John Glenn flew one of these early in the program and was told by a young engineer named Chris Kraft there was a problem with the air intake scoop warping at high speeds. Glenn scoffed him off but Kraft was determined to prove he was right and convinced Glenn and Vought his data was correct. He did and gained the young Marine's respect who later flew America's first orbital flight under Kraft's supervision. Glenn also flew the Crusader on a coast to coast record breaking flight with a Kraft modified intake.

@andyharman3022

2 ай бұрын

Great info! I remember the Glenn coast-to-coast record was mentioned in The Right Stuff. I didn't know any background information.

@tomclayton6875

2 ай бұрын

@@andyharman3022 Mr. Kraft was working for NACA at the time.

@tomclayton6875

17 күн бұрын

Yes he was, but isn't it strange that Dr. Kraft would later become his boss as Flight Control?

I noticed several clips of A-7s mixed in there. While they look similar on the surface, they are very different. A-7 is shorter, slower, no AB, 20mm Vulcan on the left chin and didn't have the tilt wings, just to name a few.

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

Yes. Example at 5:35. Additionally, the A-7 was a subsonic attack aircraft rather than a purebred supersonic fighter like the F-8.

An old Marine Fighter Jock told me "The F-8 was a pure shipborne fighter plane. It flew on it's wing. A good stick could really make one dance in a dogfight. The F-4 was a barn door blasted into the sky by it's engines. But it flew like shit and and you had to be a genius to fight your own airplane, the enemy's airplane - and then live to tell about it."

i think they were mighty mouse rockets not mickey mouse

@52Megaton

2 ай бұрын

Here I come to save the day!

@tomdis8637

2 ай бұрын

Correct.

@paktahn

2 ай бұрын

@@tomdis8637 i thought so i have only ever known of 4 ground attack unguided rockets used by american aircraft from ww2 through the cold war those being hvar tiny tim mighty mouse and zuni

@maxasaurus3008

2 ай бұрын

Mk-4 folding-fin stabilized aerial rockets, aka Mighty Mouse -Google

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

The rockets were called "Mighty Mouse". Their functioning was so "Mickey Mouse" they were eliminated after the early models of the F-8.

The Last Gunfighter developed using a sliderule

I make it a habit to learn something every day. The F-8 went out of service as a fighter when I was learning avionics at NAS Memphis. I was surprised to learn of the Mighty Mouse FFAR tray--those were sealed shut in service as redundant. Thanks for helping me achieve my daily learning goal.

Clickbait BS-NOTHING about the Super Crusader pictured in the thumbnail!

@jackrussell7190

2 ай бұрын

15:06

2 ай бұрын

@@jackrussell7190 just the picture, but no mention about it and its outstanding performance.

@jackrussell7190

2 ай бұрын

@ There are a few videos about the Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III here on YT. Cool machine...😎👍

@stettan1

2 ай бұрын

​@@jackrussell7190and landing at 12:15

@wcresponder

2 ай бұрын

nothing about the exaggerated aft lower vanes seen in the thumbnail. Thus CLICKBAIT.

When you're out of F-8s...you're out of fighters. Performance and capabilities aside, the F-8 is one of the most beautiful aircraft ever made.

@regdor8187

2 ай бұрын

Hardly, F104 or Mig 15 can get more up votes....But, then again, I don't doubt our girlfriends draw different appraisals....

@blakegoulds8313

2 ай бұрын

Great airplane, ugly af. Awkward looking.

@GNMi79

Ай бұрын

@@regdor8187 The stubby Mig-15? It looks like a blunt with wings, to me.

The thumbnail image is misleading - I thought this would be about the XF8U-3, but that radically-upgraded variant is never mentioned, despite many colour clips of it in its day-glow paint!

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

Agreed. I was also taken in by the obvious clickbait.

When a fighter is so good the FRENCH buy it and use it for 20 years? You did well.

@bobharrison7693

Ай бұрын

Over 30 years.

Navy needs a new fighter but shows USAF officers sitting around the table :(

@GNMi79

Ай бұрын

He has that exact same clip in nearly all of his videos.

Robo narrator… where have all the humans gone?

@70baja

2 ай бұрын

Lol, right? "Engooyen?"

@tomclayton6875

2 ай бұрын

Agreed. I'm certain many narrators miss the paychecks they would have earned. They're not all highly payed actors like Liam Neeson, who, by the way, is a great narrator.

@dennisyoung4631

2 ай бұрын

“Ohm… Ohm…. Ohm….” - Robotic Narration.

@JZsBFF

2 ай бұрын

And you think that this is already bad? Wait until all YT viewers have become bots.

@user-ke1ys3pw5x

Ай бұрын

Yeah. I really hate this.

I'm not sure if the Author of this video realized that some of the footage included is of the F-8's little cousin, the Vought "A-7 Corsair". This was the aircraft that I specialized in during my twelve years in the navy, also aboard 3 Carriers.

@chonqmonk

2 ай бұрын

-and the Vought XF8U-3 Super Crusader...

Seems like you mixed in a bunch of footage of the super crusader. Also, theyre called 'cheek' pylons because they are attached to the 'cheeks' of the aircraft. Same for 'chin' pylons.

Best Vietnam war Fighter Jet for me.

"The origins of the Vought F8U Crusader" narration at 1:22 is matched with video of USAF officers. Ah, next we see a USAAF P-39 to illustrate that the F8U had 20mm guns. Seen enough of this!

@newdefsys

2 ай бұрын

I hear ya man. I made it half way and couldnt take any more of it.

Stupid robovoice and absolutely nobody checking the info or proofreading. The thumbnail was also of a different aircraft.

Wings Last of the gun fighters Vought F-8 Crusader

I served on the USS Ranger, CV61 aircraft carrier in 1976. There were a few of these on board still in service at this time.

Some of your F8s…. Aren’t. They are the prototype replacement that lost out to the f104. This would have been soooo much better with a human narration and accurate data….

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

I think you're referring to the opening shot - and others - of the XF8U-3 Supersader prototype which lost out to the Navy's F-4 Phantom, not the Air Force's F-104 Starfighter. The Navy wanted two seats, two engines and two sets of eyeballs aboard in spite of the fact that John Konrad, Vought's Chief Test Pilot stating that "the XF8U-3 would literally fly circles around the F-4". The F-4 was proof that given enough thrust, a brick building would fly... as an interceptor, which is what it was designed to be. Not a fighter.

Something oxymoronic about an ir missile being a beyond visual range missile.

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

Visual range is seriously degraded by the absence of daylight and the presence of bad weather. The 'Winder was good for about five miles, target's rear quarter only.

@craigwall9536

Ай бұрын

Not really. Can YOU see in infrared? I didn't think so.

Not too many successes like this plane. Design was great. Development went great, service went great.

Right On

My Uncle would come visit on occasion in his F8 He would light the afterburner over house then we would drive to Oxnard Air force base and pick him up.

My favorite military jet ever.

click bait

Hello. You stated that the Sidewinder was a BVR capable missile, it is not.

He is talking about the F-8 but the video is showing an A-7…. They don’t know the difference? LOL

The "Last Gunfighter" only had two gun kills. All of the rest of its kills were sidewinder kills. Just trying to get that out there because while the F-8 had a gun, it didn't use it much.

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

There was another kill with the guns used to finish off the target after all the Sidewinders had been expended. It was a combination missile/guns kill.

@shenmisheshou7002

2 ай бұрын

@@randykelso4079 Ok, two kills. Wow. The F105 Thunderchief had 25 or 26 gun kills. Hmmm.

While the F8 had a beauty hard to describe, it’s offspring, the super crusader; took on the appearance of a sword fish. Not so attractive as a fighter, but more appealing to fishermen I suppose.

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

More appealing to pilots as well. Speed is life. The mach 3+ design was still accelerating during high-speed test runs but that was terminated after the plexiglass windscreen began to melt. The maximum speed of the XF8U-3 was never reached.

my step dad was the first to recover from a flat spin in this thing; I think 3 or 4 failed before him. Needless to say he had a very long debriefing after that incident.

@bobharrison7693

Ай бұрын

We were told that while it was easy to spin, it wouldn't stabilize in a flat or inverted spin.

2:05 Guy thinking: What in the heck is this thing?

When the video gets to the North Korean jets the flybys are not Mig 15s , they are Mig 17s with the little radar nose over the intakes.

Mickey Mouse rockets? Are those like Donald Duck drones?

called "cheek pylons" because they somewhat resembled cheeks, the same way that earrings are called that because they somewhat resemble ears and headlight because they look like heads

I thought the company name was Chance-Vought ?

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

Chance Vought Corportion's name was changed to Ling-Temco-Vought in the late fifties (LTV).

Could this aircraft have been able to carry the ordinance of the simple F8?

@randykelso4079

2 ай бұрын

Trying to make sense out of your question. Is there a typo there or something?

Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III is not the same plane as the Crusader.

Synthetic Muzak not even up to kindergarten standard

Let's REALLY be honest: I didn't get past :07. The F-8 was NOT the last gunfighter: every US fighter today has a gun or gun option. The only fighter that was built without a gun were the initial models of the F-4. Sorry for the facts.

@blakegoulds8313

2 ай бұрын

They may all have guns today but they also have only 4 seconds of ammo and only use them as a last resort. Not in the same spirit as this fighter where the 4 cannons were the main armament.

@paladin0654

2 ай бұрын

@@blakegoulds8313 We could quibble about number of rounds, calibers, radar guidance etc......guns are guns.

@blakegoulds8313

2 ай бұрын

@@paladin0654 Yeah, they are guns. Which I believe in the F15, 16, 18 and also I believe the 14 have never been fired at, let alone shot down another aircraft. Obviously the doctrine is what they meant by "The Last Gun Fighter".

@paladin0654

2 ай бұрын

@@blakegoulds8313 My original comment was about the term "last gunfighter", that the F-8 clearly was not. If you want to quibble about fighter guns, find someone else.

@evo-labs

2 ай бұрын

The "last gunfighter" reference isn't to a fighter jet having a gun - it's because missiles were becoming the primary armament, and the F-8 was considered the last of the fighters that focused (initially) on guns only.

the j 57 engine was also used in the A-12 and SR71 Blackbird

@taproom113

2 ай бұрын

The first 5 A-12's used the same 29,500 lb class J-75 that powered the F8U-3 Super Crusader until the J-58 was ready, then those 5 were retrofitted with the J-58. All the rest of the A-12's and all the YF-12's and SR-71's used the J-58. ^v^

@gort8203

2 ай бұрын

The early A-12s used the J75, not the J-57.

@bobharrison7693

Ай бұрын

The SR-71 used a J-58, and that engine was considered as a future upgrade to the F8U-3.

@garyyoung4074

21 күн бұрын

Nope.....F-8 used most powerfull version of the J57 at 18,000 lbs thrust. More powerful than the often touted "mighty" J79 in the F4. The J75 uprated to it's 29,500 lbs for the Super Crusader/early A-12 was a BEAST of a motor. Now it's common for AB TurboFAN fighter engines to make thus power but a PURE TurboJET to make that was awesome. ALL the mass flow through the motor reached multiple sonic velosities in the exhaust, pushing planes easily to mach 2.8 or higher. J58 in Blackbird was a turbo/ramjet configuration. An AMAZING feat done with sliderules. My dad worked at PWA during this time. Smart guys!!!!!!

@bobharrison7693

21 күн бұрын

@@garyyoung4074 The F-8J, H and reengined RF-8G used the J-57 P420 with 19,500 lbs of thrust.

❤😂😂🎉🎉😢😮😅

What a lazy, BS video. For the first time I'm considering blocking a channel just because it's a waste of time. Why tell us about axial flow jets? ALL jets of this era were axial flow. Why tell us about the 20mm cannon? All fighters of this era had 20mm cannon. Why describe the Sidewinder as useful for engaging targets beyond visual range? NO Sidewinder, even today, can go BVR. Why would cheek pylons allow missiles to be "deployed rapidly in battle?" They're no faster to deploy than belly-mounted or wing-mounted missiles, are they?

You forgot about the Crusader III, even though you used some of the footage in your video. WTF? Get your shit together if you want subs and likes.