The 747 Shuttle Carrier Aircraft was pretty impressive, but was chosen at the expense of a far more adventurous plan. The losing contender was the Twin Fuselage C-5, which would have been a spectacular monster. This design would have been a far riskier proposition than the relatively unmodified 747- though it would have been a truly incredible sight.

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

The RAF’s most advanced interceptor in the 1980s and ’90s was the Tornado Air Defence Variant. In creating a ‘fighter’ based on a bomber, the programme went against received wisdom. The result was a deeply controversial interceptor. The initial model was the F2 which entered service in 1985, this was followed by the F3 (all images in this article: Copyright David Gledhill)

During the Cold War, Britain’s greatest fear was an attack from the Soviet Union. The communist superpower was equipped with a vast armada of heavy bombers capable of delivering nuclear armageddon to the United Kingdom hundreds of times over. Against this potential annihilation stood a force of RAF interceptors. In charge of the weapon systems of these supersonic guardians was a team of highly-trained Navigators. Hush-Kit spoke to former RAF Navigator David Gledhill to find out more.  

Save the Hush-Kit blog. This site is in peril, we are far behind our funding targets. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. 

The Tornado F2 has a very bad reputation – would you have been confident to take it to war?

David Gledhill: “The initial operational standard of F2 delivered into service deserved its poor reputation, was under-developed and inadequately tested. There were many issues shortly after delivery including operational clearances. The F2 was not declared to NATO until 31 December 1986 and at that time its capability was marginal. It was, however, a very effective weapons platform from the outset and the missiles and gun performed well.

The Foxhunter radar was delivered late and for some months F2s operated carrying a ballast in the nose in lieu of the radar. It simply did not work effectively. There were problems with poor target tracking in track-while-scan mode and the software design and interface with the navigator who controlled the radar was poor adding significantly to the workload. For many years the navigator had to make up for equipment and software deficiencies using work around procedures. The fact it only carried two Sidewinders was quickly rectified with delivery of the F3.”

Was the Tornado inferior to the F-4 Phantom* in any respects?

“The F2 and, subsequently, the F3 was generally better that the Phantom in most areas, (including performance, avionics and weapons) apart from the the high level subsonic performance, particularly when heavily loaded with weapons and fuel tanks. The big issue was that most of the improvements in the early years were not a quantum improvement and it lagged its peers. It took about 10 years to field a weapon system standard which met the original specification but by then the F3 had earned a poor reputation. Its reputation was, undoubtedly, worse than its capability for most of its service life.”

*HK:The F-4 was an older American design that entered RAF service in 1969

 How did the Phantom compare to the Tornado in terms of:

A. Acceleration

B. Sustained turns

C. Instantaneous turns

D. High altitude performance

“The Tornado was perhaps a little slower to accelerate initially but rapidly overtook the Phantom and had a much higher top speed at all levels. This was an area in which the F3 excelled. It was cleared by the manufacturer to 850 knots/Mach 1.2 at low level and once there could hold supersonic in cold power. Sadly this was limited to 750 knots in service. At height with the wings fully swept it was very slippery and Mach 2 was easily achievable in a clean aircraft. To achieve a good sustained turn rate the wings had to be fully forward in the 25 degree sweep position. Turn rate was helped by the use of slats and flaps. It also benefitted from the spin prevention system and carefree throttle handling which prevented the pilot from exceeding the design limits and made it almost impossible to lose control. With the wings swept the aircraft needed a good deal of G to give a good, sustained turn which had a negative effect of the fatigue life of the airframe. Anyone who watched a Tornado F3 aerobatic sequence would have seen the instantaneous turn performance. During my brief “aeros” career I flew with Paul Brown who demonstrated the minimum radius turn immediately after takeoff. Flown at 250 knots, the jet easily stayed inside the airfield boundary hanging on the power. Sadly such a manoeuvre was not very useful tactically as, flying at 250 knots in a threat environment was ill advised. It was the Tornado’s performance at height which let it down. Above 25,000 feet carrying tanks and electronic warfare equipment it struggled and reheat was needed for most manoeuvres. Replacement EJ200 engines were considered to solve the issues but never installed due to funding constraints.”

Which aircraft have you ‘fought’ in training exercises, and of these which were the most formidable fighters?

“I came across most of the latest generation fighters over the years with the exception of the F-14 and the Soviet fighters. I flew in an F-16A of the Royal Netherlands Air Force which was a remarkable aircraft, albeit at that time only armed with stern hemisphere Sidewinders. The F-15C would have to be top of my list but I know that the Su-27 Flanker would have been a formidable opponent and is extremely capable in all corners of the envelope. That said, western avionics, particularly in the data link era would, hopefully, have redressed that balance. Nowadays, the F-22 is in a league of its own but with emerging fighters such as PAK FA in Russia and the Chengdu J-20 in China, that dominance may be challenged.”

 Do you believe the ADV the right choice for the UK? what would have been better?

“I think it fair to say that most aircrew in the early ’80s would have preferred other fighter types to F3 but the mantra was that the weapon system would make up for airframe deficiencies. That clearly did not happen, at least not at first. The logical choice for the UK scenario would have been an F-14D as it was designed for exactly the same mission, namely to defend an aircraft carrier (which is how the UK was often jokingly referred to). A two seat F-15 would also have been eminently suitable. The logic of the early 80s was that two seat operations were still the optimum solution as avionics systems were diverse and integration was immature. The current standard seen in the F-15C simply did not exist in those days. The F-16 and F-18 were evaluated and rejected.”

How capable was the F3 at the end of its career, how did it compare with its peers? 

“The Stage 3 standard which retired from service in 2011 was light years ahead of that of the F2. At its demise, the F3 was armed with the C-5 standard AMRAAM and ASRAAM missiles, a capable Foxhunter which had automatic track-while-scan, JTIDS data link, secure radios, better identification systems and capable electronic warfare equipment including a radar homing and warning receiver, towed radar decoy, chaff and flares and a Phimat chaff pod. The situation awareness enjoyed by the crews was, arguably, better than even the latest generation American platforms. Regrettably, it still lacked the performance when carrying its role equipment particularly carrying 2250 litre tanks in the upper air but with improved situation awareness and long range weapons, the crew should not have been drawn into the visual arena.”

Do you believe that two seats are better than one for a modern fighter? 

“Having flown a Typhoon before I retired I am confident that modern design, integration and technology can be handled by one person. Current systems are a generation or more ahead of that in the F3. It is always preferable to have two sets of eyes in a close combat environment but today that should be a last ditch emergency. The battle should be fought beyond visual range. A single pilot can now cope with air defence operations in all but the highest workload environments in my opinion.”

What is the greatest myth or misunderstanding of the F3? 

“Undoubtedly, that the aircraft which emerged in the mid 90s had not improved over the early variants. By 1994 when “Stage 2” radar was introduced it came of age. It continued to improve and could have been even better with more investment. If it had been employed against an aggressive opponent, the results would undoubtedly have been surprising as it is unwise to under estimate an opponent. The standard which retired was one of the most capable fighters in the world and, with further enhancements would have been extremely effective.”

Which variant of the Phantom did you fly? What were the various merits of the different British Phantom variants?

“I flew the FGR2 almost exclusively during my four tours. With its pulse-Doppler radar and Sparrow/Skyflash missiles it had a look-down, shoot-down capability against targets at extremely low level and could engage targets up to 70,000 feet. Although unreliable at first, it was a hugely capable radar for its generation. Having never served at Leuchars, I only ever flew the FG1 on one occasion and was unimpressed. Although the radar was similar, it lacked the inertial navigation system, the high frequency radio and the battery for internal starting. I felt sorry for Leuchars based crews operating many miles from the UK shores without adequate navigation kit. Although I never flew the F-4J, I flew about 10 sorties in the Luftwaffe’s F-4F as a NATO evaluator. At that time it was equipped with a pulse radar which was much less capable than the British Phantom and useless at low level. It also had only stern hemisphere Sidewinders so had limited capability. It was eventually upgraded with the AN/APG65 radar from the F-18, AMRAAM, AIM-9L and digital avionics and became one of the most effective Phantoms ever fielded. To its final days it always smoked like a chimney and that was never a good thing entering a visual fight as it advertised your position to an enemy.”

What is your lasting memory of the Phantom?

“The Phantom had charisma. Even now, most crews who flew the aircraft have a lasting affection which will never fade. It was rugged, capable and dependable and what more could anyone ask. As I always say you could love the Phantom, hate the Phantom but you could never ignore the Phantom.”

How many missiles do you think it would have taken to down a Tu-95?

That is hard to say. The Sparrow or Skyflash with its larger warhead would have been preferable to the Sidewinder. A kill always depended on striking a vulnerable area such as engines or control surfaces or causing damage to flight control systems. It would be possible to cause lethal damage with one shot but might have needed more. The ‘Bear’ was a large rugged aircraft and would probably have survived minor damage, but the Phantom had eight missiles and a gun. Happily the Cold War never turned hot.

Would a F3 have had the speed to catch a Tu-160? 

Without a doubt. The F3 could travel extremely quickly in a straight line. With an excellent “snap-up” capability the Skyflash would have been able to engage a Blackjack at any of its operational heights. A supersonic target was not much more demanding than a subsonic target other than the fact that things happened rather quickly. With a Mach 2 dash capability it might even have been possible to run one down even if the head-on engagement failed.

Would this have been the hardest aircraft to intercept?

“The hardest engagements were high speed, low level targets employing jamming, tactics and terrain to avoid detection and engagement.”

This 56 Sqn Phantom is at RAF Akrotiri. It is fitted with an external gun pod.

 How easy was it to get lost over the North Sea?

“Almost impossible. Precise navigation, other than maintaining the combat air patrol position, was rarely needed and area navigation was often good enough. It only became important when recovering to base, hopefully, with sufficient fuel. That said, quick reaction alert crews operating well north of Scotland with marginal weather at base or at the diversions were keenly interested in an accurate position. Overland was an entirely different proposition.”

What equipment would you have like to have seen integrated onto the F3?

“The air combat performance in the visual arena would have been transformed by fitting a helmet mounted sight allowing the crew to target weapons quicker and more effectively. The impressive off-boresight capability of ASRAAM could not be fully exploited by the weapon system. Internal electronic warfare equipment such as that developed for Typhoon would have mitigated some of the performance penalties of carrying external stores. The F3 would also have benefitted from a missile warning system. All this technology was available but was not affordable within a cash-strapped MOD budget.”

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

How do interceptor crews feel about the prospect of shooting down a hijacked airliner? Was this eventuality trained for in the 1980s?

“I can safely say it was every crew’s worst nightmare. There were clear procedures to follow and, given the correct authentication, it would have been the crew’s duty to carry them out. That would not have made it any easier. We trained regularly when holding Quick Reaction Alert and Battle Flight and one of the drills was “intervention” when we would pull alongside, try to establish contact, give visual interception signals and shepherd a rogue aircraft to a diversion airfield. One of the main tasks in Germany was to investigate any incursions into the Air Defence Interception Zone or ADIZ. Often light aircraft would stray too close to the Inner German Border and our role was to lead them away to safety.”

 What were favourite and least favourite missions/flights?

“My least favourite flight was a Basic Radar Sortie Number One as an instructor on the Operational Conversion Unit when it was cold and wet and you were soaking before the canopy was even closed. Invariably, that would be followed by an instrument departure through thousands of feet of thick cloud following the leader on radar. The best sorties were undoubtedly a four- ship tactical mission over land in Germany against Jaguars or Harriers or other Phantoms and it sometimes seemed that World War 3 had, indeed, broken out.”

How much variation was there in the F3 fleet – were certain airframes better than others?

“The F3 was much better than the Phantom in this aspect. The Phantoms were built in 1968 at the height of the Vietnam War. They seemed to be almost hand-built and engineering tolerances were ‘relaxed‘. Some airframes didn’t fly straight and, certainly, leaked. There was, undoubtedly, a difference in the performance of the radars, particularly in Germany. One airframe on 92 Squadron did not have a fully serviceable radar for its entire time on the Squadron. It was so marked that it was chosen as the test bed for the radar reliability trial. The F3 was vastly improved and I was never really conscious of any differences between airframes. The obvious difference was that in both aircraft, the rear cockpit in a ‘twin sticker’ had a different layout so demanded different routines when operating the kit.”

What advice would you give to today’s fighter crews?

“Times change and I would never presume to set my own experiences against modern challenges. There are a few old truisms that are still valid, however. -It’s the one you don’t see that gets you-  and -You fight like you train-.”

Although a within visual range fight is best avoided, how would you have fought the following…

A. A Su-27 in an F3 (and how confident would you feel of surviving)?

“The ‘Flanker’ was a very capable airframe with a good radar, an integrated infra-red search and track system, helmet mounted sight and capable weapons. Its turning performance was as good as the F-15 if not slightly better, although the avionics and combat modes were more traditional. The F3 was out-ranged by the longer range AA-10C Alamo missile when carrying Skyflash and that balance was only redressed by the fielding of AMRAAM. Without a helmet mounted sight, the F3 would have been killed inside a single turn by a well flown Flanker as, aerodynamically, it was out-performed at all levels.”

B. MiG-23 in an F-4 or F3 ?

“We gave the MiG-23 more credit than, perhaps, it deserved during the Cold War. Although it was a swing wing design, its turning performance was the same as the Phantom and inferior to the F3. The wings could not be moved under G so tactically it was limited. The weapon system and early generation weapons such as the AA-7 Apex and AA-8 Aphid were also less capable and the radar did not have true look-down, shoot-down capability. Furthermore, Soviet pilots were not well trained in air combat skills. All in, I would have been confident that a British crew with a serviceable weapons system in either a Phantom or an F3 would beat the average Flogger if employing normal tactics.”

C. How would an F-4 ‘fight’ a EE Lightning?

“The Lightning was an agile performer at all heights but suffered from an obsolete radar, limited capability missiles and a lack of fuel. The key would be to make best use of beyond visual range weapons, ideally, to achieve a kill before the merge. The Lightning emitted less smoke which meant a Phantom would often be seen before seeing the Lightning. Once visual a Lightning had the edge over a Phantom but was probably on equal footing with an F3 except at high level where the Lightning was superior. Pilots would use the vertical to keep a Lightning at bay until the opportunity for a forward hemisphere shot, either Skyflash or AIM-9L presented itself. In the days before those missiles were fielded, a stalemate was more likely. If the fight was prolonged, the Lightning would rapidly run out of fuel and be looking for a disengagement, at which time it would be vulnerable. Because of the limitations of both Firestreak and Red Top, a Lightning pilot would have to position close to the “6 o’clock” in order to take a shot. Tactically aware crews should have been able to fend off an attack long enough to run the Lightning short of fuel.”

D. How would an F-4 ‘fight’ a Harrier?

“The Harrier only ever carried the AIM-9G/L missile. Without beyond visual range weapons the Harrier pilot would be forced to adopt defensive tactics prior to the merge. Once visual a Harrier was extremely agile with good visibility from the cockpit. With an AIM-9L it had a slight advantage over the Phantom post merge. The Phantom crew would seek to generate a minimum separation pass and disengage allowing them to re-enter the fight, ideally having locked up and fired a Skyflash on re-entry. The legendary ‘viffing’ (vectoring in forward flight, or using the jet nozzle as ‘brakes’) was a useful technique to force a Phantom pilot to fly through leaving him vulnerable in the resulting ‘scissors’. It was ill advised in a multi aircraft engagement, however, as it left the Harrier pilot vulnerable to other fighters as it lost all the speed which was hard to recover.”

The Mighty Stage 3 ‘Pomcat’ 

 What was your involvement with the F3 upgrade- and why are RAF upgrades generally so slow? 

“I was the MOD desk officer responsible for fast-jet electronic warfare programmes in Operational Requirements in MOD. I proposed the original plan for the Gulf War modifications to the Tornado F3 and worked closely during the early months with the F3 Operational Evaluation Unit to modify the prototype aircraft. On a subsequent tour I was the sponsor in MOD for all airworthiness aspects of the Tornado F3 weapon system and avionics and saw many key modifications into service in concert with the operational requirements staff. Modification programmes are slow because each change has to be designed and integrated into the overall aircraft system by the manufacturer before entering an extensive testing cycle. These aspects are discussed extensively in Tornado F3 In Focus and my new book Operational Testing – Honing the Edge.”

David Gledhill joined the Royal Air Force as a Navigator in 1973. After training, he flew the F-4 Phantom on squadrons in the UK, the Falklands and West Germany. He was one of the first aircrew to fly the F2 and F3 Air Defence Variant of the Tornado on its acceptance into service and served for many years as an instructor on the Operational Conversion Units of both the Phantom and the Tornado. He commanded the Tornado Fighter unit in the Falkland Islands and has worked extensively with the Armed Forces of most NATO nations including two tours of duty in the USA. He has published a number of factual titles through Fonthill Media including “The Phantom In Focus”, “Fighters Over The Falklands” and “Tornado F3 In Focus”. He has also published a series of novels in the Phantom Air Combat series; “Defector”, “Provocation”, “Deception” and “Maverick” which follow the exploits of a fictional Phantom fighter crew. He is about to publish a new book called “Operational Test -Honing the Edge” and has a sequel to his Phantom book called “Snapshot – The Wildenrath Phantom Years” in draft. His next novel “Infiltration” will pit his fighter crew against a Soviet naval task force operating off Scotland. You can find the full details of his books on his website or him on Twitter @davegledhill1.

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. This site cannot carry on without your generosity. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

Since we assembled our assessment of the top ten fighters in the beyond-visual range regime in 2013, a great deal has changed. Most significantly, the Su-35 has entered frontline service with the Russian air force-  and the MBDA Meteor missile is now fitted to operational Saab Gripens. With this news in mind, and access to more information we have adjusted our top ten- there’s at least big surprise in the re-ordering. I hope you enjoy this article.

HK

To excel in Beyond Visual Range air combat a fighter must be well-armed and equipped with capable avionics. It must be able to fly high and fast to impart the maximum range to its missiles, allowing them to hit the enemy before he is even aware of their presence. The aircraft must give its crews good enough situational awareness not to shoot their friends down, and be easy to operate so it can deploy its weapons quickly and accurately. The black magic of the aircraft’s electronic warfare suite can also come in to its own, reducing the opponent’s situation awareness.

Hardware is generally less important than training and tactics, but removing these human factors from the mix allows us to judge the most deadly long-range fighting machines currently in service. The exact ordering of this list is open to question, but all the types mentioned are extraordinarily potent killers. This list only includes currently active fighters (so no PAK FAs etc) and only includes weapons and sensors that are actually in service today (so no Meteor missiles etc).

To keep this blog going- allowing us to create new articles- we need donations. We’re trying to do something different with Hush-Kit: give aviation fans something that is both entertaining, surprising and well-informed. Please do help us and click on the donate button above – you can really make a difference (suggested donation £10). You will keep us impartial and without advertisers – and allow us to carry on being naughty.  A big thank you to all of our readers.

10. Lockheed Martin F-16E/F

A great sensor suite, including a modern AESA and comprehensive defensive aids systems is combined with advanced weapons and a proven platform; a small radar cross section also helps. However, the type is let down by mediocre ‘high and fast’ performance, fewer missiles than its rivals and a smaller detection range than some of its larger rivals. With Conformal Fuel Tanks its agility is severely limited.

Armament for A2A mission: 4 x AIM-120C-7, 2 x AIM-9X (1 x 20-mm cannon.).

9. Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet

Well equipped with a great defensive system and excellent weapons the Super Hornet  has much to offer. It is happiest at lower speeds and altitudes  making it a fearsome dogfighter, but is less capable at the BVR mission; a mediocre high-speed high-altitude performance let it down, as does a pedestrian climb rate and acceleration at higher speeds. The touch screen cockpit has disadvantages, as switches and buttons  can be felt ‘blind’ and do not require ‘heads-down’ use. The much-touted AN/APG-79 AESA radars introduced on Block II aircraft has proved unreliable and has enormous development problems. One scathing report said ‘ …operational testing does not demonstrate a statistically significant difference in mission accomplishment between F/A-18E/F aircraft equipped with AESA and those equipped with the legacy radar.’ Read an exclusive interview with a Super Hornet pilot here.

Armament for A2A mission: Super Hornet (high drag ‘Christmas tree’) 12 x AIM-120, realistic = 6 x AIM-120C-7  + 2/4 AIM-9X ) (1 x 20-mm cannon)

8. Sukhoi Su-30MK and Shenyang J-11B

Until the arrival of the Su-35, the most capable official members of Sukhoi’s ‘Flanker’ family were the export Su-30MKs. Agile and well-armed they are formidable opponents. Armed with ten missiles the Su-30 has an impressive combat persistence and is able to fly impressively long distance missions. The radar is a large, long-ranged PESA (featuring some elements of an AESA) and Indian aircraft carry particularly good Israeli jamming pods. The type has proved itself superior to both the RAF’s Tornado F.Mk 3 and USAF’s F-15C in exercises, though the degree of dominance over the F-15C is marginal to the point that superior training, tactics and C3 saw the US lord over the type in later exercises. The pilot workload is higher than in later Western designs, the engines demanding  to maintain and the vast airframe has a large radar cross section.

A2A armament: 6 x R-77, 4 x R-73 (1 x 30-mm cannon)

Shenyang J-11B

The Chinese pirate version of the ‘Flanker’ features a reduced radar cross section and improved weapons and avionics. With the latest Type 1474 radar (with a 100 miles + range) and the highly-regarded PL-12 active radar AAM, it is an impressive fighter.

6 x PL-12, 4 x PL-10 (or R-73E) + ( 1 x 30-mm cannon)

7. Mikoyan MiG-31BM

The Russian air force is currently updating its MiG-31 fleet to BM standard. The new model features an updated avionics suite further sharpening the teeth of this unique machine. The fastest modern fighter in the world, with a top speed of Mach 2.83, the MiG-31 offers some unique capabilities. Until the arrival of the Meteor missile in April 2016, no fighter had a longer air-to-air weapon than the type’s huge R-33S, which can engage targets well over 100 miles away. Designed to hunt in packs of four or more aircraft the type can sweep vast swathes of airspace, sharing vital targeting information by data-link with other aircraft. The enormous PESA radar was the first ever fitted to a fighter. The type is marred by a mountainous radar cross section and poor agility at lower speeds. More on the MiG-31 here and here.

 4 x R-33, 2 x R-40TD (1 x 23-mm cannon)

6. McDonnell Douglas F-15C (V) 3 Eagle/Boeing F-15SG Eagle

That the Eagle has jumped two places in our rating is not due to any improvements in the design since 2013, but the fact that we have greater knowledge of how well it has been performing in international exercises. Though the famously one-sided score sheet of the F-15 should be taken with a pinch of salt (Israeli air-to-air claims are often questionable to say the least), the F-15 has proved itself a tough, kickass fighter that can be depended on. It lacks the agility (certainly at lower speeds) of its Russian counterparts, but in its most advanced variants has an enormously capable radar in the APG-63(V)3. The F-15 remains the fastest Western fighter to have ever entered service (the often quoted M2.54 speed is exaggerated, but it will get up to M2.3), and is currently the fastest non-Russian frontline aircraft of any kind in the world. The type is let down by a giant radar cross section, a massive infra-red signature and an inferior high altitude performance to a newer generation of fighters. Typhoon pilots who have fought it describe it as a challenging threat, Hornet pilots have noted that it is almost impossible to defeat at long ranges.

A2A armament: 6 x AIM-120C-7, 2 x AIM-9X (1 x 20-mm cannon)

5. Sukhoi Su-35S 

Russia’s latest operational fighter was not in service at the time of our last list – today it very much is and is an impressive machine. The Su-35S were deployed in Syria in 2016 to provide air cover for Russian forces engaged in anti-rebel/ISIL attacks. The Su-35 is even more powerful than the Su-30M series and boasts improved avionics and man-machine interface. More on the Su-35 can be found here.

A2A armament: 6 x R-77, 4 x R-73 (1 x 30-mm cannon)

4. Dassault Rafale

The Rafale has leapt from position 7 to position 3 thanks to the new RBE2 AESA radar. The Rafale has great agility, one of the lowest radar cross sections of a ‘conventional’ aircraft and its defensive systems are generally considered superior to those of its arch-rival, the Typhoon. It falls down in its main armament, the MICA, which is generally considered to have a lower maximum range than later model AMRAAMs. It has a little less poke than the Typhoon in terms of  thrust-to-weight ratio leading some potential customers in hot countries to demand an engine upgrade. It has yet to be integrated with a helmet cueing system in operational service.

A2A armament: 6 x MICA (possibly 8 if required, though this has not been seen operationally)  (one 30-mm cannon)

3. Eurofighter Typhoon

A high power-to-weight ratio, a large wing and a well designed cockpit put the Typhoon pilot in an advantageous position in a BVR engagement. Acceleration rates, climb rates (according to a German squadron leader it can out-climb a F-22) and agility at high speeds are exceptionally good. Pilot workload is very low compared to most rivals and the aircraft has proved reliable. The type will be the ‘last swinging disc in town’, as it will be among the last modern fighters to feature a mechanically scanned radar; the Captor radar may use an old fashioned technology but it still a highly-rated piece of kit with extremely impressive detection ranges. It has a smaller radar cross section than both the F-15 and Su-30 and superior high altitude performance to Rafale. Combat persistence is good and the AIM-132 ASRAAM of RAF aircraft are reported to have a considerable BVR capability.

A2A armament (RAF): 6 x AIM-120C-5, 2 x AIM-132 (1 x 27-mm cannon)

2. Saab Gripen C/D

In our original list from three years ago, the Gripen did not even make the top ten. Its dramatic jump to the number two position is due to one reason: the entry into operational service (in April 2016) of the MBDA Meteor missile. The Gripen is the first fighter in the world to carry the long-delayed Meteor. The Meteor outranges every Western weapon, and thanks to its ramjet propulsion (an innovation for air-to-air missiles) it has a great deal of energy, even at the outer extremes of its flight profile, allowing it to chase maneuvering targets at extreme ranges. Many air forces have trained for years in tactics to counter AMRAAM, but few know much about how to respond to the vast No Escape Zone of Meteor. This combined with a two-way datalink (allowing assets other than the firer to communicate with the missile), the aircraft’s low radar signature, and the Gripen’s pilot’s superb situational awareness makes the small Swedish fighter a particularly nasty threat to potential enemies.

4 x MBDA Meteor + 2 x IRIS-T (1 x 27-mm cannon)

The ten best-looking Swedish aeroplanes here

1. Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor

Undisputed king of beyond-visual range air combat is the F-22 Raptor. Its superbly stealthy design means it is likely to remain undetected to enemy fighters, calmly despatching its hapless opponents. The type’s excellent AESA radar is world class, and its ‘low-probability of interception’ operation enables to see without being seen. When high-altitude limitations are not in place (due to safety concerns) the type fights from a higher perch than F-15s and F-16s, and is more frequently supersonic. High and fast missile shots give its AMRAAMs far greater reach and allow the type to stay out harm’s way. The F-22 is expensive, suffers from a poor radius of action for its size and has suffered a high attrition rate for a modern fighter.

6 x AIM-120C-5 + 2 x AIM-9M (1 x 20-mm cannon)

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. When we hit out funding target we will be able to give you even better and more frequent reading matter.

Let’s get in to the merge, Top Ten Dogfighters here

By Joe Coles &  Thomas Newdick

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here– it doesn’t have to be a large amount, every pound is gratefully received. If you can’t afford to donate anything then don’t worry.

At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

As a thank you….

Those who donate more than £50 may ask for a short article on a particular subject.

Those who donate more than £100 may ask for a long article on a particular subject.

Find out about the latest Hush-Kit articles on Twitter: @Hush_kit

Who was Sweden’s flying farm girl?

“If you have any interest in aviation, you’ll be surprised, entertained and fascinated by Hush-Kit – the world’s best aviation blog”. Rowland White, author of the best-selling ‘Vulcan 607’

I’ve selected the richest juiciest cuts of Hush-Kit, added a huge slab of new unpublished material, and with Unbound, I want to create a beautiful coffee-table book. Pre-order your copy now right here  

TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY NOW

From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:

“the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.

The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.

FEATURING

• • • • Interviews with pilots of the F-14 Tomcat, Mirage, Typhoon, MiG-25, MiG-27, English Electric Lighting, Harrier, F-15, B-52 and many more.
      • Engaging Top (and bottom) 10s including: Greatest fighter aircraft of World War II, Worst British aircraft, Worst Soviet aircraft and many more insanely specific ones.
      • Expert analysis of weapons, tactics and technology.
      • A look into art and culture’s love affair with the aeroplane.
      • Bizarre moments in aviation history.
      • Fascinating insights into exceptionally obscure warplanes.

The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.

Rewards levels include these packs of specially produced trump cards.

Pre-order your copy now right here  

I can only do it with your support.

We wish we’d had the space to include several other aircraft, like the gorgeous Lockheed XF-90.

For every military aircraft that makes it into service, a thousand projects only live on as tattered blueprints in filing cabinets, gung-ho artworks or sit silently as lonely prototypes in museums. To be sentimental over killing machines that never were may seem perverse, but the following ten aircraft inspire tantalising speculation of what could have been. War is Boring’s David Axe and Hush-Kit’s Joe Coles take a ghoulish stroll through the graveyard of cancelled military aircraft.

To keep this blog going, allowing us to create new articles – we need donations (please do read this bit). 

We’re trying to do something different with Hush-Kit: give aviation fans something that is both entertaining, surprising and well-informed. Please do help us and click on the donate button above (or here) – you can really make a difference (suggested donation £12). You will keep us impartial and without advertisers – and allow us to carry on being naughty. A big thank you to all of our readers.

(You’ll be delighted to hear we haven’t included the Arrow, TSR2 or F-20)

11. Sud-Est SE.5000 Baroudeur

Aeroplane designers hate wheels. Wheels are for cars. The weight and complexity of a retractable undercarriage is a huge nuisance. Why not do away with them altogether? The wartime Germans were very keen on this idea and built a series of aeroplanes that took off from trolleys. The aircraft would simply uncouple itself from the trolley as it took off, the trolley remaining behind on the runway. The aeroplane would land on simple skids. A trolley take-off frees an aeroplane from the need for vast, vulnerable runways. In a war, airbases would be priority targets and however good a fighter was, it be would utterly impotent if it had no runway to take off from. Mindful of this problem, and fearing the technological hurdles of vertical take-off and landing, Sud-Est, turned back to the ‘trolley dolly’ concept to create the Sud-Est SE.5000 Baroudeur (‘adventurer’). The aircraft took its first flight on 1 August 1953. It was superb: trolley take-offs proved effortless, skid landings a delight (even in crosswinds). It could be rapidly rearmed and refuelled, and would have made a superb tactical fighter. If required, the trolley could even have be rocket-assisted! The ‘jet dirtbike’ never made it into service, usurped by a generation of concrete-loving fast-jets.

10. Bell XF-109

In 1955, the U.S. Navy and Air Force approached Bell Aircraft Corporation with a far-out idea: design a Mach-two fighter capable of launching and landing vertically. Bell dutifully drew up a design for what it unofficially called the XF-109.
Fifty-nine feet long, the XF-109 featured a startling eight J85 turbojets – four afterburning motors arranged two apiece in rotating wingtip nacelles, plus another two afterburners in the rear fuselage and a pair of non-afterburning J85s pointing downward behind the cockpit.The XF-109 was clearly ahead of its time. The Navy and Air Force both lost interest and the military cancelled the Bell jump jet in 1961 before the company could build any actual prototypes. The Harrier, the world’s first operational vertical-takeoff-and-landing fighter, flew for the first time in 1967. The Harrier is subsonic.

See the top ten jump-jets here.

8. Kamov V-100 ‘Боевой молот’

Image via rotorpedia.ru

Kamov’s long flirtation with twin wingtip-mounted rotors led to some truly startling ideas, one was a vast C-130-sized transport- and at the other end of the size spectrum was the V-100, an extremely fast battlefield helicopter. As well as the unusual rotor configuration, the V-100 was to have a single pusher propeller – this, combined withs its sleek aerodynamics, was expected to imbue with it a top speed of 400 km/h (around 250 mph) – which is a whole 100 km/h faster than the AH-64 Apache (itself no slouch). Armaments considered included two 23-mm cannon or a single 30-mm, and even the huge air-to-ground Kh-25 (X-25) missile. In the end, the design was considered too risky, and never flew. Russia eventually ended up with the Ka-50/52.

8. Yakovlev Yak-43

Russia (and the Soviet Union) is often accused of stealing US aircraft concepts and technologies. In reality there has been give and take (as well as similar design solutions resulting from parallel teams working to solve similar problems).

That Lockheed bought research from Yakovlev on the STOVL propulsion system of the Yak-41 (or 141 if you prefer) is pretty notable. The Yak-41, impressive though it was, was merely a stepping stone to the formidable Yak-43 fighter. The Yak-43 would have been far faster and versatile than the Harrier, with a performance comparable to the MiG-29. The tumultuous transitional period that made the collaboration with Lockheed possible also killed the Yak-43, but its DNA lives on today in the F-35B.

7. British Aerospace P.125

Image via http://forum.keypublishing.com

The long history of British expertise in stealth technology has not been discussed a great deal. Britain pioneered radar absorbent material for aircraft, working on reduced radar observability for nuclear warheads in the early 1960s and was able to create a world class stealth testbed in the Replica model. Prior to Replica, in the 1980s, Britain was working on an aircraft concept so advanced it was classified until 2006.
The BAe P.125 study was for a stealthy supersonic attack aircraft to replace the Tornado. It was to be available in both a short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) and a conventional variant. The conventional variant would feature a central vectored nozzle, the STOVL version would have three vectoring nozzles. In some ways the P.125 was more ambitious than the F-35, the aircraft was to have no pilot transparencies,with the reclined pilot immersed in synthetic displays of the outside word.
It is likely that this formidable interdictor would have been even less visible to radar than the F-35 (though the absence of planform alignment is noteworthy). Despite its 1980s vintage many of its low observable features are reminiscent of today’s latest fighters – others such as its unorthodox wing design, are unique. The project was quietly dropped when Britain joined the JSF programme in the 1990s.

Leave the MiGs in the hangers, we’ll sort this out.

It is likely that the absence of a cockpit transparency on the P.125 was to protect the pilot from laser dazzle weapons (a weapon inaccurately feared to be in widespread use by the soviet union). Even now a synthetic cockpit is considered a daunting technological prospect, why BAe didn’t opt for an unmanned configuration remains something of a mystery.

6. Convair YB-60

In the early 1950s, the U.S. Air Force wanted a turbojet-powered heavy strategic bomber to lug atomic bombs across oceans. Convair had built the piston-engine B-36 for the Air Force and decided simply swapping out the B-36’s prop motors for jets — among other modest changes — would suffice to produce a new bomber.
The result was the YB-60, a 171-foot-long monster of a warplane sporting eight J57 turbojets. The first of two prototypes took off on its inaugural flight in April 1952. The YB-60 could fly 2,900 miles at a cruising speed of 467 miles per hour while lugging a 36 tons of bombs.
Impressive, but not as impressive as the performance of the YB-60’s most direct competitor, Boeing’s B-52. The eight-engine B-52 cruises at 525 miles per hour over a distance of 4,500 miles while carrying 35 tons of bombs.
The Air Force cancelled the YB-60s’ test program in January 1953. B-52s remain in the U.S. inventory.

5. Northrop Fang

Ed Schmued designed the North American P-51 Mustang fighter that helped the Allies win World War II. A decade later in 1952, now working for Northrop, Schmued outlined a simple, single-engine jet fighter. The N-102 Fang.
Forty-one feet long, powered by a single J79 turbojet and sporting a simple delta wing, the Fang bucked the trend toward bigger, heavier and more complex fighters. Northrop built a mockup and pitched the N-102 to the Air Force in 1953 and the Navy in 1954. Ultimately, both branches opted for bigger fighters such as the F-4, which was roughly twice the Fang’s size and boasted two J79s.
But Northrop didn’t entirely give up on the idea of a small, simple fighter. The company’s F-5 family of fighters, including the F-5A, the much-improved F-5E and variants and even the prototype F-20 all owe their design philosophy to Schmued’s N-102. F-5s remain in service all over the world.

4. Convair Model 49

In the 1960s the US Army were growing sick of dependence on inappropriate USAF aircraft for the close support mission. Aircraft like the Republic F-105 Thunderchief were simply too fast and too vulnerable to support troops on the ground effectively. Instead the US Army wanted the versatility and forward-basing possibilities of a vertical take-off platform with the ability to hover. To excel in the tough close support role the type would need to be heavily armed and armoured. This need was expressed formally as the Advanced Aerial Fire Support System or AAFSS.
Convair, a company famed for its adventurous designs, responded to the Army’s AAFSS requirement with typical ambition. Drawing on their experience with the tail-sitting XFY-1 ‘Pogo’ they proposed a two man ‘ring’ (or annular) wing ducted-fan design quite unlike anything else in service, though somewhat similar to the experimental SNECMA C.540 Coléoptère. The concept was bizarre in appearance but Convair believed it was the perfect configuration for an aircraft combining a helicopter’s unusual abilities with some of the offensive features of a military ground vehicle. One of the greatest challenges was creating a cockpit that tilted so the pilot was not facing the sky in the take-off/landing and landed support parts of its mission. This necessitated  a complex hinged forward fuselage giving the type its distinctly ‘Transformer’-like looks. More on the incredible Convair 49 here.

3. Lockheed CL-1200

In the late 1960s, Lockheed saw an opportunity. Anticipating worldwide demand for 7,500 advanced but – in the company’s own words – “reasonably-priced” jet fighters over the next decade, in 1971 it began circulating a proposal for an improved, safer “CL-1200 Lancer” version of the speedy but notoriously hard-to-fly F-104 Starfighter.
Lockheed’s Skunk Works division, with famed designer Kelly Johnson still at the head, enlarged the F-104’s wing and fin, shifted the tailplane lower in the fuselage, tweaked the engine inlet, added internal fuel capacity and replaced the F-104’s J79 engine with a TF33. The resulting CL-1200 was, in theory, more manoeuvrable and controllable than the F-104 and cost around $2 million per copy, assuming a large production run. At the time, a new F-4E cost at least $2.4 million.
Lockheed entered the CL-1200 into the U.S. military’s International Fighter Aircraft competition, which aimed to select an export warplane for America’s allies. But Northrop’s F-5E won the contest, and Lockheed scrapped the CL-1200 concept, having only ever produced a mock-up of the plane.

2. Dassault Mirage 4000

France’s Mirage 2000 has been described by many fighter pilots as the perfect flying machine. Its ferociously high performance and almost telekinetic responsiveness have left pilots of all nationalities giddy with love and respect for the ‘Electric Cake Slice’. So imagine a ‘2000 with twice the power and you have a pretty spectacular aeroplane; the 4000, which first flew in 1979 was a just such an aircraft, in the same heavyweight class as the F-15 and Su-27. The Mirage 4000 was one of the first aircraft to incorporate carbon fibre composites (to keep weight down)- and was probably the very first to feature a fin made of this advanced material. Thanks to its light structure and powerful engines it had a thrust-to-weight ratio that exceeded 1: 1 in an air-to-air load-out. On its sixth test flight it reached 50,000 feet at Mach 2 in 3 minutes 50 seconds. The 4000 would have been agile, long-ranged and able to haul an impressive arsenal. Its capacious nose could have held an advanced long-range radar. The French air force didn’t want it, Iran — another potential customer- had a revolution, and Saudi Arabia, also on the look-out for a heavy fighter, opted instead for the F-15. Despite its obvious potential, the Mirage 4000 failed to find a customer, which was an enormous kick in the nuts for Dassault, as the company had privately funded the type’s development.

1. Lockheed RB-12

In January 1961, Lockheed’s legendary aeroplane-designer Kelly Johnson delivered an unsolicited proposal to the U.S. Air Force. His idea was to take the Mach-3 A-12 spy plane – the predecessor of the iconic SR-71 Blackbird – that Kelly had designed for the CIA and modify it into a very fast strategic bomber. More or less in parallel, Johnson was working on a missile-armed F-12 fighter version of the A-12.
The Air Force liked the RB-12 Mach-3 bomber idea but counterproposed with a slightly altered design it called the RS-12. Take the A-12’s sled-like titanium airframe with its powerful J58 turbojets. Add a sophisticated, long-range radar and a nuclear-tipped air-to-ground missile based on the AIM-47 air-to-air missile that also armed the F-12.
The plan was for the RS-12 to penetrate Soviet air space at Mach 3.2 and 80,000 feet and fire a single missile from 50 miles away, striking within 50 feet of its aimpoint within a Soviet city.
The Defense Department ultimately cancelled the F-12 on cost grounds and opted not to proceed with the RS-12, as ballistic missiles were beginning to supplant manned bombers. The Air Force did ultimately acquire the SR-71 reconnaissance version of the A-12 and operated it into the 1990s.

Hush-Kit would like to thank Northrop Grumman’s Bill Sweetman and Combat Aircraft’s Thomas Newdick for their generous help in the researching of this article.

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here– it doesn’t have to be a large amount, every pound is gratefully received. If you can’t afford to donate anything then don’t worry.

At the moment our contributors do not receive any payment but we’re hoping to reward them for their fascinating stories in the future.

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

“If you have any interest in aviation, you’ll be surprised, entertained and fascinated by Hush-Kit – the world’s best aviation blog”. Rowland White, author of the best-selling ‘Vulcan 607’

I’ve selected the richest juiciest cuts of Hush-Kit, added a huge slab of new unpublished material, and with Unbound, I want to create a beautiful coffee-table book. Pre-order your copy now right here  

TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY NOW

From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:

“the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.

The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.

FEATURING

• • • • Interviews with pilots of the F-14 Tomcat, Mirage, Typhoon, MiG-25, MiG-27, English Electric Lighting, Harrier, F-15, B-52 and many more.
      • Engaging Top (and bottom) 10s including: Greatest fighter aircraft of World War II, Worst British aircraft, Worst Soviet aircraft and many more insanely specific ones.
      • Expert analysis of weapons, tactics and technology.
      • A look into art and culture’s love affair with the aeroplane.
      • Bizarre moments in aviation history.
      • Fascinating insights into exceptionally obscure warplanes.

The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.

Rewards levels include these packs of specially produced trump cards.

Pre-order your copy now right here  

I can only do it with your support.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

If you’ve enjoyed this article you can help us by donating here. Thank you lovely reader! Help us keep this website free of adverts. 

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

As someone born in the early 1950s, I find it thrilling to live in this future, which mostly exceeds the imagination of the Sci-Fi writers I read in my youth. Some aspects of the present seem designed to make it an unprecedentedly golden time to be old – as my memory fails, I have access to all the knowledge of the ages in a small gadget in my pocket – and suddenly the skills that time is taking away from me – the memory for names and other specifics, of where I was last Thursday, of how to cook meringues….seem obsolete, unfashionable. As my outward body decays, it seems less important to have one. Virtual Reality can give me experiences that are now too taxing for my physical body. Something as simple as a bus app can vastly improve my quality of life and, combined with the ubiquity and cheapness of Uber, has made getting from one place to another relatively quick and easy…but…where are the personal transportation miracles I was promised? Where is the jet-pack I need to get me from one place to another as quick as thought? To fulfil the promise of personal flight vouchsafed to me in my dreams? To let me bound across the miles as though weightless?

Things seemed so promising when I was a small child.

In 1955, Stanley Hiller presented the Hiller VZ-1 Flying Platform (the VZ-1E is pictured above), which included two Nelson H-59 engines, a fan, and two large propellers.

In 1958, Thiokol Chemical Corporation marketed a jump belt, a strap-on rocket fuelled by nitrogen tanks, not for the purpose of flying, but to enhance athletes’ ability.

In 1960, Wendell F. Moore of Bell Aerosystems developed the SRLD, the Small Rocket Lift Device. This used pressurized hydrogen peroxide as a fuel, processed through a decomposition catalyst to instantly expand into superheated steam, producing a few hundred pounds of thrust at the exhaust nozzles, which the pilot could control by means of hand grips. Unfortunately, the weight of the fuel required meant that it could only fly for about 20 seconds. Bell rocket belts turn up in movies and on television: Lost in Space, Gilligan’s Island, and memorably in the 1965 James Bond film Thunderball. But at this point, iron entered the soul – the inescapable mathematics of the limitations of flight time due to the weight of the fuel made the whole project a dead end for the aerospace companies, and subsequent developments have come from amateur inventors or small independent companies.

True, in 1994, NASA introduced the SAFER (Simplified Aid for EVA Rescue) a propulsive backpack for use in space when astronauts come untethered during space walks. But a jetpack that works in conditions of weightlessness gets me no closer to a personal jetpack that will take the weight off my arthritic knees.

In 2006 Swiss pilot Yves Rossy developed a kerosene burning pack with wings. This succeeded in crossing the Swiss Alps and the English Channel. But this was a suit comprising 4 jet engines rather than, strictly, a jet pack. It flew at 200 mph and was controlled by shifting his body.

In 2012, Jetlev developed a $99,500 jetpack that can launch people up to 30 feet high using water as a propellant. But the rider  of this device has to be tethered by a hose to a boat. It looks a lot of fun, but has no exciting practical applications.

Jetpack International tantalizingly offer two models of jetpack on their website

But they fly for a maximum of 33 seconds, and the release date is TBA

Thunderbolt Aerosystems’ model  is marked not for sale.

It looks like my best hope is the Martin Jetpack,  made by a New Zealand firm and inviting returnable deposits for packs which they claim will be available in 2017. It is pretty bulky, with a V-4 gas engine and two ducted fans, and looks more like a small personal aircraft than the backpack of my fantasies. It is certainly too large to be stowed in my hallway with the bicycles, and the videos online make me doubt whether it can by moved by one person – the engine alone weighs 60kg. But it claims to fly for 30 minutes – a great improvement on previous models. To quote their website, “The price has not been set yet while the jetpack is still in development. The Martin Aircraft Company is targeting a sales price of under US$150,000 for the recreational version of the aircraft but this may take some years to achieve.”

Maybe I’ll just keep saving for that trip with Virgin Galactic.

Ruth Lingford is Senior Lecturer in Animation in the Dept of Visual and Environmental Studies at Harvard University 

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

The basic running of the Hush-Kit blog (which makes no profit) costs money.  If every reader submitted £2 we could solve our funding problem in one hour.  Help us carry on – without adverts.If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here or here. Thank you lovely reader! 

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

1946 was the zenith of piston-engined fighters. The bloody lessons learnt from the hundreds of thousands of dogfights fought in the War had been carefully noted by designers. This knowledge had been distilled into the creation of a generation of aeroplanes wildly superior to their peers from the recent past, but these perfected killing machines faced fierce competition from immature upstarts with an unfair advantage: the first generation of fighter jets. To make this list, aircraft had to have been in operational service during the year in 1946 – hence no Sea Fury, La-9, Twin Mustang or MiG-9 (likewise, also no Me 262 or Ki-84 for example). 

The order is somewhat arbitrary and cases could be made for aircraft that didn’t make the grade such as the Tigercat and Spitfire F Mk.22. Reality doesn’t confirm to the ‘top ten’ format – and war is not a sport with a league table. This list of ten supremely capable aircraft should however form a good basis for a discussion on the relative merits of ten extremely exciting machines at the cutting edge of mid-20th century technology. 

10. Vought F4U-4 Corsair ‘The Ensign Eliminator’

The Vought F4U represented a big improvement in performance over the previous generation of carrier fighters, even though it took a great deal of work to make it suitable for carrier operations. The F4U-4 variant saw active service in the last four months of the Pacific war. It benefited from a R-2800-18W engine which could produce 2,400hp with water-injection, and a four-bladed propeller as well as numerous detail improvements over the F4U-1. As a result, it could reach speeds of 446mph at 25,000ft while retaining its predecessor’s impressive manoeuvrability. By 1946, the engine had been upgraded to a R-2800-42W offering 2,760hp, and top speed pushed up to 451mph. Though it had impressive performance, and better range than the Grumman F8F, the F4U-4 was always marginal as a carrier aircraft, with an unpredictable stall in the landing condition, and on top of that NACA determined that it had a few unsavoury control characteristics. Nevertheless it deserves its place as one of the most effective carrier fighters in service in 1946.

9. Yakovlev Yak-3(VK-107) ‘Pебенок буре’

Much like Britain’s Tempest II, the Yak-3(VK-107 – there was no specific designation to denote the engine change) was the result of a long process of wartime refinement of a basically sound design, being the final production variant of a highly conventional fighter that had first flown in April 1940. The diminutive Yak possessed beautiful handling from the start but was hampered by its relative lack of power and pathetic armament. By the end of 1945, the Yak-3(VK-107) had addressed both these problems. Engine power, whilst still modest by the standards of other nations, was up by about 500 horsepower whilst the structural weight had been reduced by some 2000lb, mostly by replacing wooden components with metal. Armament was provided by three nose mounted 20-mm cannon offering a heavy concentration of fire without any of the detrimental aspects of wing-mounted weapons. The result was spectacular- a small, well-armed, manoeuvrable aircraft whose loaded weight was less than half that of a Tempest V yet was 10mph faster at 17,000ft. The authorities were delighted: ‘the experimental Yak-3 powered by the VK-107A engine and designed by Comrade Yakovlev appears to offer the best performance of all indigenous and known foreign fighters, being superior in horizontal speed, rate of climb and manoeuvrability‘ gushed the official report. The Yak was not faultless, its ceiling was low, its basic equipment primitive and its range was not exactly in the P-51 class but it was an outstanding fighter aeroplane at low to medium heights and, importantly, was straightforward to produce quickly in massive numbers.

(The Yak-3U that I was referring to derives from the Russian usilennyy which means ‘strengthened’ and is actually: усиленный. It would appear that the designation may be retrospective.)

8. Republic P-47N Thunderbolt ‘$83,000 Jugs’

In 1944 the ‘hot rod’ P-47M appeared, designed specifically for chasing V-1s, which mounted the latest R-2800-57 Double Wasp engine with an incredible war emergency rating of 2800hp. Meanwhile in the Pacific there was need for a very long-ranged aircraft to escort B-29s. Republic were keen to regain the escort mission that the upstart Mustang with its longer range had taken from them and the P-47N was the result. It combined the new engine with a larger wing designed to deal with the truly massive fuel load of 1226 US gallons (to put that into context the Spitfire XIV, when fitted with the largest available droptank, carried 308 US gallons), and featuring square cut tips to improve rate of roll. From the outset the P-47N was designed with provision for a 2500-lb bombload to fulfil the fighter-bomber role. The P-51H was faster but the P-47N outranged it and was more versatile. It was, apparently, a more comfortable aircraft to fly than the Mustang, was a better gun platform and had the edge on the P-51 in some manoeuvres. However, in 1945 a P-47 cost $83,000 compared to $51,000 for a P-51. The P-47N may have been superior to the P-51H in several respects but it wasn’t $32,000 better. Having said that 1816 were built and the P-47N is one of only two aircraft on this list to have seen meaningful service during the Second World War. Oscar Perdomo, the USAAF’s last ‘ace’ of the conflict scored all his victories on the type two days before the war ended.

7. Grumman F8F-1 Bearcat ‘The Bastard Bear’

In 1942, Grumman had markedly improved on its earlier F4F Wildcat with the F6F Hellcat. The new aircraft did much to turn the tide of war in the Pacific, but was significantly bigger and heavier than its predecessor. Rather than continue this trend, Grumman set about designing a follow-up to the F6F that would be as small and light as the Pratt & Whitney R2800-34 engine would allow, and they achieved a power-loading of 3.5 lb/hp (compared with 5.5 for a P-51). This would allow even better raw performance, particularly rate of climb and short take-off. Like the P-51H the F8F had reached squadrons in 1945 but did not see frontline service before the end of the war. Shortly after the Second World War, the US Navy evaluated the P-51H as a possible carrier fighter, and instigated a mock carrier launch and dogfight between the two aircraft. Legend has it that the F8F had taken off, circled tightly and ‘strafed’ the Mustang before the latter had left the ground. The F8F-1 in service in 1946 was capable of 424mph, remarkable agility and a climb-rate that gave allegedly it the record from brake release to 10,000ft until the ‘century series’ came along. Unlike the Corsair, the Bearcat’s visibility for deck-landing was superb, and it flew ‘as if on rails’, making it practical as well as a hot rod. An innovative ‘failsafe’ wing-fold was incorporated, where the outer panels were supposed to snap off if the G-limit was exceeded, leaving the pilot with enough aerodynamic surface to get home. Unfortunately, though, this failed to work as advertised, leaving the Bearcat unable to fully exploit its impressive manoeuvrability in service. Even then, it could sustain a 7G turn without trouble due to the engine’s high power.

6. Hawker Tempest Mk.II  ‘Sundown over Empire’

The best British fighter in the last months of the Second World War was the Hawker Tempest Mk.V, which matched high speed with heavy armament and surprising agility for such a large aircraft. Combat reports from late 1944 and 1945 give little doubt that the Tempest Mk.V generally made short work of the Fw 190s and Me 109s it encountered over Holland and Germany, at the low and medium altitudes where most air combat took place at that time. The Mk.II (its lower mark number reflecting the fact that designations were issued according to engine fit during the type’s development rather than a progressive development) replaced the Mk.V’s complex and sometimes temperamental Napier Sabre H-24 engine with a reliable 18-cylinder Bristol Centaurus radial. The change of engine resulted in an improvement in the already impressive performance, being up to 20 mph faster than the Mk.V at all altitudes (top speed was just shy of 450mph at 12,000ft, and did not begin to fall away seriously until 20,000ft) with a better rate of climb, while leaving the handling unaltered. Acceleration was astonishing – the Tempest Mk.II could pull out an initial lead on a P-47D even at high altitudes, despite turbo-equipped Thunderbolt having a higher top speed. At low levels, the Tempest was a barely-believable 80mph faster than the P-47. At altitudes up to 20,000ft, not many fighters could live with the Tempest Mk.II in 1946, while it also made an effective ground-attack aircraft. It served with the RAF in Germany and India until 1951, and with the Indian Air Force.

5. de Havilland Hornet F Mk.I ‘The Spiffing Super Hornet’

Designed for a Pacific island-hopping campaign that was over before it entered service, the Hornet was the finest twin piston-engined fighter ever to see service, boasting superlative range, speed, firepower and handling. ‘Handed’ (the left propeller turning the opposite direction from the right one) engines and airscrews removed the torque that plagued the highest powered piston-engined aircraft and, unburdened by the colossal nose-mounted motor of single-engined fighters, the Hornet pilot enjoyed an exceptional view forwards and downwards from his bubble canopy in the extreme nose. Armament was the standard and effective British fit of four 20-mm Hispano cannon mounted below the pilot. With 4000hp available the performance in the vertical plane was described as ‘rocket-like’ and ‘even with one propeller feathered the Hornet could loop with the best single-engine fighter’. As the fastest ever operational piston-engined British warplane, the Hornet supplied performance that was only marginally inferior to the Meteor and Vampire and combined it with an endurance the thirsty jets could not match. The late-model Merlins that powered the Hornet were highly developed, reliable engines at the end of a decade long process of refinement and improvement and still had advantages over the first turbojets. Not least was their ability to rapidly increase engine speed, useful for a fighter but essential for a carrier aircraft, which the Hornet was being developed into during 1946. In the words of Eric Brown, who flew all but one of the aircraft on this list and conducted the carrier qualification trials of the Sea Hornet, it was ‘a truly outstanding warplane… ranks second to none for harmony of control, performance characteristics and, perhaps most important, in inspiring confidence in the pilot. For sheer exhilarating flying enjoyment, no aircraft has ever made a deeper impression on me‘.

4. North American P-51H Mustang ‘Mustang Harry‘

The North American P-51 was one of the outstanding fighters of the Second World War, and one of the few to have a genuinely strategic impact due to its ability to escort bombers all the way to Berlin. Surprisingly, Edgar Schmued and the design team at North American believed their superb aircraft could be improved upon significantly. Although the P-51B-D models comfortably outpaced and outranged the Spitfire Mk.IX, despite using a similar powerplant, the Mustang was significantly heavier, compromising its rate of climb and potentially holding back even better performance. Schmued asked for a complete weight breakdown of the Spitfire, searching for any areas where the Mustang could be lightened, and using lower British load factors. In addition, the aerodynamics were completely revised, to create a series of prototype ‘lightweights’ that knocked on the door of the magic 500mph. The production version was designated the P-51H, and featured a lighter structure, new wing planform and aerofoil. It improved on the P-51D in every respect, being capable of over 480mph at 25,000ft, with an impressive climb rate and manoeuvrability to boot, and was more forgiving to fly than the earlier models. The ‘H’ just missed the war in frontline service (despite some erroneous suggestions that a few made it to the Far East by VJ Day) though the first squadrons were formed in mid-1945. It could certainly give any contemporary jets a run for their money.

3. Gloster Meteor F Mk.3 ‘A-10 before drug use’

Britain’s first jet fighter still looked like pretty hot stuff in 1946, the staggering leap in capability of Soviet and American jets had yet to occur and Britain appeared to lead the world in the brave new world of jet aircraft. In its Mk 3 version the Meteor utilised the Derwent engine, a marked improvement over the Welland with which the Mk I was (under)powered. The considerably superior Mk.4 had flown in 1944 but would only enter service in 1947 and in the meantime the RAF made do with the still highly capable Mk.3. The Meteor’s great advantage was, of course, its speed. Manoeuvrability was not brilliant in the lateral plane, the ailerons (and the pilot’s arm) had a lot of work to do to overcome the inertia of two Derwents hanging halfway out on those huge wings and rate of roll was pedestrian, but the Meteor could use its obvious speed advantage to engage or disengage any other aircraft at will and four 20-mm cannon in the nose was considered ‘the ideal’ in 1946. In contrast to its state-of-the-art engines the airframe was, in comparison to the Me 262 for example, extremely conservative and blessed with truly massive dimensions. This would ultimately prove to be an advantage as the Meteor was able to absorb requirements for a second crewman, radar, more fuel, better engines, disposable stores and so on with ease. Unfortunately by the time it got engines of really decent thrust the MiG-15 had rendered it an anachronism as an air-superiority fighter, as RAAF experience in Korea would bear out, but in 1946 this was all in the future and the big Meteor could bask in turbojet glory in a piston-powered world.

2. Lockheed P-80A Shooting Star ‘Kelly’s Tip-Tanker’

While the definitive Shooting Star, the F-80C, didn’t arrive until 1948, the P-80A in squadron service in 1946 was formidable by the standards of its time. The speedily designed jet had gone from drawing board to flight in a period only a few weeks longer than that of the North American Mustang, despite the many unknowns associated with jet power and the transonic region of flight. Unlike the first US stab at a jet fighter, the ponderous Bell P-59, the P-80 was right almost from the off. The 1946-standard P-80A had a top speed in tests of 536 mph at 25,000ft, and could top 500mph at a range of altitudes, even with tip tanks fitted, remaining controllable up to Mach 0.82. The Air Force’s Flight Test Division considered that the P-80A was ‘superior in manoeuvrability in most respects, especially at high speeds’, and that ‘a high rate of roll is possible at all speeds, and precision aerobatics can be accomplished with ease’. Furthermore, the Shooting Star had ‘the most excellent lateral manoeuvring characteristics of any fighter of today’ thanks to its powered ailerons. Moreover, visibility was superb thanks to a forward-placed bubble canopy and slim nose. The P-80A wasn’t perfect as a fighter – at certain heights, it suffered from longitudinal instability that compromised its utility as a gun-platform and could be irritating for the pilot. But by 1946 standards, the P-80A was up there with the very best.

1 .de Havilland Vampire F Mk.I ‘The ferocious Spidercrab’

Despite its partially wooden construction and cuddly appearance the Vampire was a force to be reckoned with in 1946. In terms of speed, climb and range the Vampire and Lockheed’s P-80A (its only serious rival) were virtually identical. In terms of armament the quartet of 20-mm cannon was rather more potent than the Shooting Star’s increasingly irrelevant .50 cal machine guns but it was in agility that the Vampire really shone. When both were at their normal loaded weight the Vampire was a ton and a half lighter than the Lockheed and could outmanoeuvre it with ease. Indeed the Vampire was so agile that it could best a Spitfire Mk XIV, itself a fighter noted for its excellent manoeuvrability, in every respect (except rate of roll) whilst at the same time being considerably faster at all altitudes. Given pilots of roughly equal ability the Vampire could never be beaten by the Spitfire. Had the Vampire been in action sooner it would have been a serious problem for the Me 262, combining sufficient performance to match the German jet with both engine reliability that the Luftwaffe could only have dreamed of, and a manoeuvrability the 262 could not rival, all the while being a much smaller target than the Messerschmitt. The key to this sparkling agility was the Vampire’s relatively enormous wing for its dainty weight which also, helpfully, blessed the Vampire with brilliant high altitude abilities – as late as 1949 the USAF’s massive B-36 was deemed to be immune from attack at its operating altitude by the vaunted F-86 Sabre or any other known fighter – except the de Havilland Vampire, which set a new world altitude record of 59.446 ft that very year. Inexplicably, though perhaps inevitably, given that in the Vampire the RAF had the world’s preeminent air-superiority fighter and in the larger Meteor an ideal jet powered fighter-bomber, it was the Vampire that was developed for the ground attack role and the Meteor for air defence. Despite the world-beating performance the Vampire was relatively simple and cheap, ultimately serving with 32 air forces, more than any other British post-war aircraft.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

The best fighters of 1946 were selected by: 

Matthew Willis writes about naval and other kinds of aviation. His runs the Naval Air History website and can be found at @navalairhistory on Twitter. His book on the Fairey Flycatcher, one of the top ten British naval fighters of 1926, is available soon from MMP Books. 

 Ed Ward is the co-writer of the new musical ‘Every Day is Like Skyray’, a celebration of the life and work of Ed Heinemann featuring the songs of Morrissey. He is also a freelance illustrator

Joe Coles is the Editor and creator of Hush-Kit

The basic running of the Hush-Kit blog (which makes no profit) costs money. Help us carry on – without adverts. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here or here .Thank you lovely reader! 

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians. 

In a move long anticipated by industry insiders, Indian’s Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar announced today that Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) will produce a radically modernised version of the 1950s-vintage Hawker Hunter jet fighter.

The original Hunter, a British design, first flew in 1951 and was widely exported. It proved popular with the Indian Air Force, which ordered the type in 1954. The Hunter’s proven airframe will provide a low-risk basis for the new design, the name of which will be ‘Langoor’ in air force service. The Langoor is intended to solve India’s fighter shortage with the minimum of cost and risk, while embracing the national ‘Make in India‘ initiative to develop indigenous weapon systems and technologies. The Swedish aero-company Saab, with its proven track record, will be the partner nation for the Langoor’s testing phase. Lessons learned from the painfully slow Tejas programme, and the mired MMRCA fighter acquirement will inform the project which is intended to emphasise modest and realisable goals. According to Parrikar, the type will enter service in 2022 and will offer reliability alongside operating costs 25% that of the Sukhoi Su-30, with a unit cost at least 70% lower than that of Tejas. The design will prioritise long range and ‘rugged’ reliability over high performance, and will feature proven systems to ensure a high level of combat effectiveness. Parrikar noted that “Mach 1.5+ performance is not necessary for the vast majority of combat missions, yet this requirement has until now dominated our search for future fighters. The use of heavily networked slower assets within a force that includes faster aircraft, like the Su-30, will prove more effective, far cheaper and will give the Indian Air Force what it most needs: larger, safer and more reliable forces. Langoor will be a game-changer.”

The Langoor will differ from the Hunter in many respects-

• The original engine Rolls-Royce Avon will be replaced by the Eurojet EJ200
• Sensors will include the Swedish PS-05/A radar
• New lightweight helmet cueing system
• Internal armament of one GSh-23-mm cannon
• New wing to be designed with BAE Systems
• Glass cockpit
• Weapons to include R-73 short range air-to-air missiles

India is expected to order between 250-400 aircraft. Most of the design work has been completed and a prototype is expected to fly in 2019, with service entry scheduled for 2022.

Thank you for reading Hush-Kit. Our site is absolutely free and we have no advertisements. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here– it doesn’t have to be a large amount, every pound is gratefully received. If you can’t afford to donate anything then don’t worry.

Want to see more stories like this: Follow my vapour trail on Twitter: @Hush_kit

To keep this blog going- allowing us to create new articles- we need donations. We’re trying to do something different with Hush-Kit: give aviation fans something that is both entertaining, surprising and well-informed. Please do help us and click on the donate button above – you can really make a difference (suggested donation £10). You will keep us impartial and without advertisers – and allow us to carry on being naughty.  A big thank you to all of our readers.

Have a look at 10 worst British military aircraft, Su-35 versus Typhoon, 10 Best fighters of World War II , top WVR and BVR fighters of today, an interview with a Super Hornet pilot and a Pacifist’s Guide to Warplanes. Was the Spitfire overrated? Want something more bizarre? The Top Ten fictional aircraft is a fascinating read, as is The Strange Story and The Planet Satellite. The Fashion Versus Aircraft Camo is also a real cracker. Those interested in the Cold Way should read A pilot’s guide to flying and fighting in the Lightning. Those feeling less belligerent may enjoy A pilot’s farewell to the Airbus A340. Looking for something more humorous? Have a look at this F-35 satire and ‘Werner Herzog’s Guide to pusher bi-planes or the Ten most boring aircraft. In the mood for something more offensive? Try the NSFW 10 best looking American airplanes, or the same but for Canadians.

“If you have any interest in aviation, you’ll be surprised, entertained and fascinated by Hush-Kit – the world’s best aviation blog”. Rowland White, author of the best-selling ‘Vulcan 607’

I’ve selected the richest juiciest cuts of Hush-Kit, added a huge slab of new unpublished material, and with Unbound, I want to create a beautiful coffee-table book. Pre-order your copy now right here  

TO AVOID DISAPPOINTMENT PRE-ORDER YOUR COPY NOW

From the cocaine, blood and flying scarves of World War One dogfighting to the dark arts of modern air combat, here is an enthralling ode to these brutally exciting killing machines.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes is a beautifully designed, highly visual, collection of the best articles from the fascinating world of military aviation –hand-picked from the highly acclaimed Hush-kit online magazine (and mixed with a heavy punch of new exclusive material). It is packed with a feast of material, ranging from interviews with fighter pilots (including the English Electric Lightning, stealthy F-35B and Mach 3 MiG-25 ‘Foxbat’), to wicked satire, expert historical analysis, top 10s and all manner of things aeronautical, from the site described as:

“the thinking-man’s Top Gear… but for planes”.

The solid well-researched information about aeroplanes is brilliantly combined with an irreverent attitude and real insight into the dangerous romantic world of combat aircraft.

FEATURING

• • • • Interviews with pilots of the F-14 Tomcat, Mirage, Typhoon, MiG-25, MiG-27, English Electric Lighting, Harrier, F-15, B-52 and many more.
      • Engaging Top (and bottom) 10s including: Greatest fighter aircraft of World War II, Worst British aircraft, Worst Soviet aircraft and many more insanely specific ones.
      • Expert analysis of weapons, tactics and technology.
      • A look into art and culture’s love affair with the aeroplane.
      • Bizarre moments in aviation history.
      • Fascinating insights into exceptionally obscure warplanes.

The book will be a stunning object: an essential addition to the library of anyone with even a passing interest in the high-flying world of warplanes, and featuring first-rate photography and a wealth of new world-class illustrations.

Rewards levels include these packs of specially produced trump cards.

Pre-order your copy now right here  

I can only do it with your support.