes

[-]

Kanyiko@reddit

This is a FICON RF-84K Thunderflash reconnaissance aircraft being loaded into the belly of a GRB-36D 'mothership'.

Originally, FICON - "Fighter Conveyor" - was a project that built on the Parasite Fighter concept, tested with the XF-85 Goblin parasite fighter. The theory was that since the B-36 was vulnerable to interception of fighters, it would carry its own escort fighter in its belly, and deploy it close to target to provide itself with fighter cover, and pick it back up on the return flight. The problem was that all of the turbulence around the B-36 made the picking up part of the whole experiment extremely dangerous.

With the advance of fighters, the realisation came that the B-36 itself was vulnerable to interception, so the move went towards an evolution of the concept: rather than having the B-36 act as a bomber, it would carry an F-84 which would carry a nuclear bomb, and which was faster and more difficult to intercept. The B-36 would drop the F-84 close to the target, and pick it back up after it had delivered its bomb.

The final evolution of the project was rather than having the B-36 act as a mothership to a nuclear bomber, having it act as a mothership to a fast jet reconnaissance aircraft. This was to photograph high value targets in the Soviet Union.

Tests were held in 1955-1956, but it was soon found that the RF-84K posed some real problems: its dimensions meant that a B-36 loaded with one had a very marginal ground clearance: if the RF-84K was carrying external fuel tanks, the whole combination had just 6 inches of ground clearance. Additionally, the whole 'picking the aircraft back up after completing its mission' thing still posed a massive problem - during tests, numerous of the RF-84Ks were damaged during pick-up attempts, and many other attempts were simply abandoned with both aircraft landing separately.

The whole idea died a silent death when Lockheed's U-2 spy plane appeared (entering service early in 1956). Its long range and high ceiling pretty much meant that it did everything the GRB-36D/RF-84K combination were supposed to do together, without all of the issues of aerial docking, so the plug was pulled on the FICON project in April of 1956.

[-]

Skorpychan@reddit

It's not even the most insane concept. I saw articles about mid-air rearming a while back.

Not refuelling, re-arming. Attaching missiles and bombs while flying, because that was the limiting factor on strikes at the time.

[-]

Kanyiko@reddit

FICON was merely meant as a stop-gap measure to overcome the most obvious issue with first-generation jets: early jet engines were very thirsty, which meant that pre-mid air refuelling, they had a very limited range. Meanwhile, the last generation of propeller-driven bombers had the range, but were slower than the new jets, making them vulnerable to interception.

Added to that, the 'nuclear delivery' FICON concept addressed the B-36s main weakness: it was simply too slow to escape the blast of its own nuclear weapons. If it had ever been called upon to drop nuclear weapons in anger, the B-36s relatively slow speed more or less guaranteed that it would be caught by the blast of its own weapons - something that would no longer be the case if it was delivered by a B-36-carried F-84 instead.

Obviously, the speed at which military aviation was developing at the time meant that by the time these tests were underway, new technology meant that the concepts were already obsolete.

By February of 1955, the B-52 had started entering service, so the idea of having a much slower B-36 carry a nuclear-armed F-84 no longer made sense. But RB-36s were still being used for reconnaissance over the USSR - something which became increasingly difficult as new and more capable air defence fighters entered Soviet service (the MiG-17 in late 1952; and the MiG-19 in early 1955).

Naturally, by the time the idea of a B-36-carried reconnaissance jet was starting to be trialled, developments made the whole concept obsolete. The RB-47 entered service in 1955 and the U2 in 1956 - and with it, the need for the FICON reconnaissance carrier B-36s was no longer there.

It's not even the most insane concept. I saw articles about mid-air rearming a while back.

Not refuelling, re-arming. Attaching missiles and bombs while flying, because that was the limiting factor on strikes at the time.

feathersoft@reddit

Wellll... two thoughts One - someone left a Starfighter out overnight in the bomber field ... and

Two - an experimental plane (think Yeager) is being loaded into its drop plane.

[-]

AvailableCondition79@reddit

Start tttt ooooooooooooo

I’m 5’8” and kind of skinny. Guy.

One time in my late 20s I was lucky enough to date a 6’3” redheaded woman with large, curvy, solid proportions.

This was before midair refueling came into being, they were experimenting with parasite fighter/bomber combinations. This was one of them, the FICON concept. They took a Thunderjet, lightened it, and mated it to a B-36's bomb bay.

There were other concepts. Tom-Tom with F-86's connecting wingtip to wingtip.
Not to mention the semi-suicidial Goblin parasite fighter.

See, posts like this make me hate this sub. We have an actual interesting photo and someone wanting an answer and despite it being answered, there's the 300 bullshit comments of the same lame ass fucking joke.

Where are the mods when you need them? They're so damn useless when needed.

[-]

Terrain_Push_Up@reddit

Shut it, grumpy grandpa!

Have some fun, here:

[-]

Turdiness@reddit

Plane birth. Rarely caught on film.

Here was have a rare sighting indeed. A female plane is giving birth. She has prepared for this moment for the last 23 months.

We’ll see when a daddy plane loves a mommy plane the kiss and then months later, a baby plane comes from mommy’s tummy.

Miscegenation?

[-]

Modified 1954 as a parasite for the FICON (FIghter CONveyer) project. Fitted with a retractable
hook in the nose in front of the cockpit, along with downward-slanted tailplanes. Delivered to
USAF 19Nov54. First flight Dec54. During a high speed test early 1955, the drooped stabilators
developed a severe flutter, resulting in damage to the tail surfaces. Republic Aviation for
repairs to rear fuselage. Bailed to Convair Aircraft Corporation, Fort Worth, TX. 3520th
Combat Crew Training Wing, McConnell AFB, Wichita, KS. 71st Strategic Reconnaissance (Fighter)
Wing, Larson AFB, Moses Lake, WA. Ground instructional airframe at Larson AFB, WA May57.
Mutual Defense Assistance Program. To Royal Hellenic Air Force. Returned to the USAF.
Donated to Reserve Officersï¿½ Training Corps Detachment, The Citadel University, Charleston, SC.
Traded by USAF Museum 1996 in exchange with F-4C Phantom II 64-0816. Stored by USAF
Museum at Wright-Patterson AFB, Dayton, OH 1996. Salvaged there in the early 1990s
due to extensive corrosion with being outside for so long.

[-]