The 10 Elite Aircraft That Never Entered Service

[@jaquigreenlees]

The Avro Arrow was a political loss to aviation, when the contract was cancelled the engineers that worked on the project went to work for NASA and were critical to the success of the Apollo missions.

[@Myrrdhin83]

Every time I think about it, I feel nauseated. What a lost!

[@tetraxis3011]

Granted. Purebred Interceptors were about to become mostly obsolete. I mean, the only Purebred interceptor left is the Mig31, thanks to its advanced Electronics suite. It’s currently being used as an air platform for Hypersonic Air to ground and Air to Air missiles.

[@tetraxis3011]

@@Myrrdhin83True. I bet I that if it was made cheap enough, most nato Countries and even some countries like Venezuela and maybe Mexico would have bought it.

[@oliverclosehoff8036]

Diefenbaker cancelled the arrow in favor of the bofors missle system! One of the arrows highlights was it's orenda iroquois twin spool turbojet engines!

[@jaquigreenlees]

@@oliverclosehoff8036truth is the Iroquois engines were never used, they were delayed in production so the air-frame was tested with the second choice engines. The Arrow performed so well even under-powered by the 2nd choice engines it out performed the latest US fighters and Diefenbaker was pressured into the cancellation by the US.

[@paulkelk5142]

I'm surprised that the TSR2 wasn't mentioned which is a shame

[@sirdino4t7]

yeah i was hoping to see that

[@mathewcaldwell4108]

It was a bomber.

[@kevinclaes1838]

@@mathewcaldwell4108 so was the Valkyrie..., neither are the Comanche and the Cheyenne...

[@mathewcaldwell4108]

I didn't finish watching the video.. my dad worked on prototype two of the XB-70. Then the TSR2 should have been on the list.

[@tsr207]

Well , you know the history - and certain countries involvement ....

[@johnawalker9261]

No TSR 2?

[@Paws4thot]

Clue in the designation "Tactical Strike Reconnaissance"?

[@johnawalker9261]

@@Paws4thot clue in the word “strike”

[@geoff7058]

Not a fighter

[@johnawalker9261]

@@Paws4thot You missed a word, “and” between strike and reconnaissance.

[@fedster187]

rule of thumb only slag of the american politics once in a video and we had that with the avro

[@johneagen]

No F-16XL?

[@TheWarriorsFromHell]

@4:14 for a machine that never entered service, the aerospace industry in CT has been building parts for the commanche for 20 years straight, so theres a fleet of them some where

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... somewhere*.*

[@Rich77UK]

The Mirage 4000 is a thing of beauty. Such a shame we never got them in production varients.

[@nicolas2419]

Mirage 4000 is a really beautiful aircraft, but if it had been put into production, the Rafale program probably would not have been. The Rafale recycled a lot of features developed for the Mirage 4000.

[@MIGUEL2005LIMA]

Underpowered

[@winternow2242]

​@@MIGUEL2005LIMAunderpowered? From what I've seen, it's thrust-weight ratio was well above 1:1 on internal fuel and 4 short range missiles. What numbers have you seen?

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... variants*

[@MIGUEL2005LIMA]

@@winternow2242 4 missilles, only 4 is a very little payload for a fighter to pretend to be an equivalent of the F-15

[@sbg911]

X36 was never intended to be a fighter, it was designed to test out tailess flight concepts

[@patrickgriffitt6551]

HIMAT?

[@JebHoge]

​@@patrickgriffitt6551Son of HiMAT.

[@martinjrgensen8234]

The XB 70 looks like it is out of science fiction

[@xj900uk]

Also remember that the 2nd prototype collided with one of its chase planes and was lost, which lead to ever more spiralling costs and duties being placed on the sole remaining prototype - although most aviation historians ascertain that it was the actual collision that was the death-knell to the project (at the time it was the most expensive single plane lost in an accident)

[@cnealmartin]

Got your facts wrong on the XB-70. It was WAY faster than the B-52 ! It suffered a mid air collision disaster. Main reason for it to be canceled, price tag was insane for the time ! Would have been way more expensive than the B2. Most expensive plane of all time (if im not mistaken)

[@mondo851]

The Lavi: If the F-16 and a Saab 37 Viggen had a baby together.

[@ghostviggen]

That’s basically what Gripen is.

[@patrickgriffitt6551]

I think F-20 plus F-16.

[@caw3225]

The Arrow sure bears a resemblance to Convair’s F-106 Delta Dart.

[@winternow2242]

...which flew first.

[@Kreylem1]

Why is the TSR2 not on this list

[@ronjon7942]

Good list.

[@Kanas83]

almost the newer Japanese plane almost looks like the YF23

[@Diveyl]

Check out YF 19 and YF 21 from Macross

[@1958PonyBoy]

I worked at Northrop and worked on both the F-20 and YF-23 programs. And we were robbed. General Dynamics lowered the price on F-16's to the point where they were losing money on each plane just to keep the F-20 out of the market. And Sam Nunn was head of the Armed Services committee that oversaw arms procurement on the fighters. And he was from Georgia. And Lockheed is based in Georgia. Nuff' said. The YF-23 was better than the YF-22 in every aspect, save that it was slightly less maneuverable. But in this day and age, if you find yourself in an actual ACM dogfight, things have gone seriously wrong. Aircraft are little more than missile platforms, and the one that spots the other first is the winner.

[@Telefiend]

I saw an F-20 flight demo at the El Toro air show and to this day I consider it the best flight demo I ever saw. It became my favorite plane that day and has been ever since

[@callen6893]

I had heard rumors that the government seemed to make any excuse to put the ball in Lockheed’s court. They magically made thrust vectoring more important then how stealthy the aircraft was.

[@tetraxis3011]

True on the most parts. But, as more and more countries get access to Stealth tech and Radars evolve to pick up Stealth jets, maneuverability becomes important again.

[@machupikachu1085]

I've been lucky enough to see the the 23 up close. It is magnificent. Y'all should be proud!

[@1958PonyBoy]

@@machupikachu1085 I was. And when I said I worked on it, I was involved in the structure testing of it, and got very familiar with just about every aspect of it. I spent weeks crawling all over and under it. A very sleek and beautiful aircraft. Not to mention very capable. A one on one combat simulation would not have turned out well for the 22.

[@katherineberger6329]

7:38: This image is NOT a public-domain image of the XB-70 Valkyrie! It's a created image from the Mustard video about the plane. SHAME on you.

[@winternow2242]

Mustard is a frequent target of this sort of thing.

[@logiclust]

who makes the vest 1:16 scale versions of these?

[@everypitchcounts4875]

YF-118G Bird of Prey A-12 Avenger ii

[@callen6893]

Wait what? 7:55 the XB70 capable of Mach 3+ slower then a B52? It was also meant to carry nuclear payloads not conventional ones mainly. They called them deep penetration bombers.

[@machupikachu1085]

Yes not much when flown at the same low altitude.

[@jaws848]

When the person who made the video can't even get it right.....the title says "10 elite aircraft that never entered service" but the person said "10 jet fighters that didn"t enter service" so which is it considering you have BOMBERS /GROUND ATTACK aircraft AND HELICOPTERS on this list.....sorry my dear but the last time i looked bombers and helicopters are NOT jet fighters......and the correct pronunciation of "Dassault" is "Dasso".

[@robandcheryls]

So many great memories of these aircraft.

[@nuraly78]

I would also mention forward-swept wing Su-47 into this list

[@kevintaylor791]

I've seen the remains of The Arrow. It's a heartbreaking sight. Like a severed head on a pole.

[@wayausofbounds9255]

You missed the F-16XL.

[@Μίνως-ζ5ο]

Where is the Su-37?

[@stevenmartin6473]

TSR2 ?

[@thewalrus6833]

@@jaws848 Well they've included two helicopters and a bomber.

[@johnp8131]

@@jaws848Another blind fool? Where is the word "fighter" in the title?

[@johnp8131]

@@jaws848 Where is the word "fighter" in the title?

[@jaws848]

@@johnp8131 i didn't say there is...while the title says 10 elite aircraft the person speaking in the video DOES say 10 elite JET FIGHTERS ...and she says it more than once so the people who made this video haven't got a vlue what they are talking about

[@MrShaneSunshine]

The Arrow was an interceptor...not a fighter! 👍🇨🇦

[@Tuglife912]

Make a 10 ten intelligence agencies of the world.

[@myizukai8478]

X-36 was what they saw in future concepts

[@fedster187]

i never got why they canceled the valkyrie, the sr71 flew at mach 3 at high altitude and laughed at all the s.a.m. sites so could the valk not do the same ?

[@MrNeil-qs5fo]

surface to air missiles improvement was one reason making the XP70 a fat target.

[@winternow2242]

The SR-71 never flew as deep into Soviet airspace as the Valkyrie did. Also, Valkyrie would probably have had to slow down when dropping its payload. The Valkyrie was the first plane I ever really loved, but canceling was a smart idea.

[@sharpy3453]

@@winternow2242 love both, but my first love was the arrow. would have been an amazing aircraft, especially if they had of gotten it to mach 3, would of been nuts. never useful but nuts.

[@JebHoge]

SR-71 had some early stealth features that reduced its signature somewhat. The Valk did not...at all.

[@EvanVoor]

It was supposedly too expensive with too many setbacks in development

[@Rohit-cj6eb]

Half of this are just technology demonstrators they never meant to enter in service

[@yoamal1187]

Literally only one

[@KenanTurkiye]

Turkish high-tech! The smart nation. I have a folder about it (folder 5 in the playlist).

[@cturdo]

There are always lessons learned for future projects, so they are not a total waste (other than tax money).

[@Sacto1654]

The F-20 was just not armed well enough for most potential customers. That's why most of them bought the F-16 initially, then eventually the Dassault Rafale when that become widely available for export.

[@tedwojtasik8781]

Sad really as the test pilots who flew it said it was the best handling and easiest aircraft they ever flew.

[@Sacto1654]

@@tedwojtasik8781 if you’re referring to the F-20, it’s a great handling plane. But it was a bit under-armed and would not accommodate many modern air-to-ground weapon systems.

[@JebHoge]

No, it really was because everyone wanted the F-16 because that's what the USAF ordered.

[@gwcrispi]

Initially the F-16 was not available for export sale. Once that changed, there was no need for the F-20.

[@Sacto1654]

@@JebHoge The F-16 was considered a revolution because it was arguably the first jet fighter designed specifically around a fly-by-wire control system. As such, the plane had astonishing maneuverability by 1978 standards which the Israelis demonstrated during the 1982 war in Lebanon.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

Anything with an X-distinction usually never enters serial production. The X-36 was always meant as an experimental prototype only, so it should not be on this list.

[@carloscastillom.866]

F-16XL, SU-47, SU-37 Never Entered Service too.

[@paulbunn2255]

The Buzz not including at least one Indian aircraft?

[@davematthews3534]

I've seen alot on the f-23/22 r&d,testing etc and still can't understand how it didn't win!! I know politics was a big factor, but come on!!!

[@tedwojtasik8781]

Good old-fashioned corruption, that's what.

[@JebHoge]

Several reasons unrelated to politics but in short it was a much less effective design with a convoluted weapon bay trapeze-style missile rack. The changes needed to make the production version added way more risk that the YF-22 to F-22 would take.

[@einautofan6685]

The Avro Arrow is still a Trauma and Desaster today for Kanada! Such a Shame Government cancelled the whole Project!

[@pike100]

Why all the extra capital letters?

[@FirstLastOne]

Pretty sure if you dig hard enough you'll see that is was the USA leaning hard on Canada to quit their Arrow plans and join their program or they'd simply shoot down the incoming nukes as they flew over Canada.

[@johnp8131]

They were probably bribed by Lockheed, like F.J.Strauss and others were in West Germany?

[@johnp8131]

@@pike100I assume he's a German speaker? Shall we now test your foreign language skills?

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

@@johnp8131 Guess so, too, given the channel name and him spelling Canada with a "K".

[@redrevolution7009]

How about su47

[@Andrew-sv6zq]

The Comanche looks an awful lot like Blue Thunder!

[@davidrichter9164]

Good movie.

[@1bardiel1]

No BAC TSR2 ? no F-16XL ? And the Mirage 4000 was more of a technical demonstration, a concept to bring to the Rafale. The IVI Lavi is a little-known model, and not appreciated by aviation enthusiasts, because it is more or less a copy of the F-16 with canards. Just like the F-20 Tigershark which was a barely improved copy of the Northrop F-5 Freedom Fighter, which was already 20 years old.

[@trevorhart545]

TSR2 omission, unacceptable, makes this a poor video F-16XL a bad an omission LAVI was "sponsored" by South Africa so the issue was NOT Money it was Israel were told NO! This is abuse of $US in aid. IAI got away with KFIR so pushed again but too far with a F-16 Branded Generic F-20 never had a market unless it was DUMPED on the third world as US Paid Military Aid Dassault Mirage 4000, even the French didn't want it Video with promise in the title but failed to deliver

[@cosmoschtroumpf]

@@trevorhart545the M 4000 has been designed for export, not for french air force who had Mirage F1, IV and 2000, and Jaguar .

[@gasparguadalupethecante6377]

the best video

[@SPak-rt2gb]

NGAD will probably resemble the X-36

[@gld1010]

And YF-23

[@Eastern_Egale]

F-20 Tiger Shark is Rebuilding by Iran with Name of "K-2 HESA" with Single Al-31 Jet Engine

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

... is being* rebuilt* by Iran

[@alamy313]

This Boeing X-36 Looks like a Roast Chicken.

[@hugocheng6243]

LAVI enter service in China as the name of J-10😊

[@qwertyK-vx7st]

Where Su-37, Mig 1.44, Su-47 Berkut?

[@ebnhahn1993]

LAVI very much so was the US F-16. That is why the US stopped the funding...

[@oc10121989]

The lavi was developed by *Israel alone with US funding* assistance and US limitations

[@MoizRaja-ry4dg]

You forget su47

[@HankyInTheTanky]

How can you say the XB-70 was barely faster than the B-52 its max speed per Wikipedia is 2056 miles while the B-52s is only 650 mph???

[@lucianobarbosa5764]

Note that she said "at lower altitude" (she was refering to mission profiles close to sea level to avoid radar recognition). Although this was never the intended operational mission altitude for both -70 and -52... YES, "close to sea level" the maximum speeds for both are almost the same (and this applies to SR-71 as well, paradoxically). But this is not a problem at all for this wonderful, Mach 3 (in altitude) aircraft, the XB-70.

[@Eja5rN]

i think yf-23 got better design than 22

[@leondillon8723]

The Boeing B17 was not bought because it was the best. Boeing rounded up best "public relations" experts to get the congressmen to buy. Jack Northrop's YB49 "Flying Wing" was killed by politics. I have seen 4 engine pusher and a 8 jets models.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

Jack Northrop*

[@smelkus]

I would have included the TSR2, Yak 141 and F16xl shame you restrict yourself to 10 as their are more that should be included

[@taritakhe]

J10 of China is Isreali lavy.

[@tirsofelipeduranmendoza5432]

Bro... im gonna puke, every time i hear the term "Stealth". A stealth chooper is way stupidier than the polish "stealth" A-10

[@spinynorman887]

If you're going to have a narrator (bot or otherwise), make sure they know the correct wat to pronounce words! Mispronunciation shows that the video maker is lazy, ignorant or both - bad ideas in an informational video! Also, calling the X-36 a fighter is like calling a Formula 1 car an ambulance. Fighters carry WEAPONS and the X-36 was never intended to carry weapons. The X stands for "Experimental" and the X-36 was designed to test new technology to make fighters more maneuverable. There's no talk of making it into a fighter because modifying it into a combat capable fighter isn't economically smart. It's cheaper to design a fighter from scratch than to turn a teeny little experimental plane into a fighter worth the name.

[@wrigman]

Gee…… go figure…… ANOTHER Northrop fighter passed over………….

[@martinandreshenriquezconch1081]

And the MBB Lampyridae? The Myasishchev M-50, or the Sukhoi Sotka?

[@winternow2242]

Did the Germans ever get around to building a Lampyridae? The other aircraft were at least built. M50 flew and was a disappointment, and never achieved supersonic speed.

[@patrickradcliffe3837]

The YF-12 does not belong on this list.

[@winternow2242]

Not disagreeing, but why not?

[@patrickradcliffe3837]

@@winternow2242 my apologies I was under the impression that the YF-12 was pressed into service CIA as a surveillance drone launch platform.

[@winternow2242]

@@patrickradcliffe3837 That's the M-21/D-21, which I think used a modified A-12, or at least a Blackbird that was closer to the A-12 than SR-71. I'm not an expert on D-21, but AFAIK, use of M-21s to launch the D-21 drones was dicontinued before the system went operational, and D-21's launches were made witha B-52.

[@teto85]

The YF-23 was robbed.

[@jessehorn6180]

What a waist!

[@pike100]

*waste

[@jessehorn6180]

@@pike100 thanks for correcting me.

[@Ringele5574]

This video is lacking in so much information that I quit watching before the end.

[@ZillaZarate]

😮

[@robandcheryls]

Like what? It’s not an in depth. I enjoyed it frankly

[@machupikachu1085]

You'll be missed!

[@logiclust]

bad AI read

[@sandyhamilton8783]

TSR 2 !!! X36 is not even a real aircraft,

[@EvanVoor]

Oh yeah the mach 3+ capable XB-70 was just barely faster than the subsonic B-52, makes total sense. Do your research dude

[@russellwhitmyer6764]

Makes question the rest of data.

[@julienguillaume3881]

Video says "at low altitude, X70 is barely faster than B52" that is true. A basic research tells you the speed limit at low altitude is Mach 0.95 for B70 that is just above B52 rated at Mach 0.86.

[@LessAiredvanU]

Huzzah 'Murica (best add a couple of non US types, one another North American nation and the other a client state...)

[@gisrele]

france ? a client state ? the fuck?

[@gisrele]

ohhh, you are talking about israel! so, these are 3 non-American planes!

[@bestamerica]

' oh no... stop watch at 020... not good and lousy computer animation edit video

[@davidtaylor8002]

The main reason the XB-70 was never developed was that the airframe design was unstable. Because of that instability, both prototypes were destroyed in flight.

[@Hector-tx3be]

Bullshit, only one crash due to mid-air collision. Chase plane rolled into the XB-70 destroying the wing. The remaining prototype is a static display at Dayton, Ohio.

[@davidfindlay5014]

Only 2 XB-70s were built, with a third under construction, when the design was relegated to R&D test flying related to future SST concepts. The Valkyrie was NOT an unstable design; in fact, the compression-lift principle was proven to be quite viable. The (more advanced) second prototype was destroyed in a completely unnecessary commercial formation photo flight highlighting various GE engine-powered warplanes in the USAF inventory. The tragedy occurred when an F-104 off the starboard wing of the XB-70 lost control in a wingtip vortex and rolled across the bomber's back, carrying away both its vertical tails. This had nothing to do with design weaknesses! FYI: the first prototype still exists and can be seen by visiting the National Museum of the USAF! Do your damned homework before posting erroneous statements as fact!!!

[@winternow2242]

I'd love to know what evidence you have that shows the XB-70A was unstable.

[@YourMom-qq4ht]

No this is the worst vid

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@peterstubbs5934]

No TSR2? What a load of bollox without it.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@einundsiebenziger5488]

Any reason to post this a thousand times?

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.

[@ayanariyan-kg3ky]

Mig-1.44, SU-37 & SU-47 the Father of these Fighter Jets.