Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: frank@thehowards.ca
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: The Hunter was a great aicraft, but if only . . . - images.jpg
Message-ID: <be6ofb9l9fhoan9ipm7t9f4ct5caih2c5s@4ax.com>
References: <j1elfbp264hq07tflmokp4ijb6k4oaj68f@4ax.com> <t8hlfb9vt4afmjfnglctk2imsdaeng3v24@4ax.com> <y5ednYkDsLPplWbLnZ2dnUU7-S3NnZ2d@earthlink.com>
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 26
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.193.84.230
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cogeco.net
X-Trace: 1459366810 67.193.84.230 (Wed, 30 Mar 2016 19:40:10 UTC)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 19:40:10 UTC
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 15:39:43 -0400
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2125099663
X-Received-Bytes: 2014
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:3447
On Tue, 29 Mar 2016 17:57:59 -0500, "Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:
>"Charles Lindbergh" wrote in message
>news:t8hlfb9vt4afmjfnglctk2imsdaeng3v24@4ax.com...
>>
>> If only, what? If only the USA had purchased the aircraft?
>
>The U.S. already had the F-100 as a transonic jet.
>
>The Lebanese air force flew Hunters until a couple of years ago
Why should the US NOT have bought the Hunter? It's cost was only about
half that of the F100. That would have come to a $660-million saving
over the life of the aircraft, or about $6-billion in today's money.
Even if a decision to buy Hunters had been delayed until the F100 was
ready for service, the development cost of the Super Sabre
($23-million) would easily have been written off.
Then there was the F100's awful accident rate. 889 aircraft, or about
one-third of the total production, were lost to accidents, involving
the loss of 324 pilots.
OK, the F-100 was faster by about 25mph in level flight and ongoing US
developments called for somewhat different requirements.
|
|
){kind=link}