The Secret Fighter That Was Too Small to Spot - The Sabre Slayer

Throughout aviation history, many of the most iconic aircraft have been named after powerful animals. From the F9F Panther to the F-15 Eagle, big cats, birds of prey, and other fearsome creatures have been invoked to highlight speed, strength, and aggression.
Yet when British designer W.E.W. “Teddy” Petter set about creating a new fighter in the early 1950s, he knew only one name would do: the Gnat.
Like the minuscule insect it was named after, this aircraft was truly tiny. Less than thirty feet long and weighing little more than 6,500 pounds at a time when prevailing trends favored the big and the heavy, it was a radical departure that flew in the face of fifties fighter fashion. Yet like its namesake, it could also torment far larger adversaries with relentless persistence, turning its diminutive size into a lethal advantage.
Though it was deemed too unconventional for combat use in its homeland, the Folland Gnat would find a new home half a world away. Soon, this pint-sized hero would find itself taking on one of the greatest dogfighters of all time: the F-86 Sabre…
---
Join Dark Skies as we explore the world of aviation with cinematic short documentaries featuring the biggest and fastest airplanes ever built, top-secret military projects, and classified missions with hidden untold true stories. Including US, German, and Soviet warplanes, along with aircraft developments that took place during World War I, World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War, and special operations mission in between.
As images and footage of actual events are not always available, Dark Skies sometimes utilizes similar historical images and footage for dramatic effect and soundtracks for emotional impact. We do our best to keep it as visually accurate as possible.
All content on Dark Skies is researched, produced, and presented in historical context for educational purposes. We are history enthusiasts and are not always experts in some areas, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with corrections, additional information, or new ideas.

[@devashishvaid]

My Grandad was a GNAT test pilot for Indian Air Force. At the time he was certified by both RAF and IAF to fly for either Airforces. India started to induct GNAT in around '61-'62 and the very first production spec was destroyed in a pre delivery crash. My grandpa was scheduled to fly the second delivered jet for a PDI flight, and during the flight they were running test for jettisoning the fuel tanks. That test failure led to the crash of the plane. The Airforce obviously had never released the details of the crash but that's something we found out from the people up and close to them was that the external tanks created a unstable aerodynamic envelope due to it's design and the IN-0002 jet that my Gramps piloted had uncontrollable pitch movement. My grandpa perished with the jet outside the airspace of HAL Bangalore trying to recover the jet away from crowded places. He and I are the only aviators from a long long line of relatives in my family. RIP

[@PapiDoesIt]

He was a brave man for flying the second aircraft after the first crashed. You should be proud.

[@devashishvaid]

@@PapiDoesIt Absolutely. Cut from different cloth. Commands a different level of respect. To knowingly and willingly sit in a seat that could very well be your final resting place is an acceptance that only a man in uniform could muster up. Not mere mortals.

[@Kathiarwari]

Salute the brave air warrior RIP

[@WardenWolf]

Tragic. Sadly not too uncommon with early jets. Virtually all of them had quirks that made them overly dangerous in some way, simply because they didn't fully understand what they were doing yet. Things like stores jettisoning at high speeds weren't always predictable. Eventually they figured out how to design both tanks and mounts that could jettison safely, but many pilots tragically lost their lives during this experimental early jet phase.

[@philipdurling1964]

May his memory be a blessing.

[@alanelesstravelled8218]

The Red Arrows discovered that if a certain fuse was removed the roll rate of the Gnat could be increased. The top brass ordered that the fuse should not be removed, the Red Arrows duly obeyed the order but replaced the fuse with a blown one.

[@joeylawn36111]

🤣

[@michaelpcoffee]

Sweet!! Orders duly obeyed!

[@bjmccann1]

Oh! So clever. I'm sure that the engineers who designed the craft just put that fuse in there for no reason at all. Let's say that they would've had a series of crashes. The entire fleet would've been grounded until an investigation had determined the cause. It couldn't possibly have been those fuses, because the paperwork shows that they were regularly replaced. It must've been the company making the fuses. Our mechanics were that they had put good fuses in. Cancel that company's contract. They might go out of business, and people might lose their jobs, but they make crapoy fuses.

[@OldPapaBear]

@@bjmccann1 Yeah, you're right. One must set their priorities. Those jobs are far more important than the pilots flying into combat situations.

[@Siddich]

@@OldPapaBear…on airshows…red arrows…unarmed trainer aircraft. unlikely to ever see combat in bright red aircraft. and without the industry pilots will not have an aircraft to fly into combat. one of britains biggest mistakes was to rely on american built aircraft too much. was one reason, why they almost lost the falklands…

[@follandgnatrebuild7504]

Very interesting to see you do this video as I am restoring a Gnat, XR987, to flight condition in New Zealand. This particular Gnat was part of the YellowJacks and then was one of the original Gnats that formed the Red Arrows and stayed with the team until her retirement in 1979 when the Red Arrows changed to the Hawk. XR987 should return to the skies mid 2025. Cheers

[@grahamstubbs4962]

Mate, you just got yourself a new subscriber. 🙂

[@bronsonperich9430]

​@@grahamstubbs4962same here!

[@gryph01]

Nice! Looking forward to seeing a video of her flying. Just subbed to your channel.

[@michaelmartin1519]

Awesome sir! Enjoy your project, and fly her well! Godspeed from Colorado!

[@JClarkeCT1334]

Enjoy your tiny beauty.

[@WardenWolf]

It sounds like the Gnat would have been an ideal fit for virtually every air force at the time it was introduced, but everyone was thinking bigger when a smaller, lighter, cheaper aircraft could actually perform better in many cases. It was the aircraft everyone needed, but almost no one knew they needed it. It could easily beat many of the best fighters in the world during the pre-missile period.

[@MachinecoMachines]

Well spoken, You should get tons of likes for that statement., ☺

[@YoniBaruch-y3m]

Same market as the F-5? And the MiG 21?

[@jonathanryan933]

When introducing anything totally new, and unproven. It takes very strong men to stand by a belief in anything that different. The Indian Air Force proved that the small, agile jet, would fill a special place in air combat. I'm old enough to remember watching, and hearing, "The Red Arrows" perform, almost miraculous displays. Truly beautiful.

a very underated aircraft,simple but damned effective.

[@nikolaucznaum4312]

Sadly, the UK mandarins know how to piss on the bonfire.......

[@RogerEvans-oy2wj]

Arguably the prettiest jet fighter aircraft ever!

[@tarmaque]

Among the prettiest, surely. I'm a fan of the F5 Tiger myself in the looks department. On the other hand I'm also a big fan of ugly fighters that perform. Such as the F-8 Crusader and her little sister the A-7 Corsair.

[@codywalz8555]

Ohhh the F5 is a good one. The F16 will always be close to my heart. This one’s pretty cute though.

[@scottshaw1310]

​@@tarmaqueXF8U-3 Crusader III must surely be the greatest of all. Why they were all scrapped is an absolute crime!

[@davidcroucher1399]

Hawker Hunter still pips it I think...

[@tarmaque]

@@davidcroucher1399 Not bad, but a bit generic, I think. I like the English Electric Lightning. Not as pretty, but a beast of an aircraft.

[@PapiDoesIt]

One of the unsung heroes of aviation. Looks fast sitting still. Simple is sometimes better.

[@rogerhudson9732]

When the Red Arrows flew the Gnat I saw them a number of times. The display rules meant they could fly very low over water. Once I was in a dinghy in Fowey harbour when they flew the 2 plane head on manoeuvre low and I was engulfed in JP1 exhaust fumes, spectacular display.

[@christhesmith]

I was in a kayak when the blue angels did the same over the severn river, maryland usa. Absolutely terrifying..and the were just being friendly!

[@graemef6852]

An example of the brilliance of the British aerospace engineers of the 50's and 60's. I hadn't realised this about the Gnat, but what an aircraft. A real David and Goliath story of the skies.

[@restojon1]

There are still a couple on airshow duty in the UK. Get out and see them if you can, they're probably the angriest little aircraft you'll ever see... fantastic little things.

[@garryferrington811]

Very pretty aircraft. Sometimes simpler is better.

[@georgebarnes8163]

Indeed, the little BAE Hawk carries the same virtues.

[@kawarps]

Anecdotally it was said all Royal Air Force fighter pilots of the 1960s and 1970s were short because of being able to fit in the Gnats cockpit. The video is fascinating. W.E.W Petter is the most overlooked aircraft designer of the British war time and post war years.

[@MachinecoMachines]

All respect to Petter and Folland Aircraft. . . . . . and a frown upon the boffins at the Air Ministry that turned it down as a proper fighter.

[@randyrippley7381]

Petter was responsible for the Lightning, the Canberra and the Gnat. One heck of a record: for a while the backbone of the RAF's fast jet squadrons. All remained in service longer than expected because quite simply, they worked

[@michaelleiper]

@@randyrippley7381 I still remember seeing the Lightning at an air show in Aberdeen back in the 70s. Very noisy, very fast.

[@ranavalona24]

As a maintenance fitter at RAF valley in the seventies I was routinely required to carry out ground runs on Gnat T1s. Stepping into the cockpit was like settling into my greatcoat. I did wonder about the knees of any taller pilot who had to bang out.

[@keithattwood59]

During my simulator technical training in the RAF, I flew and learned on a Gnat simulator. It was driven by analogue computer, built on vacuum tubes.

[@ThatMicro43Guy]

Was that at Locking?

[@FreeFlyerUk]

Me too... DST12

[@davidrolfe9571]

I joined Folland Aircraft at Hamble as an Aeronautical Engineering Apprentice in 1961 - alternating 6 months at the factory / 6 months at college starting in the workshops. Used to watch newly finished Gnats being trailered out. Part of our training included in depth reviews of various aircraft accidents, causes and lessons learned. I found this really interesting and in later years I would happily personally review aviation accidents in depth and subsequently entertain family and friends and fellow passengers with accounts of these accidents, often involving the aircraft type we were about to board. Sadly my efforts to entertain and inform were not always appreciated.

[@tonypetts6663]

"Sadly my efforts to entertain and inform were not always appreciated." 🤣🤣🤣🤣 I'm sure I don't know why!

[@mike747436]

7.45 You talk about the Hawker Hunter but show what I believe is a Gloster Meteor. I had a passenger ride in a Gnat in 1978 while training on its replacement, the Hawk.

[@64Alvis]

There's a lot of unrelated footage which I find annoying.

[@julianfrost3796]

I noticed that too. It's very jarring.

[@milangasic7289]

me too

[@MrOtistetrax]

⁠@@64Alvisthere always is with this channel. He also just takes large chunks off Wikipedia and reads them basically verbatim. Eg. 8:53 “including the adoption of a new wing with additional fuel capacity, which in turn allowed for more internal space within the fuselage to be allocated for additional equipment…. The inboard ailerons of the fighter variant were reconfigured to an arrangement of outboard ailerons and conventional flaps.”

[@jamesjacobson3966]

I noticed that too. Thought I also saw footage of F -16s for some reason while showing Mirages in flight? Also bit of a stretch to say the Indian airforce was outclassed regarding the quality at least of their aircraft in 1965. I don’t believe all the Sabres were Canadian built of which the Mk 6 was the ultimate version. Many were older US F86Fs. Regardless they were second hand and at least 10 years old by then? India did have the Hawker Hunter in large quantities which outclassed both the Sabres and Gnats by most measures. I have read the term Sabre Slayer was more of a propaganda claim by India for morale purposes. Given the disparity in size of their respective militaries and that Pakistan was then split into to widely separated halves the PAF did surprisingly well against the IAF. Not taking sides here just looking at it dispassionately.

[@willbraxton1843]

Hey for all you complaining some of us just dig watching the footage because we may not have seen the history footage and by the way thank you for putting it together and sharing with us.

[@khalsasikhpunjabda]

My father was a fighter pilot in Indian Airforce and flew Gnats...

[@masterm43]

That’s awesome

[@lanesaarloos281]

There must be stories !

[@PhantomLover007]

The Gnat also made it into the movies. They were in the movie “Hot Shots” as the fictional "Oscar EW-5894 Phallus" tactical fighter bombers were portrayed by four privately owned Folland Gnat T.1s and an Ajeet. These planes were flown by US Navy pilots in the movie.

[@zenhallman780]

I was just about to add a similar message but I did not know these details! :-) Of course they used the Gnats because a) they were cheap b) they are very small and made to look comical while on the ground. But they sure could fly and certainly made the movie more watchable.

[@raizalmohammad8188]

One of the privately owned Gnat had a fatal crash during the filming of Hot Shots killing the pilot..almost scrapped the movie because of the incident.

[@drfirechief8958]

A very similar concept was endorsed by Chuck Yeager the F-20 Tiger Shark. Small, cheap and easily maintained. His idea mirrored the Gnat as cheap, rapidly built jet aircraft to swarm the enemy as opposed to a few very expensive aircraft. You lose a Gnat or a Tiger Shark there two more coming. The Gnat really earned it's reputation as that little bug that can really irritate the elephant if needed. Great story!

[@cawensil3264]

The F-20 Tigershark was an evolving upgrade of the F5. Which was almost NEVER used as a fighter. Mostly it was used as a ground attack aircraft. Even though it was smal and extremely agile. Had the followed the suggestions and using the F20, the FA18 and the F15 would most likely never have been developed.

[@YoniBaruch-y3m]

F-20 my favorite plane of all time. 🎉

[@YoniBaruch-y3m]

@@cawensil3264Didn’t F-5 have the best scores against the MiG 21 of any aircraft ever? ❤

[@cawensil3264]

@@YoniBaruch-y3m Yes. It was faster, more manueverable at speed, and capable of carrying more arms. The Navy didn't want it because it was single seat, single engine. Also, it was not designed for carrier use, however, the f20 was addressing that issue.

[@gone547]

Saw one at the Indian Air Force Museum at Indira Ghandi airport New Delhi. Was gobsmacked at how tiny (and cute) it was.

[@Blowinshiddup]

I read in the book on the Canadian Starfighter about a mid-air between an F-104 and an RAF Gnat during an improvised mass flypast. The formation turned into a gaggle, with some aircraft slowing to near stall speed while others were straining to catch up. A Gnat shortened its nose on the turkey-feathers of an Italian Starfighter engine, so at that point the Canadians opted to remove themselves from the event... There was a picture of the Gnat with its nose hanging off landing at an airfield. I believe it was at Leck...

[@MachinecoMachines]

That is a great recollection. Please publish a link to that newspaper page showing the Gnat with the squashed nose !

[@Blowinshiddup]

@@MachinecoMachines it was actually in a book on the CF-104 Starfighter in Canadian service...

[@iancharlton678]

Still flying from North Weald airfield in Essex. G-MOUR previously owned by David Gilmour, the Pink Floyd guitarist - painted as a Yellow Jack ………. and at least one other which I recall is displayed in an earlier red/white RAF livery.

[@IntrospectorGeneral]

Folland Aircraft was established by Henry Folland, designer of the WW1 SE5 fighter and the interwar Glostet Grebe, Gamecock, Gauntlet, and Gladiator biplaine fighters. WE Petter took over as chief designer and, eventually, as Managing Director of Foland aircraft post WW2. While Folland is not exactly a forgotten designer his failure to design any memorable stressed skin monoplane designs has led to him being somewhat overlooked.

[@Orangesjesus]

Grebe, what a great name for an aircraft. The Australasian grebe, is one of my favourite birds, (and some call it a duck).

[@IntrospectorGeneral]

@@Orangesjesus I don't know how much leeway Gloster gave Henry Folland in choosing names for his designs but a few of his others were the Nightjar, the Gnatsnapper, the Gambet, and the Goldfinch.

[@Orangesjesus]

@@IntrospectorGeneral something of a bird fancier, himself?, or "twitterer", isn't it?.

[@topspeed250k5]

Wow he designed great planes, starting with the SE5a and finishing with the Gladiator! Beautiful and effective biplanes.

[@dimitrihayez6502]

As a kid, I was lucky enough to see one flying in an airshow in Belgium in de 80's. Not sur wich version, as it was long time ago. A very nimble fly.

[@gamernerd7139]

This aircraft is part of my childhood memories in the early 80's. There was a static display in the summer camp school grounds, where I was doing aeromodelling. We tried to sneak into the cockpit which was stripped down. The surprising fact is that it is still there in the campus today. An old bird that refuses to die. I went into the Airforce cadet core and was introduced to the canberra which was used in limited role at that time. Good memories!

[@topspeed250k5]

Better change that "core" to "corp" 😂 you're losing your cred.

[@MrPoornakumar]

Thank you. My association with Gnat ("G" silent) was long. Its the saga of a lowly fighter jet aircraft. How many weapons an Interceptor/LWF (light weight fighter) can carry along with its fuel? So drop-tanks were necessary, in long ferry -flights. My son, who accompanied me to a public show saw Gnat, with all her regalia that included drop tanks. He asked "what is it, a bomb?". I said "No. Its a drop tank, that can be dropped (jettisoned)?" Then he said "then why carry? Put a bomb in that place". I learnt a lesson from him, in fighter aircraft design; juggling with the load it carries. Its successor "Ajeet" was an improved version did carry, as the main weapon (with wet wings basically to carry more fuel & thus offering a longer range). It needs to be mentioned that HF24 Marut that was the best air-frame (aerodyanamic) design then (designed by the German Prof.Kurt Tank), but failed to get an equally powerful engine (as none would offer it for love or money). Severely under-powered Bristol 730010 twin engines (even) got it relegated to ground-attack role that it performed very well. It left air-superiority role blank & Gnat was to fill it partially. These design conundrums & stark incapacity to develop our own fighter jet engine (efforts were apace laterally though for an engine)left a "hunger in the belly" as Kalam saab would say, in the designers "sans no design office nor design bureau" entertaining visions of the best "fighter jet" design on the drawing board. With a close interaction & experience with the original LWF, Indian design community set out to design, creating ADA for it. It culminated in LCA Tejas. American aircraft designers were a keen lot, observing every air-battle around the world (drawing lessons for future design projects). In 1965 Indo-Pak war they observed the air-battles with keen interest. They saw how this little insect, Gnat delivered a powerful sting on Sabre (F-86; that was Korean War veteran & hero that won decisive air-battles) that was fatal at times; all with a Aden30 gun, that was the main weapon. It began carrying a missile later, with no avail. Gnat had to go behind its pursuer quickly for gunning, executing a jaw-dropping yaw in no time. This dog-fight sequence impressed the American designer-community. Particularly impressive was its evasion of F104 star-fighter (they call it, "pilot in a rocket" as it can quickly get to Mach1 speed). Gnat pilot simply dropped in height to see F104 shooting past overhead. It was his near-fatal decision! No doubt, the '65 war was won by our pilots' skill. But every time pilot 's skill won't pay. Nevertheless the American team went back to their drawing boards & came up with "LWF" designs. Experimental prototypes were prefixed/designated with a X or Y before the name/nomenclature. As usual there was performance (competition in public view) show-off. Competitors were YF-16 (General dynamics) & YF-17 (I think it was Grumman-Northrop). In executing the tight turn (almost a circle as needed) YF-16's circle was tighter & so small that it won the selection. In mid-seventies, it was taken up for production for USAF (& NATO) dropping the prefix Y. About 4000 aircraft were made to date & they even offered (a lot of demand for version block-70 is here, for it for spares at least) to shift the production-line to India, but India didn't take it up. It was so while YF-17 that was almost as good as its competitor, but lost the race in photo-finish. Never mind! The Navy took it up as the main deck-fighter aircraft(to replace F14 twin-tail Tomcat!) & developed it as F-18 ( I think her present name is "Cobra"). A colleague who grew up-turned moustache, was found by friends with drooping mooch one day. It was joked (on him) "aircraft today has drooping wings today". He non-chalantly said. "Yes, high performance aircraft like Gnat have wings with low dihedral angle, only trainers have upward-pointing wings like Kiran (HJT-16 designed by Prof. Ghatge, an IISc alumnus) as stability is important". He meant, that for high performance, aircraft should be a wee bit "unstable"(a fighter pilot loves it), particularly "yaw". That is the only thing Rocket designers need to worry about, unless its a cruise missile.

[@FredScuttle456]

I'm surprised this video misses out two important stories. The Gnat was proposed as a fighter to the US Navy, but the Skyhawk won the contract instead. One of the Gnat's designers had created the SE5a fighter in WW1. Designing a wood/fabric biplane for the Great War, and still designing fighters for the Cold War.

[@billkennon319]

Awesome video. One of your best. There's a lot to be said for a small, agile plane in a dogfight. For many years the US Navy used A4s for adversary training. The F14 and A4 pilots I worked with (retired Navy SWO myself) loved the A4 and feared it. As one person said, the A4 was one of the last US planes you strapped on and flew, instead of "making suggestions to the computer what you would like it to do". The small agile planes do indeed confound the Mark 1 eyeball, which is vital in a close-in dogfight. Today they are dead meat for precision weapons, but in the dogfight they more or carry there own. Again, great video!

[@pavarottiaardvark3431]

The reason Finland bought the Gnat (and its successor the Hawk) is that the post WW2 treaty prohibited Finland (who had sort of been on the Axis side) from buying fighter jets. But the Gnat was *technically* a Trainer, so they were allowed to buy them. EDIT: another commenter has suggested that this isn't quite right. If you are interested in this stuff there's no substitute for proper reading

[@tepporaininko9556]

Not true. The Paris Peace Treaty limited the number of aircraft in the Finnish Air Force, but not the quality. Finland had already purchased Vampires, both single- and two-seater, after the war, and the French Fouga Magister had already been selected as a training fighter. The Air Force needed newer equipment, but the budget was small. The single-seater Gnat was chosen because it was a new aircraft type and also cheaper than competing models.

[@pavarottiaardvark3431]

@@tepporaininko9556 thanks for the correction, I should read more into this

[@tepporaininko9556]

@@pavarottiaardvark3431 You’re welcome. The Gnat fighters arrived in Finland in 1958 - a year later than agreed. In return, they were withdrawn from service earlier than planned in 1973. The Gnat was unreliable and required extensive maintenance. The type was grounded for up to six months due to a serious accident. The factory delivered a new aircraft to replace the first one that was destroyed, but a total 4 aircraft of 13 were lost, although the average flight hours were only about 60 hours per year. Finland planned to manufacture another 20 aircraft under license, but the idea was abandoned. In 1965, Finland acquired 20 Mig 21 F fighters and retired the last Vampires. The Gnat squadron (and the 20 never made) was replaced by two Saab Draken squadrons in 1973. In exercises, the new fighters were able to test their strength against the old Gnats. Although underpowered and poorly armed, the Gnat was superior in dogfights. The remaining Gnats were initially stored for emergencies, but were soon either museum-turned or scrapped. The next British aircraft in the Finnish Air Force were Hawk training fighters, the first of which entered service in 1980.

[@babalonkie]

Mosquito... Midge... Gnat... Members of the Nematocera species. UK has always had a fascination about Nature.

[@FredScuttle456]

Hornet.

[@haroldguernsey3798]

Cool.

[@horusfalcon]

A good subject, and well treated. Thanks! Hope you and yours are having a wonderful Christmas and a happy New Year.

[@Original50]

I have a feeling that a fleet of Gnats, piloted by former WW2 Polish pilots, would be a good deterrent to the Warsaw Pact.

[@pastorjerrykliner3162]

The Gnat II made it to Hollywood... It was the aircraft featured in the movie "Hot Shots" starring Charlie Sheen...

[@marklewis35]

Great little aircraft. I've seen and photographed them multiple times at air shows.

[@sdgsuperstar]

The emergence of warriors like “The Saber Slayer” helps broaden the view of fighting ability in martial arts or historical combat. These characters highlight the richness of tactics and talents, showing that it is not always necessary to have a strong body to achieve success in combat.

[@redtale6527]

I used to sit in my back yard watching the Red Pelicans and later the Red Arrows perform at Filton.

[@Sarge084]

There is a fine example of a Red Arrows Gnat at their former home RAF Kemble, now a civilian airfield renamed Cotswold Airport. The aforementioned Gnat is in front of the tower and fire section, part of which is now a restaurant. If ever you find yourself in Gloucestershire I would recommend a trip to Cotswold Airport, there are a number of interesting aircraft to see.

[@mikew2468]

I spent 4 happy years as a child at RAF Valley surrounded by Gnats and Hunters as my dad was an instructor there. Over his 30 years in the RAF his favourite aircraft to fly were the mosquito and the gnat....both buzzy!

[@chandrachurniyogi8394]

many Indian Folland Gnat F.1B light multi role air defence fighter were upgraded to F.4 standards . . . featuring a dedicated radar for air-to-air intercepts & air-to-air guided missiles . . . whereas the same upgrade was rejected by the Royal Air Force for their fleet of Folland Gnat F.2 light multi role air defence fighter . . .

[@PhilipWhitehouse-om7tx]

With the addition of an Arrester Hook etc. it would have made an excellent fighter for the Royal Navy- and others perhaps.

[@chandrachurniyogi8394]

@@PhilipWhitehouse-om7tx the Gnat has too light a airframe to withstand the abuse associated with carrier operations . . . reinforcements can easily buckle the super thin skin of the fuselage & wings . . . & most of all the Bristol Siddeley BOr.2 Orpheus 701-01 turbojet engine is under powered . . .

[@rodolfohernandez2702]

i remember the Gnat from the movie Hot Shots with Charlie Sheen

[@davidgifford8112]

That my first thought

[@JohnJ469]

Ah Roger Dodger Milli Vanilli

[@mercuryredstone2235]

I think it's sweet that they accidently used a fighter jet with a bad ass reputation for that parody.

[@joeylawn36111]

The joke was that the fictional plane in the movie was a cutting-edge advanced fighter, but was in real life an obsolete one. (The Folland Gnat was a good fighter, but it doesn't stack well against, say, the "Teens" (F-14, F-15, F-16) for example....)

[@mercuryredstone2235]

@joeylawn36111 True, that does make the joke funny. Personally, I wish they went with the Saab J-35 Draken since that's one of the few planes that competes with the Tomcat in terms of looks. But they probably couldn't get their hands on a small Squadron of them so yeah, I have to admit it makes sense they use the Folland Gnats.

[@shantanusapru]

The Gnat was the unlikeliest hero of the 1971 Indo-Pak war! It has stood India in good stead!

[@jonhiggins504]

The Gnat was beautiful aircraft, but an absolute nightmare to work on, maintain and keep serviceable!!! My late uncle brought one that was the gate guard at RAF Valley.

[@rossanderson4440]

That is surprising (to me, anyway) to hear, as the rationale behind it was that jets were getting too expensive and too maintenance intensive for their operational requirements!

[@andrewmorgan1819]

I worked on two retired Gnats during my apprenticeship, they were a delight to work on. So small you need little more than a step ladder even when on jacks. I loved the Reds displays with Gnats, the Hawk never caught me quite as much. I always thought the little Gnat looked more impressive doing the routines.

[@SaxJockey]

​@@andrewmorgan1819The external aesthetics of the Gnat are much nicer than the Hawk, from any angle. I also remember seeing the Gnat with the Red Arrows. Fair to say, the overall performance & practicality of the Hawk was the main reason for the change.

[@jeremycruickshank8614]

@@andrewmorgan1819 I fully agree. A bit like hideous modern cars - I yearn for the 50s and 60s.

[@unclefart5527]

Saw the Red Arrows at an airshow in the late seventies. Growing up with Canada's clunky straight wing CT-144 Tudors at every airshow the Gnats by comparison were amazing. Being tiny, they could tuck in real close, something the massive Blue Angels F-4s couldn't do. They were amazing. And yeah, the Tudors were old in the late seventies. Still flying and crashing, (at that show one did) they are so outdated they tell the world what a ridiculous country Canada is now. Imagine if Elon Musk was promoting his new Mercury spaceflight capsule. As for the military worth of the Gnat it didn't look like it could deliver letters. But damn, the Red Arrows were good.

[@chadrowe8452]

I like fat Albert the best.

[@unclefart5527]

@@chadrowe8452 I saw that at the NY Niagara Falls base in the 70s. Blue Angels were't there but I was more intrigued with some Nam veteran F-100s in the hangers and flight line. (We got kicked off the flight line by the safety boss.) BTW the Arrow support plane was a C-130 in the desert camo. Really liked that one as RCAF ones are all silver drab at the time. Now they're grey drab LOL.

[@gryph01]

There is nothing wrong with the Tutors. They were built between 1963 and 1966.

[@nickhorten97]

Ayden cannon, not aahden.

[@paulqueripel3493]

And still cant pronounce Canberra either.

[@andyf4292]

I think its a similar cartidge to the ah64 cannon

[@steveforks9698]

Forking yanks eh😂

[@NitrogenPurged]

Keep it up. I enjoy watching all your videos. A couple of editing things but packed with info! Great stuff.

[@lancerevell5979]

What's with showing a Boeing B-17, F-16s and the launch of a Sparrow missile? 😮

[@mdbigman]

LOL thought that was odd also. But great review.

[@Charles-k9g5y]

Who cares.

[@chadrowe8452]

It's just filler. KZbin won't let them show random boob pics.

[@tarmaque]

Typical Dark Skies padding when they can't find enough relevant footage and are tired of repeating what they do have.

[@Charles-k9g5y]

@ -- how much footage do you think there is? If you can do better then have at it.

[@lauriecroad3186]

Xcellent. One of my favourite A/c at displays.

[@hondaspeed6785]

Wow! This is a cool little plane. It doesn't happen often that I encounter a plane that I never heard of before.

[@YoniBaruch-y3m]

One of the first model planes I built as a kid. ❤

[@alext8828]

Very good. Had no info on this little plane. Well done, little Gnat.

[@terraflow__bryanburdo4547]

13:48 B17 getting raked....classic Dark Skies trolling😆

[@blackrosecomb]

Saw these a lot over the years at airshows and also training in Yorkshire. A very pretty aircraft and tiny!

[@JohnHannigan-wx8ng]

Thank you for this exelllent informative presentation.

[@kerbalx8023]

I've seen a Gnat in a museum once, this little guy is truly so tiny it looked like it was more of a basic jet trainer!

[@flybobbie1449]

Some still flying in private hands. I think it's roll rate had to be limited. You can see the concept a replacement Spitfire.

[@witchfinder401]

David Gilmour (Pink Floyd) owned one in yellow jack colours. G-MOUR.

[@raizalmohammad8188]

The BAE Hawk is based on the performance capibilities of this light fighter..

[@johnsheehan9318]

Your content is always brilliant!

[@kennyhagan5781]

I would love to see a video on the English Electric Lightning, if you haven't already done one. That thing gets you closer to space faster than any other plane.

[@briansmith8079]

Great aircraft!!! Thanks 👍

[@280zjammer]

You absolutely do not want your aircraft design to be “ground breaking”.

[@lesklower7281]

The Gnat a small jet fighter that packed a punch

[@flickingbollocks5542]

7:45 That isn't a Hunter...

[@lancerevell5979]

The Gloster Meteor is indeed quite different. 😮

[@grahamstubbs4962]

Any self-respecting Hunter would have Tower Bridge above it. 🙂

[@flickingbollocks5542]

@grahamstubbs4962 LOL Trouble is the pilot was discharged from RAF (on medical grounds which avoided Court Martial)

[@flickingbollocks5542]

@@lancerevell5979 Sometimes I think he deliberately shows us the wrong plane when talking about another. I don't remember seeing a video when he has got everything right.

[@grahamstubbs4962]

@@flickingbollocks5542 I would have promoted him. Either he was certifiably insane or just the kind of chap you want in a fighter squadron. Those are not mutually exclusive.

[@BigBadLoneWolf]

When the Red Arrows flew the Gnat, they stumbled on the fact, that if a couple of fuses were removed it significantly increased the roll rate. When the top brass found out, they ordered that the fuses be replaced. What they didnt say was that the fuses had to be serviceable, so the Red Arrows put blown fuses in and kept the roll rate

[@JohnJ469]

14:58 Interesting to see the rounds that missed the aircraft impacting the ground.

[@chrishamilton4999]

the Folland Gnat ... the prettiest aircraft ever ...

[@265justy]

@ 7:48...It shows a Meteor....not a Hunter ..Who makes and edits these vids..? Can they ever get right..🙄 And then seeing a B-17 and an F-16 later on in the vid...😂😂😂 For God sake ...

[@slaytanicsabbath]

The guy behind all of the “dark” documentary channels called the as such because he is blind, that’s what he said to me a couple years ago when I asked a similar question. Maybe he was kidding but it didn’t seem like it.

[@crawford323]

Outstanding

[@oculusangelicus8978]

The Canadair CL-13B mk.6 was the best fighter jet of its era. but the problem with having the best fighter jet in the world is that, in order to put it to good use, you needed to have the best fighter pilots in them, and while those jets were in the hands of the Canadian pilots, they were a force to be reckoned with, even American Pilots had a healthy respect for Canadian Pilots because they often lost to Canadian pilots when Canada and the USA joined together for aerial combat training events annually. The reason being is that American Pilots could only be a pilot for so long before being promoted out of the cockpit, which is the American stype of operation, to always make room for younger up and coming pilots to gain access to the fighters, but in Canada, the Pilots can be Career Pilots and the amount of experience and treachery they gathered in the time of their Career was a massive deciding factor in aerial combat, Youth and Vigor loses out to old age and treachery everytime. But Pakistan didn't have as robust a training system so they could not use those fighter jets to their top capabilities and the Gnat was a smaller, lighter and mor maneuverable aircraft, which would put a heavy strain on the Pakistani pilot's skills. And the Sabre was an older aircraft than the Gnat also so the Pakistani Pilots likely fell into traps of playing to the Gnat's superior handling instead of disengaging and looking for another opportunity. This is how American and Canadian Pilots rule the air, by knowing their enemy's aircraft traits and not playing into them but using their Sabre's superior qualities of speed to their advantage Also the weapons of the Sabre were much smaller rounds than the Gnat's twin 30mm cannons the Sabre was armed with 6 x 12.7mm (0.50 cal) machine guns. what it did have in calibre, it made up for in Volume of fire, but it's no good if you can't get behind your enemy with your skills.

[@stevehuggett2098]

I well remember my first flight in a Gnat, Folland built a mighty giant in a tiny frame. As agile as a fleeting thought, it responded without a moments pause, it went where I pointed it, and got there faster than my second thought. My first fast jet was a sky dancer beyond peer; who could've dreamed where it would take me.

[@fredburley9512]

Cool little plane. Nice design profile.

[@34ccsn]

We need more small, simple, inexpensive fighters.

[@stoobydootoo4098]

My money's on Gloster Gladiators.

[@rickbear7249]

The theory was to produce a cheap and easily maintainable fighter aircraft that could overwhelm any advisory by sheer numerical advantage - a swarm of gnats. But, the designer overlooked the politics of money. With air force vs army vs navy, the military branch with the most expensive kit was supreme. This is why the US F14 Tomcat grew from a relatively lightweight fighter into something enormous - mostly to give it an enormous price tag. The British Folland Gnat was a world-beater, but not expensive enough for those with brass on their hats.

[@crimsonfury7811]

Indian Gnats really made its reputation as Saber slayer nonetheless it can have slayed many other fighters of that time. They should have arranged A2A missiles on it.

[@Zoomie932]

The Red Arrows flew the Gnat in 1974-1977 the years I was there. I saw the RAF Airplane Drivers do some magnificent little tricks. I got to inspect the aircraft up close and all I can say is GORGEOUS🤩🤩😍😍🥰🥰😘

[@Bodkin_Ye_Pointy]

It is ever the way that the biggest threat to fantastic aircraft is the march of time.

[@DavidReed-g5e]

a nice airplane that could mix it up in the subsonic range. best of all could be built in numbers quickly. a big advantage over larger more complex aircraft when it hits the fan.

[@willbraxton1843]

I was training in Germany and saw one of these planes fly in training. I was a tank gunner at the time and we could hear them but see them till they were already flying over us at less than 100 feet

[@marlecmarine5393]

Small is beautiful, l remember watching the Red Arrows Gnats practicing at RAF Manston in Kent many times, beautiful aircraft, l think they may have been stationed at Manston for a while.

[@Karl-w6r]

Genuinely interesting.

[@benbovard9579]

Sekhon sounds like a friggin badass

[@pravinbalakrishnan2438]

Excellent narrative 👏

[@mdbigman]

The Gnat was also featured in the movie "Hot Shots".

[@Turd_Furgeson]

And part Duex??

[@pastorjerrykliner3162]

YES!

[@mdbigman]

@@Turd_Furgeson Negative Ghost Rider.

[@Kradlum]

Lovely little aircraft. I remember when the Red Arrows flew them. The 4 airworthy ones in the UK are based a few miles from me, but I'm not sure how often they actually fly them.

[@curiousuranus810]

The greatest little aircraft you have ever featured; beautiful. It's a shame you didn't go into more detail about the encounter between the Gnat and the F104 n(400 metre turning radius vs a 5 Km turning radius).

[@tarmaque]

The F104 was not really a fighter jet so much as it was an interceptor. Its whole purpose was to get off the runway and carry a couple of missiles up to the altitude of bombers as fast as possible. In this it has essentially the same role as the MIG 25, but was lighter, cheaper, and slower. It was also dangerous to fly. It had a horrible accident rate as high as 46% in some countries.

[@michaejshannonshaw9852]

Excellent little plane,it ws the 1st Red Arrows team I saw as a kid,went out and started my Airfix collection a month later,got the Spitfire 1st.....

[@catlee8064]

We led the world back then in all sorts of fields.....now look at us, how far we have fallen....

[@Steven-p4j]

I believe this was the earliest incarnation of the American 'Light Fighter Program' so famously, creating the F-16 and F-18. This was developed as a cheaper and smaller alternative to the USAF F-15, as an air superiority fighter, a title which it still holds to this day. Such aircraft are still in great demand, as the USAF is only now realising, when considering the possible costs involved in developing a 6th Generation fighter. It may well be the best fighter in the world, however if they can only budget for 4 aircraft, it at once becomes senseless.

[@JamesWilliamson-w8y]

There is a Gnat preserved on a pole at the Old Folland Factory in Hamble Hants. it can be seen and photographed from public roads. It's about 200 yards from my old home.

[@LAu-zg8cx]

Very interesting video, some strange pictures...

[@patriot9455]

One of the undeniable facts of war and arms. When you show you have a superior device, SOMEONE will find a way to improve it, YOU HAVE TO HOPE it is your guys who find it, lol

[@pierrebuffiere5923]

I believe the Gnat had a rate of roll of 390 deg. per second. It was too small to tke the Martin Baker ejection seat, so Folland had to develop their own. One didn't get into this aircraft, one strapped it on.

[@brettwoodard167]

That was great, thanks!

[@andrewthorpe2539]

If the Auxiliary Air Force hadn’t gone in the late 50s the Gnat would’ve made an excellent mount for them, maybe using it for local air defence and close air support. Oh well. Lovely looking thing.

[@prashanthb6521]

You dont have to have the latest and the greatest to win. Common sense and wisdom wins always.

[@Karl_Kampfwagen]

If it was made in 2020 or beyond, this would have been named "SmolBoi Big Chooch" 😂

[@Istandby666]

After graduating high school, working on the British gnat was my first aircraft, I'd learn how to demilitarize the airplane for civilian use.

[@Steven-p4j]

Given the most remarkable track record of Petter's, it is surprising that he should be ignored out of hand. He was definitely onto something in his thinking, which would soon become apparent to many air forces, hence the popularity of the F-16 and F-18 all over the globe. The F-16, in particular, becoming a widely fielded NATO standard in practice. Cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, and an amazingly capable jet fighter.

[@patrickhenry236]

"Pyrex, Pickle, Blowfish.... Requesting permission to land." ~Topper Harley, Operation Sleepy Weasel.

[@hvymax]

A literal Guided missile could carry out many defined missions!!!

[@trebormints3739]

i remember when the red arrows stopped using gnats and went to hawks

[@mre7862]

Trevor Keeler sounds like a nice Indian lad!

[@railyatra8879]

His brother Denzil Keeler was also a sabre slayer in the same war, both the brothers flying the Gnat.

[@mzncjdkslakpd]

Eurasian pilots were prominent in the early Indian Air Force before 1947 and into the '60s