FA+
Shop
711
Views
Views
23
Favorites
Favorites
Category
All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 791 x 913
File Size 141.5 kB
Report this content
More from baroncoon
One of the areas I am planning to make a strong push into for my art career is aviation art. The problem is that I like aviation in general but I needed to decide on which era or type of aircraft that I really wanted to focus my energies on. Was it WWI , WWII, or did I want to focus on more modern conflicts like Vietnam? I was one of my roommates 
Rindis who made the observation that I really seem to be fascinated with the early jet era, pre-F4 Phantom II, so maybe I should start there. He is correct.
These are some study sketches I did of a F-84E that served during the Korean War. It was one of first jets procured in large quantities by the USAF in late 40's early 50's. It reflects some of the first tentative steps away from propeller driven fighter aircraft to jet power. As typical of early US. jet designs it does not benefit from the swept-wing research that Nazi engineers applied to aircraft like the Me262. Later the aircraft would be fitted with swept-wings like the F-86 Sabre and given a new name Thunderstreak but would retain the same F-84 designation.
One thing I have learned over the years is that you can often, but not always, tell when an aircraft, or most mechanical objects, were manufactured ,and by whom, if you looking for various key features and shapes. As new technologies, materials, and understandings of aerodynamics become available engineers apply them to new designs. Also concepts become "fashionably in " and a whole generation of will crop up with similar features. The F-84 in many ways encompasses more of the fabrication techniques from the last generation of piston engine fighters than with the new "jet age". It is composed of mainly simple curves and straight lines. Also it represents a time when jet fighters had not yet grown into the giants they are today.
Rindis who made the observation that I really seem to be fascinated with the early jet era, pre-F4 Phantom II, so maybe I should start there. He is correct.These are some study sketches I did of a F-84E that served during the Korean War. It was one of first jets procured in large quantities by the USAF in late 40's early 50's. It reflects some of the first tentative steps away from propeller driven fighter aircraft to jet power. As typical of early US. jet designs it does not benefit from the swept-wing research that Nazi engineers applied to aircraft like the Me262. Later the aircraft would be fitted with swept-wings like the F-86 Sabre and given a new name Thunderstreak but would retain the same F-84 designation.
One thing I have learned over the years is that you can often, but not always, tell when an aircraft, or most mechanical objects, were manufactured ,and by whom, if you looking for various key features and shapes. As new technologies, materials, and understandings of aerodynamics become available engineers apply them to new designs. Also concepts become "fashionably in " and a whole generation of will crop up with similar features. The F-84 in many ways encompasses more of the fabrication techniques from the last generation of piston engine fighters than with the new "jet age". It is composed of mainly simple curves and straight lines. Also it represents a time when jet fighters had not yet grown into the giants they are today.
Category All / All
Species Unspecified / Any
Size 791 x 913px
File Size 141.5 kB
Lovely. One of my favorites. I really enjoy transition-state stuff. Like Viennese galleases with ramming prows, rowers belowdeck...And cannon above. Or this and the Me-262...Jets built along the lines of old piston-pushers. Hybrids of technology, little micro-eras of overlap that rarely last more than a few years, if that.
Nice ^^ I have a kit of one on the growing 'to do pile' XD I plan to have the gun cover off on that one ^^
The foirst US aircraft to carry a nuke; but it was very poor...even by 50's standards; in Korea they were cut up pretty bad and had to go low level...thats where they shone ^^ They were the attacker of their day; still they took an age to take off...with needing fully sized or even longer airfields; the pilots joked about it having a dirt sensor which only allowed the aircraft to take off when it smelled the dirt at the end of the runway...so you better take a handfull of dirt with ya to fool it! XD
They were also fitted with RATO weren't they?
The foirst US aircraft to carry a nuke; but it was very poor...even by 50's standards; in Korea they were cut up pretty bad and had to go low level...thats where they shone ^^ They were the attacker of their day; still they took an age to take off...with needing fully sized or even longer airfields; the pilots joked about it having a dirt sensor which only allowed the aircraft to take off when it smelled the dirt at the end of the runway...so you better take a handfull of dirt with ya to fool it! XD
They were also fitted with RATO weren't they?
Yeah, they didn't jump into the sky although apparently their engines made a horrible screeching sound that you could hear for miles around! I don't know if fitted RATO/ JATO bottles to F-84's or not, but I do know that they used the F-84 for the early stages of the ZELL testing. Since that involved shooting airplanes off what look like modified SAM launchers I guess that would qualify as RATO launched!
By the way is it RATO or JATO? I've heard it both ways but I refer to it as RATO since it is Rocket Assisted Take-Off not Jet Assisted.
By the way is it RATO or JATO? I've heard it both ways but I refer to it as RATO since it is Rocket Assisted Take-Off not Jet Assisted.
Originally, the term was JATO for the rocket-engine thrust units; 'jet-assisted take-off' referring to the use of jet engines for additional thrust was not viable because of the low thrust of the early jet engines; as jet engines became the common propulsion for aircraft, they started referring to the takeoff-assist rocket units as RATO (the only aircraft that had _real_ JATO systems were the Avro Shackleton MR.3 Phase 2 and the late-model B-36 Peacemaker, which had four jet engines in addition to its propellors. The terms are both generally understood to be rocket-powered devices, however.
By the way, the swept wing on the Me-262 wasn't done because of any aerodynamic research that showed swept wings to have an aerodynamic advantage; the original design had straight wings, but they were swept back before prototypes were built in order to reposition the center-of-lift in relation to the center-of-mass after the engines proved to be heavier than expected. At first, only the outer wing section was swept, but after wind tunnel tests, the inner section was swept back as well, although the sweep was only 18.5°, hardly the more severe sweep seen in aircraft designed to have swept wings; in fact, Willy Messerschmitt had in 1941 proposed mounting a wing swept at 35° to the 262. His suggestion was not implemented, although the projected HG II and HG III high-speed derivatives of the Me 262 were designed with a 35° and 45° wing sweep respectively.
By the way, the swept wing on the Me-262 wasn't done because of any aerodynamic research that showed swept wings to have an aerodynamic advantage; the original design had straight wings, but they were swept back before prototypes were built in order to reposition the center-of-lift in relation to the center-of-mass after the engines proved to be heavier than expected. At first, only the outer wing section was swept, but after wind tunnel tests, the inner section was swept back as well, although the sweep was only 18.5°, hardly the more severe sweep seen in aircraft designed to have swept wings; in fact, Willy Messerschmitt had in 1941 proposed mounting a wing swept at 35° to the 262. His suggestion was not implemented, although the projected HG II and HG III high-speed derivatives of the Me 262 were designed with a 35° and 45° wing sweep respectively.
Comments