I worked on some of these same aircraft in 1952. The F-80A's had manual starts where you just opened the throttle about 3/4 way and just threw fuel back into the engine and then waited for a rumble.

@neothechosenone1502

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for your service. I hope you're still with us sir.

Dad was a young 2nd looey flying the F-80's in Korea. Like all fighter pilots, he yearned to fly air-to-air combat in the F-86, not air-to-mud in the F-80. One night we had consumed quite a bit of tongue oil & he let slip that "a couple" times he attempted to engage the Mig-15 and was lucky make it to homeplate unscathed. When he retired from the AF (1970), he was flying the F-104. Things do work out.

My dad used to be a aircraft mechanic in Germany in 1950 and the F-80 was a real nightmare to work on.

@douglasrodrigues332

5 жыл бұрын

In what way? It was a single centrifugal compressor engine? Mechanically it was simple, but advanced technology was a long way off. The engine was such that 75% of the power is used to simply keep the engine running. 25% went to thrust. I never worked in those old engines, only on the more modern engines such as the J-79 in F-4's.

@ledenhimeganidleshitz144

Жыл бұрын

I was a T33 aircraft mechanic in the Air Force. Split the fuslage to change engines, what a joke! The tail pipe was long, thin and always cracking. It was difficult to service, except for tire and break changes. It was not designed with maintenance and service in mind. I could have worked out a major retrofit useing a couple of J85's, Williams TF or a number of other engines, plus some changes in the electronics bay for ease of service. It would have made a good primary or transition trainer and cost a lot less than some of the pie in the sky stuff they spent money on. That would leave more money for the real weapons systems.

There's something about early Cold war fighters that look so unique to me it's like they took a world war II era aircraft and bolted jet engines to them

What an absolutely sick looking plane. I love these things so much. The style just captivated me from the first time I saw it. Beautiful piece of machinery.

Holy shit is that apu an International Harvester power unit? Looks like the frontend of a 40s cub.

The "A" models tip tanks were hung under the wing tip. The later models hung from the tip of the wing. You can also tell an early model by the pitot tube being positioned on the vertical stabilizer , later under the nose.

@jimstrict-998

5 жыл бұрын

1944 contract #

The buzz numbers on the jets start with F, so it's 1948, the year P was changed to F. The red stripe was put in the insignia in 1947.

Warthunder brought me here

@Pablo-lh3zj

5 жыл бұрын

Elestro Air-soft jajajakaka this plane in the game is suck

@rextuller3498

3 жыл бұрын

@@Pablo-lh3zj nahhh its the best starter jet in the game

The 1944 serials mean they were ordered in that year. I also think this was 1948, when the 3 color insignia was adopted.

In some cases the two seat version is more succesful, which is the case with the F-80, because when the TF-80C was introduced Lockheed all of a sudden had a hot item on their hands. www.avionslegendaires.net/wp-content/uploads/images/avion_militaire/Gt33-2.jpg The TF-80C's name was changed into T-33 and is still flying today. The reason why the T-33 became such a succes was because of it filling a need for a Jet trainer and there were no trainer versions of the F-86 Sabre or the F-84 Thunderjet simply because they weren't needed, the T-33 was perfect for schooling those pilots. Oh and for those of you wondering if the T-33 had a soviet counterpart, yes and that plane also was a two seat version of a fighter. A fighter that every aircraft enthusiast knows about: the MiG-15. But whereas the world knows the T-33 and few know the F-80, with the MiG-15 it is the other way round, everybody knows the MiG-15 but not many know the MiG-15UTI trainer eventhough it had been built in far greater numbers and in service far longer than its single seat sibling. img.planespotters.net/photo/137000/original/n15vn-private-mig-15-uti_PlanespottersNet_137678.jpg

This looks like 1948. Airmen are still wearing US Army style insigina.

Wow

It really blows my mind to be reminded on how they started these marvelous aircraft back in these days. I hate the external fuel tanks on the wing tips; the only thing I don't like about this aircraft.

@jadendesveaux7452

7 жыл бұрын

Dbusdriver71 they weren't on all P-80s

@rubenbueno3926

3 жыл бұрын

Luego del despegue , lo primero que se consumía era el combustible de los tanques de punta de ala . Para proteger el larguero principal del ala . El avión quedaba en condiciones de hacer acrobacia .

@Dbusdriver71

3 жыл бұрын

@@rubenbueno3926 I understand It was just the way the fuel tanks were used. I prefer the F-84 more but still love the F-80.

They could drop those in combat. But the early jets had very short range.

I did not see,not present there,but a aircraft like this blow up under the sea in 1967 in Fortaleza-Ceará -Brazil beach when the pilot was upside down near the sea and tried to turn shocking the wing.Was terrible.I was 12 years old.

GE built the engine at it`s plant in Lynn Ma

@williamkennedy5794

3 жыл бұрын

Actually Allison J33 made in Indianapolis was the operational Turbojet that powered the F-80 and T-33. Come see one at the Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust in Indy.

@scootergeorge7089

Жыл бұрын

@@williamkennedy5794 The Allison J33-A-35 used was originally developed by GE.

crew chief had no hearing protection. QA fail

56th FG

Bolivian airforce

junky jets. F-86s were vastly superior.