The F-100D Super Sabre was tested with an experimental Zero-Length Launch (ZELL) system that used a massive, detachable solid-fuel rocket booster, Circa 1958

[-]

Spiderkeegan@reddit

Why tf did this post get flagged with Seatbelts Fastened? It has nothing to do with politics. Feels like every post on this sub lately gets flagged

[-]

TheMusicArchivist@reddit

Imagine that in the back of a semi truck. You could just slowly transport a whole fighter jet anywhere in the world then when it's needed just launch it high speed undetected.

[-]

SVlad_667@reddit

Looks like something from Kerbal space programm.

[-]

dodo-obob@reddit

I plead guilty to strapping SRBs on planes to get them off the runway.

[-]

FIBAgentNorton@reddit

Guilty plea rejected. We’ve all done this. If you haven’t tried SRBs to solve your problem, you weren’t thinking like a Kerbal

[-]

Economy_Link4609@reddit

I'm trying to think of the use cases

Bring a plane in somewhere on a truck, then launch with this?

Launch from a non aircraft carrier naval vessel (like some old recon planes back in early days)? (Of course, most of those had skis to land on the water after).

Is it landing somewhere with so short a runway that it can land, but not take back off?

Just wondering.

[-]

I'm assuming "extremely forward deployment" in case of a vital intercept, like nuclear bombers. Possibly near one of your earliest/nearest radar towers, so you don't have to worry too hard about lines of communication slowing intercepts down.

In this case, I'd expect whoever gives the go ahead to "gain altitude, close, and prepare for intercept" has incredible authority. Of course, you might be able to radio the pilot(s, if multiple) later and wave them off in a false alarm scenario, but that's why you need a high-ranking officer making the initial call. Some random dude scrambling the "human-missile SAM sites designed to prevent undeclared nuclear war" feels like a bad idea.

[-]

Soggy-Register-1781@reddit

I think it would be if they are getting attacked and need planes in the air fast.

[-]

Economy_Link4609@reddit

I doubt this is really saving any time compared to a plane sitting in a ready box near the end of a runway. Pilot still needs to go out to the plane and fire it up before they take off - that's most of your time from receiving orders to being in the air. If anything this adds a complication to the process.

[-]

los_rascacielos@reddit

You can position them anywhere to be ready to launch and intercept incoming bombers, don't need a runway. Keep in mind surface to air missiles were still in their infancy at this time

[-]

Tomero@reddit

Its not stupid if it works.

[-]

FUBARded@reddit

Well...there's still a question of if the utility comes close to justifying the enormous risk (and I assume cost).

I assume this is for bomber interception where being able to take off really quickly is valuable, but how much time does this really save vs. simply scrambling a jet off the ground which is already really quick?

As a proof of concept it also demonstrates that a jet can be launched from a ship (that's not an aircraft carrier) or deployed from somewhere without an airstrip, but again, where's the real-world utility of being able to launch a jet that now has nowhere to land?

I'm sure there are some niche mission sets/applications where this would've/could've been useful, but it's still stupid (even if it worked) as evidenced by the fact that development went into more capable helicopters and VTOL aircraft rather than this concept.

[-]

Candid_Highlight_116@reddit

This is for intercept or retaliation after the regular runway at airbases were rendered useless for some reason. The base was nuked or special runway ruining bomb was deployed or whatever your Cold War fantasy case it might be. Then they pull the trailer out of the nuke proof hardened bunker and launch couples of these single use jets to keep the fight going.

The runways would be repaired in a hurry by the time they come back, or pilots would find somewhere to crash land, or eject, or whatever, but the part that they land and reuse the plane is not given a lot of thought(they would just land on the pristine base runway for tests).

[-]

Rampant16@reddit

It's more about the survivability, or lack there of, of airfields in an all out nuclear war. Early training exercises in the atomic era like Operation Sage Brush showed that all of the airfields near the frontlines where short-range fighter jets would operate from get nuked immediately. Therefore, the Air Force was interested in developing aircraft and technologies that did not require airfields to operate, like this rocket launch system.

Later VTOL jet concepts like Harrier were also based on the same concept of having runway independent combat aircraft.

Ultimately the problem was never truly solved, most combat aircraft still require runways. The hope would just be to scramble quickly enough to get off the ground before being nuked.

[-]

Steamcurl@reddit

Maybe they were big fans of the Doolittle raid. Overfly the target, punch out or try to reach friendly airfields on the opposite side.

Note, only works for skinny countries like Japan, Peru, Vietnam, Korea, Litchenstein, maybe the UK, etc.

[-]

Steamcurl@reddit

The UAE, Gaza strip, Yemen, Oman...actually there's a lot of conflict places that are skinny, come to think of it. Maybe I'm on to something here....

[-]

gromm93@reddit

where's the real-world utility of being able to launch a jet that now has nowhere to land?

Generally speaking, a lot of the pilots who were trained to nuke Russia, didn't expect to have anywhere to land either. Either because Russia was too far away, or that every airfield (and city, and power plant) in range would be a smoking crater by the time they got back. It's also the entire intention behind "autobahn runways" which was a deliberate design decision that had to be baked into the highways of places like Sweden and Finland.

[-]

ExoticMangoz@reddit

In an all-out war in Europe, there would 100% have been tactical nuclear weapon use and quite possibly strategic nuclear weapon use. Degeneration would be enormous and you simply could not rely on your airbases remaining in operation when intercepting nuclear bombers is so important.

[-]

millera9@reddit

Ok but hear me out: what if we put another solid rocket booster under the nose, facing backward, and when it came time to land the pilot could just fly real low toward the ship he took off from and activate the rocket and drop straight down onto the deck? His timing would have to be pretty good…

[I’m 90% certain this conversation actually happened at some point. 50’s engineers were nuts.]

[-]

Bubbly-Travel9563@reddit

Google RATO C130

[-]

bozoconnors@reddit

The c-130 (/YMC-130H) test flights for Operation Credible Sport were wild.

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

Credible Sport

That sounds like a Reddit username, just add a random number.

[-]

Perryn@reddit

Imagine someone getting u/Credible_Sport130 and having no idea of the significance.

[-]

Feeling_Inside_1020@reddit

"minor partial wing detachment and fire when implemented"

Probably how they wrote that down lol

[-]

PossumCock@reddit

The whole science behind that attempted undertaking was absolutely insane

[-]

bozoconnors@reddit

Maybe. I'd have paid money to be a fly on the wall for that pitch meeting though.

"Well.... can we like... just strap some fuckin' rockets on a c-130?"

"Hahaha!!! That's ridiculous!! Of course we.... wait..... where's my calculator..."

[-]

icecream_truck@reddit

That significantly impact center-of-gravity, aerodynamics, flight range, and maneuverability.

[-]

Bubbly-Travel9563@reddit

RATO C-130 is a thing that came after this, it very much works and the niche mission sets aren't as niche as you expect it's just that there's always a better option.

[-]

Glittering-Quote-635@reddit

I'm also skeptical of the weight they could launch at. IE, how much fuel is in that plane? How many weapons can it carry?

[-]

Pornalt190425@reddit

It was tested with a full fuel loadout and a nuclear payload

So for the time period, enough to be a threat to soviet tanks trying to roll across west Germany

[-]

I-Here-555@reddit

They tested this contraption with a nuclear payload? If true that's terrifying.

[-]

Pornalt190425@reddit

Doing something kinda terrifying with nuclear weapons is just another day that ends in "y" for the 50s. It was an era decidedly before safety was invented

[-]

Perfect_Big_5907@reddit

no matter the weight we just add more propellant. It WILL get airborne.

[-]

JimTheJerseyGuy@reddit

I’m pretty sure that there were World War III scenarios that envisioned pilots not coming back. Intercept these bombers as far away from here as you can so they can’t drop their nuclear payload on our soil. Not quite a kamikaze mission but close.

[-]

Pornalt190425@reddit

where's the real-world utility of being able to launch a jet that now has nowhere to land?

So in a lot of the WWIII scenarios being assumed at the time there likely wouldn't be an airbase to return to for any jet as they would be destroyed in the opening salvos of the conflict. With that in mind being able to spread forces around on the ground instead of clustering them at airbases has some utility in them being able to get airborne as the bombs fall on your airfields and launch second strikes or perform air defense missions to intercept the "third strikes" from the USSR. Theres also utility in the fact you could hide planes throught the countryside or truck them around at random so the disposition and number of your forces are obscured especially in the pre-satellite era

All the said the juice was ultimately not worth the squeeze and everyone went other directions

[-]

ReggieCorneus@reddit

They could easily do this today but it would be a special mission for sure. it is not good for mass adoption.

[-]

thediesel26@reddit

Until it blows up one too many times

[-]

Actual-Many3@reddit

Are they prone to failure? I always thought they're pretty reliable with the caveat that once they're going, they are GOING.

[-]

Candid_Highlight_116@reddit

I don't think so but the kernel of truth in this make-up is that one common failure mode of SRBs is going kaboom

[-]

Jumpy_Confidence2997@reddit

No the problem is the cost benefit.

Don't get me wrong, looks cool as shit...
Imagine 100 of them at the same time while firing ....
Black metal.

But, like... you could just have launched the plane a bit earlier yeah? like sure for an ambush, fucking amphibious rocket launched jets... would fuck hard.

But the amount of raw one time cash you're burning makes an aircraft carrier look frugal.

[-]

FighterJock412@reddit

No, that's just someone talking shit .

[-]

Own_Reaction9442@reddit

As far as I know none blew up. There was one where the spent rocket failed to detach, which ended in a bailout because it made a safe landing impossible.

[-]

Luknron@reddit

But is it working then if it does that?

[-]

happymudkipz@reddit

Burning money works to stay warm. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

[-]

kona420@reddit

The video makes it look wild but controlled. My understanding is that you have zero margin for success, everything must be perfect or you are dead.

[-]

LefsaMadMuppet@reddit

It is being considered for the CCA (Colaborative Combat Aircraft) program.

[-]

pTech_980@reddit

Engineers: “Trust me, it worked in Kerbal Space Program.“

[-]

Bullfinch88@reddit

Thunderbirds are GO!!

[-]

BannedAgain-573@reddit

The 50s and 60s, were just different

[-]

Folded_Fireplace@reddit

And they say your VW Golf pollutes the envitoment.

[-]

LordofSpheres@reddit

And guess what? Your VW Golf does pollute. Quite badly, in fact, if it's an older diesel model.

[-]

HortenWho229@reddit

I think there are a few more Golfs than there are F-100s that did zero length launches. I don’t have the exact numbers so I can’t be sure

[-]

LBBflyer@reddit

To be fair, no one was concerned about pollution in the 50's.

[-]

Folded_Fireplace@reddit

Thats true by hypocricy remains.

[-]

rvbjohn@reddit

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljaP2etvDc4

[-]

BrewCityChaserV2@reddit

Test pilots of the 1950s were built different.

[-]

thissexypoptart@reddit

There’s a dude whole volunteered to be a test passenger in a rocket sled testing the limits of human g force tolerance. The mfer sustained 40+ G with only minor injuries and emerged from the craft smiling.

[-]

ReggieCorneus@reddit

It is very common that the inventor or head of the project does the most "lethal" test. It is a case of "i do not bare to carry the guilt if someone else dies, it is my responsibility to take the greatest risks". Doolittle was the first to test if bombers can take off from a carrier deck, it was his idea to do the Doolittle Raid...

[-]

PossumCock@reddit

He was also the first to fly and land a plane "blind", aka using only flight instruments instead of visuals.

[-]

BannedAgain-573@reddit

This dude should be on a dollar or something. God damn.

[-]

toooomanypuppies@reddit

He was also the first pilot off the deck on what was a high sea state day while everyone was in a rush, due to having just destroyed a Japanise patrol boat.

Inspiring to say the least, no wonder people would follow him anywhere regardless of the risk.

[-]

TooEZ_OL56@reddit

The launch officer was also timing launches with the first waves too

[-]

DisturbedForever92@reddit

Noteworthy to add: WW2 carriers had no catapults, being first meant having the shortest takeoff runway

[-]

gromm93@reddit

TBF, they also had a 25 knot headwind at a bare minimum. High winds? Just makes a shorter takeoff roll!

[-]

AussieDaz@reddit

To be fair Stapp was the lead researcher not just some random airforce dude. He did the experiments on himself.

[-]

jakeod27@reddit

“If my body liquifies, be sure to write it down”

[-]

Zwangsjacke@reddit

Just a heads up: We're gonna have a superconductor turned up full blast and pointed at you for the duration of this next test. I'll be honest, we're throwing science at the wall here to see what sticks. No idea what it'll do. Probably nothing. Best-case scenario, you might get some superpowers. Worst case, some tumors, which we'll cut out.

[-]

Daminica@reddit

Aaaah, another day at Aperture Science.

[-]

jakeod27@reddit

Stapp: sick

[-]

superspeck@reddit

If you write it down, it’s science. Otherwise it’s just fucking around. - Paraphrasing Adam Savage

[-]

thissexypoptart@reddit

Didn’t mean he was a random person from the street but strictly speaking we’re all just some person

[-]

danit0ba94@reddit

46 Gs.....
So basically for a brief amount of time, his body weighed more or less 7,000 pounds.
Or your kilogram equivalent.

That is fucking... I don't even have the words.

[-]

Cunning_Linguist21@reddit

I think the word you're looking for is, "mental".

[-]

abscissa081@reddit

Insane covers it pretty well I'd say. Even more insane that people like race drivers crash and experience even higher. Obviously voluntary vs a crash but still. In more recent times Max Verstappen sustained a 51G impact and got out under his own power. But a couple years later he revealed he struggled with blurred vision and stuff after the crash especially when racing.

[-]

raptorlightning@reddit

Pretty sure some stuff in there bent that probably shouldn't have. I bet waking up the next day felt less than ideal.

[-]

imaguitarhero24@reddit

Something I recently learned about those rocket sled tests is they weren't acceleration or speed tests, they were deceleration tests. Specifically seeing if supersonic ejections were feasible.

[-]

aflyingsquanch@reddit

I know a guy that safely ejected at over Mach 10. He's pretty badass.

[-]

Deucer22@reddit

You know Pete Mitchell?

[-]

swift1883@reddit

Damn, one ‘r’ away from perfection

[-]

smarmageddon@reddit

And as a result, quite a few of the became un-built.

[-]

Epdo@reddit

They certainly weren't constipated.

[-]

Diarrhea_Donkey@reddit

Any time you have a test pilot nicknamed “Tex” you knew things were going to get weird.

[-]

SemiAutoAvocado@reddit

The Right Stuff is some crazy shit.

[-]

peva3@reddit

There's a reason so many of them became astronauts

[-]

Immediate-Spite-5905@reddit

that and you don't become a test pilot (and survive) without being a damn good pilot

[-]

markp_93@reddit

they just kept going up

[-]

swift1883@reddit

Wait, let’s ask Darwin..

[-]

-Badger3-@reddit

Those guys just fucking loved being strapped to missiles.

[-]

VulcanHullo@reddit

I read Eject! Eject! By John Nichol on the history of ejections seats with a focus on Martin Baker.

The OG Ejection Seat tester was some guy who offered. He eventually had to retire after getting his body literally broken by the forces he was subjected to, and the various accidents.

Meanwhile, talking of test pilots, Eric Winkle Brown who holds the record for most carrier landings and most aircraft types flown says the only reason he survived was that he was a little guy and during the crashes he experienced could crawl up into a ball inside the cockpit so the crumble wasn't so bad.

[-]

auerz@reddit

Global suicide rates going up simply because all the suicidal people dont have shit like this to do and get blown up at 23

[-]

exitcactus@reddit

What a truth

[-]

RatInaMaze@reddit

Chasing that adrenaline after dodging flak over Berlin

[-]

Blue_Etalon@reddit

Back when men were men and chickens had lips

[-]

hellfire_109@reddit

How many G’s?

[-]

SuperPantsHero@reddit

4 g of acceleration according to Wikipedia

[-]

ottermanuk@reddit

Not great not terrible

[-]

Crazy_Ad_91@reddit

YOU DID NOT SEE ANY GRAPHITE.

[-]

Diarrhea_Donkey@reddit

Go to the roof, see if there is a solid rocket booster.

[-]

dabarak@reddit

4 G isn't so bad like you said. I've experienced about 3 to 3 1/2, and fighter pilots often experience 6 or more. (I know you know this, just putting the info out.) I wonder how I'd do in 6 G. Not so good now, probably, but in my 20s it might have been pretty easy. Or not.

[-]

Kitchen_Clock7971@reddit

All of them

[-]

LiveComfortable3228@reddit

all of them

[-]

SlickDillywick@reddit

Yes

[-]

SordidDreams@reddit

"Your lung cancer is not service-related."

[-]

CouchPotatoFamine@reddit

My Dad flew F-100s for many years, and I bet you he never had a desire to try and do this in one.

[-]

kid_entropy@reddit

I contend that this is what they should have done with the f-35b! None of that lift-fan contraption, the marines could just shoot it into the sky on a rocket.

[-]

makatakz@reddit

So…launch it that way off the ship? Fuck everything else on the deck!

[-]

Steamcurl@reddit

This is how I build my planes in Kerbal Space Program. Good to know I'm operating on at least a 1950's level :)

[-]

Crazy_Ad_91@reddit

Wow, that’s a pretty cool concept I genuinely had never heard of before. Looking into it further reveals pretty easily why it didn’t last.

One was reliability that the booster would detach cleanly, which it did not often, thus damaging the aircraft.

Someone already mentioned the stress on the pilots due to the high Gs as well insane vibrations. But mainly Cold War technology advanced so quickly that systems like ZELL were deemed too costly and not advantageous enough to pursue and fully implement.

Setting up maintaining the ZELL took a ton of time and resources, which when warnings for ICBMs went from hours to minutes away, the risk wasn’t worth the reward.

Lastly, missiles advanced to such an extent that the need to have fighter planes able to deploy without a runway became unnecessary. When you are now able to fly farther or take off from farther away and shoot your missiles from farther away, the need to get planes closer before launching an attack was no longer needed.

[-]

A_large_load@reddit

They just released a mod for DCS with this too. Looked interesting

[-]

somewittyusername92@reddit

Not a mod, it s full fidelity model

[-]

fireandlifeincarnate@reddit

Pre-order's open, but it's not out yet, is it?

[-]

_PROBABLY_CORRECT@reddit

You should see the ones they slapped on the side of a Hercules

[-]

somewittyusername92@reddit

Someone's been waiting for the DCS release

[-]

altec777777@reddit

What's the use case for this ?

All I can think of is backup if your runways are bombed?

[-]

Difficult_Camel_1119@reddit

no need for runways, can start anywhere and runways are clearly visible for the enemy

[-]

The_Angu@reddit

I can think of one need for runways, other than taking off

[-]

discombobulated38x@reddit

In the scenario these would be employed in, the only other use for a runway other than taking off is as a nuclear weapon target.

[-]

ReggieCorneus@reddit

I never land planes in Battlefield, ergo: airfields are for taking off.

[-]

samnfty@reddit

Skill issue?

[-]

froggo921@reddit

The idea apparently was to station interceptors close to the border, have them launch like this to intercept and return to an airbase afterwards.

Also, this was considered as an option for nuclear retaliation, as they could be placed basically anywhere.

[-]

Delicious-Window-277@reddit

Rapid response to intercept incoming strategic bombers. Being able to deploy your fighter/interceptor in places where an entire base wouldn't normally be. Giving you a chance to place them all across the region without the enemy knowing about to catch their bombers off guard. Stand off early detection and interception.

The paranoia seemed endless.

[-]

Feeling_Inside_1020@reddit

Especially in todays age, i'd imagine 24/7 satellite access that can see your nose hairs and other telemetry options for 3 letter agencies, i'd imagine very little "we missed the satellite window and have to wait" happens now.

[-]

ProperTeaIsTheft117@reddit

Probably point defence interception at airfields and other locations. Basically get a jet in the air very quickly to intercept incoming Soviet fast bombers (i.e. we have English Electric Lightning at home)

[-]

froggo921@reddit

You could station jets in locations without runways and get them in the air very quickly.

Also, as backup including as a way to ensure the possibility of nuclear retaliation

[-]

405freeway@reddit

John Jack Whiteside Parsons never gets with credit for his legacy.

[-]

herdek550@reddit

I kinda love that the solution to every military issue used to be "just slap a rocket onto it"

[-]

Feeling_Inside_1020@reddit

or the A-10 lol

"See we have this big ass gun and need to design a plane that flies around it (barely)"

[-]

JamesHarvin@reddit

It screams fuck the environment

[-]

distantreplay@reddit

Thunderbirds are GO!

[-]

FreeBonerJamz@reddit

Imagine flying over enemy territory by yourself and then out of nowhere a bunch of enemy planes appear out of sheds like this

[-]

Ocelotocelotl@reddit

This is some peak Gerry Anderson shit.

[-]

Sixguns1977@reddit

You misspelled Red Green.

[-]

Tank-o-grad@reddit

I was expecting a title card, "Filmed in SUPERMARIONATION"

[-]

Malcolm2theRescue@reddit

Lift is for kids!

[-]

pickledjello@reddit

Anyone old enough to remember the Thunderbirds series from the 1960's?

[-]

betelgeux@reddit

The 50's were truly a time of utter madness. And if you think this is terrifying - imagine doing it with an F-104. Oh wait

[-]

dwamny@reddit

Imagine if they did that with today's rocket.

[-]

Perfect_Big_5907@reddit

Man back in the gool old days of iron balls. Let's strap that thing on and see what happens. Any volunteers? Whole room raises hand.

[-]

Razzledazzy@reddit

I love how this takes off like a paper airplane being thrown.

[-]

SundogZeus@reddit

Soon you’ll be able to try this yourself in DCS world.

[-]

tuxsmouf@reddit

Hum..It could have been more optimal with gears already up.

[-]

ARottenPear@reddit

It's also beneficial in test settings to operate in the highest drag configuration.

[-]

tuxsmouf@reddit

good point.

[-]

JodieFostersFist@reddit

The balls

[-]

aflyingsquanch@reddit

The 50s were just such a fun time for aviation.

[-]

abstractmodulemusic@reddit

Didn't Russia also have a MIG that launched like this?

[-]

snailmale7@reddit

Where land ?

[-]

satmandu@reddit

Obvious solution is to carry a solid rocket booster pointed forward for landing. /s

[-]

savageotter@reddit

Essentially, Operation Credible Sport.

[-]

satmandu@reddit

Yes. Exactly that.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Credible_Sport#Development

[-]

savageotter@reddit

My neighbor was one of those hostages. Odd lady with insane stories.

[-]

TaskForceCausality@reddit

Where land

Disclaimer: Landings Not applicable In Nuclear War

[-]

Tank-o-grad@reddit

RAF solution*; outer Mongolia and find a local girl to settle down with

*according to a story told by a former Vulcan pilot to a BBC documentary crew about advice received from his CO about what to do if they went for real.

[-]

old_righty@reddit

Regular runway?

[-]

murfburffle@reddit

They use another one, pointing forward

[-]

savageotter@reddit

Somewhere else

[-]

Volodio@reddit

The booster is detachable so the plane can still land regularly.

[-]

Spare-Builder-355@reddit

below them, usually

[-]

kiran_ms@reddit

Kamikaze

[-]

UsernameIsTaken45@reddit

Zero length land

[-]

_PROBABLY_CORRECT@reddit

So it Inspector Gadget's into a helicopter?

[-]

GirthyPigeon@reddit

Like a lawn dart

[-]

mxforest@reddit

Massive parachute

[-]

MidwestFlyerST75@reddit

Kind of funny the pilots didn’t trust the engineers that much: they’re launching with the gear down.

[-]

superSaganzaPPa86@reddit

It’s amazing that rocket had enough thrust to accelerate those guys with such massive balls. They must factor that into the rocket equation ratios of thrust/fuel/balls

[-]

MidwestFlyerST75@reddit

Every PPL learns the five forces on an airplane: thrust, drag, lift, weight, and balls.

[-]

Basic_Chemistry9499@reddit

Engineers: "But, you could just skip the rocket booster and take off from a runway."

Suits: "Shhhhh..."

[-]

patrdesch@reddit

One, maybe two planes can use a runway at a time. In the event of a masses bomber attack this system was meant to counter, even rapid scrambling of fighters in the traditional sense would be too slow to get the necessary numbers into the air.

That, and airfields aren't exactly known for their ability to dodge ballistic missiles.

[-]

DaimonHans@reddit

That carbon footprint 😨

[-]

Effective-Trust4440@reddit

Well we know where that idea came from. The ME163 Komet.

[-]

LingonberryAlert8773@reddit

Landing gear down?

[-]

oh_dear_now_what@reddit

Common on test flights of new planes, isn’t it? Maybe rocket + plane counted as a new plane in their minds.

[-]

-NewYork-@reddit

I'm infinitely thankful nobody added music to this video.

[-]

Unhappy-Flight6008@reddit

Her: my parents just left Me:

[-]

aviation-ModTeam@reddit

Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.

If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.

If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.

[-]

missingnono12@reddit

I've seen enough. Put me in one of these things in Ace Combat 8

[-]

aviation-ModTeam@reddit

Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.

If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.

If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.

[-]

ozarkfireworks@reddit

Why did I read this as F-100 super duty rolling coal?

[-]

aviation-ModTeam@reddit

Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.

This content has already been posted, or this subject has been covered repeatedly.

If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.

[-]

Clamps55555@reddit

How the fuck that solid fuel rocket launched those balls f steel I will never know!

[-]

aviation-ModTeam@reddit

Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.

If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.

If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.

[-]

Binary-Trees@reddit

Was this before or after the Rocket Assisted Stratojets?

[-]

ReggieCorneus@reddit

Rocket assisted take-offs are old invention, before jets.

[-]

Binary-Trees@reddit

Yeah I was just curious on the order these were developed. I looked it up, the Stratojet did get JATO first a few years earlier.

[-]

BigBlueMountainStar@reddit

This is what happens to a lot of male redditors when a woman speaks to them

[-]

aviation-ModTeam@reddit

Your post has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.

If you post in this subreddit, you are expected to engage in the discussion. Do not post images, links, or videos just to karma farm or drive engagement. Questions with simple or easily-googled answers are not permitted.

If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.

[-]

trendingtattler@reddit

Welcome to r/aviation - you’re likely here from r/all or r/popular.

We’re glad you’re here. This community is focused on aviation: aircraft, incidents, operations, and the people who keep it all moving.

Due to the surge in traffic, Seatbelts Fastened is now enabled and Crowd Control settings have been increased. That means:

Some comments may be filtered or require manual approval. Participation may be limited for very new or low-karma accounts.

This helps keep discussions informed, on-topic, and readable for everyone.

A few quick reminders:

Keep it aviation-focused. No politics or religion. No low-effort or inflammatory comments.

If you’re here to learn, contribute, or ask thoughtful questions - you’re in the right place.

Thanks for being here,

- The Mod Team

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[-]

Any_Towel1456@reddit

What was the solid-fuel rocket burning? Charcoal?

[-]

DifferentSetting411@reddit

you wonder, looking at this, why they went with the wheels down… Why not go all the way in and just do it wheels up?

Did they really think there was a chance of landing while that rocket motor was burning? More likely they would just punch out, right?

[-]

ReggieCorneus@reddit

The added drag might stabilize the plane, the power is all coming from a weird angle... I'm sure there is a rational reason.

[-]

SecretTreeHouse42@reddit

Bet that was an E-Ticket ride.

[-]

The3levated1@reddit

The german air force did a similar thing with their F-104s.

Apparantly those were not deadly enough as they were already.

[-]

seventh_skyline@reddit

That's some Thunderbirds level shit

[-]

nugohs@reddit

Gaijin please?

[-]

ozarkfireworks@reddit

Why did I read this as F-100 super duty rolling coal?

[-]

echo4thirty@reddit

This didn't work out so well for the Coyote.

[-]

cat_prophecy@reddit

Most of that rocket's propellant just turns to smoke after doing zero work.

[-]

Chase-Boltz@reddit

How's that???

[-]

mshipelevsky@reddit

Here's a picture of an F-104 with a Zero-Length Launch system that I took at a museum in Germany

[-]

mshipelevsky@reddit

For anyone who interested the place is called Militärhistorisches Museum der Bundeswehr - Flugplatz Berlin-Gatow

[-]

8cuban@reddit

Man, those test pilots REAAAALLLLYYYY trusted the engineers, who were some seriously deranged, mad-scientist types back then if the historical record of some of the hair-brained ideas they dreamt up is anything to go by. Fascinating time of Olympic-level innovation and no-holds-barred, "we're going to think of and try EVERYTHING!" mentality. Must have been fascinating as hell, though dangerous as hell, too, time. I'll bet the test pilots went to work every morning dreading to see what the engineers were going to roll out that day.

[-]

StaticSystemShock@reddit

They still use boosters for special takeoffs on shorter runways. It's not very common practice tho, more for very special use cases or operations.

[-]

Sh00ter80@reddit

Why is the smoke that dark? Is that typical for small rockets?

[-]

chrillekaekarkex@reddit

It’s so cool that you can see the attitude of the plane adjust when the wings start to provide adequate lift to fly, not just rocket.

[-]

Skilodracus@reddit

Anyone know the reasons this wasn't ever used? Did it blow up too many times or was it the G forces? It looks cool af

[-]

robjohnz@reddit

Coming out of that tunnel like a Viper from BSG

[-]

variablescale@reddit

Reavers!!!

[-]

Worldly_Ad_6483@reddit

Gotta blast

[-]

blorbschploble@reddit

Still a better idea than the F-104’s Zero-Length Landing system.

[-]

Tieger_OvL-I@reddit

bruh

[-]

deleted_by_reddit@reddit

[removed]

[-]

AutoModerator@reddit

Your comment or post has been automatically removed from /r/aviation. Posts/Comments from new accounts are automatically removed by our automated systems. We, and many other large subreddits, do this to combat spam, spambots, and other activities that are not condusive to the sub. In the meantime, participate on Reddit to build your account age and this restriction will go away. Also, please familiarize yourself with this subreddit's rules, which you can find in the sidebar or by clicking this link. Do not contact the moderation team unless you feel you have received this message/action in error. We will not manually approve comments or posts from new accounts.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[-]

gcalfred7@reddit

Air Force discovers the “catapult.” News at 11.

[-]

Laki1991@reddit

How was this platform kept stable during the first phase of flight, right after launch, when the fighter’s aerodynamic control surfaces were still basically useless because of the low speed?

Was it controlled by some kind of thrust vectoring / reaction control system, or was it just “whatever happens, happens”?

[-]