XF-108 Rapier: The North American Ultimate Weapon That Never Was And Other Experimental Aircraft

[@Dronescapes]

Watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories and missions ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes To support/join the channel ➤ www.youtube.com/@Dronescapes/join IG ➤ instagram.com/dronescapesvideos FB ➤ facebook.com/Dronescapesvideos ➤ X/Twitter ➤ dronescapes.video/2p89vedj ➤ THREADS: www.threads.net/@dronescapesvideos

[@Sajuuk]

Soviet ICBMS were NOT "completely invulnerable to interception." The US had ABM (anti ballistic missile) systems specifically designed to intercept ICBMs, as far back as the 1960s. Nike-Zeus (1960s): The first major U.S. ABM system, designed to intercept incoming missiles using nuclear-tipped interceptors. Safeguard System (1975-1976): Utilized LIM-49A Spartan and Sprint missiles for limited defense against ICBMs. Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) (1980s): Proposed by President Reagan, aimed at developing ground based defenses. Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) (2004-present): Designed to intercept long-range ballistic missiles during their midcourse phase. Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (2000s-present): A naval system capable of intercepting short to intermediate-range ballistic missiles. Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) (2000s-present): Designed for high-altitude interception of short and medium-range ballistic missiles. Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3) (2000s-present): An upgrade to the original Patriot system, effective against tactical ballistic missiles.

[@tarkus07]

The lines of this plane undoubtedly inspired the A-5 Vigilante, and it had a more delta wing like the Valkyrie, beautiful planes.

[@WhiteIkiryo-yt2it]

The Rapier, the Avro Arrow, the Valkyrie, The TSR-2 & the Vulcan. Now that would have been a sexy as hell North American/British Cold War air line up.

[@jeffery7281]

The golden age of delta wing, long-range interceptor and high performance bombers.

[@jmulnick]

@@WhiteIkiryo-yt2it and EXPENSIVE AS HELL I’d surmise 😂✊🏼

[@richarddobreny6664]

Overly ambitious but it laid The groundwork for all that followed

[@GlimmerOG]

One thing about the YF-12. It was not developed from the SR-71. It was developed from the A-12 Oxcart.

[@hartvanmeter214]

North American did indeed design another fighter, albeit one dedicated to a different type of warfare. The OV-10 Bronco is a Counter Insurgency (COIN) fighter used extensively in Southeast Asia in the late 1960’s-70’s and is still in service with various non-combat and even some limited combat roles. I enjoyed my 700 hours and 194 combat missions flying the OV-10A in 1970-71.

[@gangstercheesefries1112]

I took care of a gentleman on hospice who flew them he showed me aircraft 1-4 and he also had a photo of a smaller aircraft i cant recall the name of he also flew for reconnaissance

[@TheCheech0203]

Thank you for your service!! Love the bronco

[@dougball328]

Forgot to mention that the escape pod idea was implemented on the B-58 Hustler.

[@intellectualiconoclasm3264]

It looks like a Tomcat and a Valkyrie had a baby, and I like it.

[@jerryg53125]

"Dropped from WW 2 bomber on December 9 1946 in the hands of test pilot Chuck Yeager."I think you mean Jack Woolams. Chuck Yeager broke the sound barrier on October 14 1947.

[@nate1511]

Didn’t Woolams die in a crash in august of 46? I think dec 9 would have been someone else, but still before Yeager

[@jerryg53125]

@@nate1511 Yes he had already died. Slick Goodlin flew it on December 9.

[@Darren-r9b]

The US Government brought back rocket scientist, the creators of the v1 and v2. The man guy was a SS Nazi and he was instrumental in getting Yeager the ride. So, German Nazis flooded our space and rocket programs and we brought them. Ex US Air Force here, but from after the war the US Government has been tainted.

[@brendanwood1540]

Originally the F-22 was going to be named the Rapier as well. Then it was changed to the Raptor. I'm glad because the Rapier is one of the coolest looking planes ever.

[@KirklandReinert]

Wasnt it 1st the F-22 Interceptor🤔

[@brendanwood1540]

@@KirklandReinert Sources vary. Wiki says it was "Lightning II". I saw Rapier in a fold out card from Aircraft of the World - The Complete Guide. Edit: Wiki also says it was briefly dubbed "SuperStar" and "Rapier".

[@Logan4661]

​@@brendanwood1540 Lightning II was the name given to the YF-22 by Lockheed. The YF-23 was called the Blackwidow II by Northrop, but neither of those were "official" names since the USAF did not give a name to either of them.

[@RCAvhstape]

@@Logan4661 The F-35 eventually got the Lightning II name, inherited from the Lockheed P-38, both built by Lockheed / Lockheed Martin.

[@Logan4661]

@RCAvhstape Yep.

[@michaelpfister1283]

I am imagining one of these with an updated "stealth" look and vectors nozzles ... and I am suddenly in a SciFi series. LOL Awesome looking aircraft. Definitely related to the B-70 Valkyrie.

[@shenmisheshou7002]

They absolutely did not solve the problem with the SR-71 leaking. There were giant drip pans in the shape of the delta wing of the SR-71, and it would drip all over the place. The XB-70 is s stunningly beautiful aircraft.

[@Echowhiskeyone]

The sexiest plane never built.

[@ExecuteBrandon]

You need to get out more often. 😂

[@andrewtaylor940]

Never built here! Over in Japan the Science Police use it to help Ultraman.

[@ile2038]

You have taste, lets agree that the USA needs to go back to the drawing board and make every experimental plane from the 60s work

[@wettoaster34]

@@ExecuteBrandon and who gave you permission to speak 🤣? come back when you come up with a better insult than whatever you just did. 😒

[@wettoaster34]

@@ExecuteBrandon like, can we not admire engineering? 🤦‍♂️

[@randybentley2633]

I still don't understand how N.A.A. lost out to Boeing in the development of the SST when they had an airliner-sized aircraft that was not only already flying but was already going at sustained Mach 3+ speeds.

[@dougball328]

NAA wasn't even a finalist. The loser to Boeing was Lockheed.

[@randybentley2633]

Truth there. =/

[@howsmydriving99]

Men in white shirts and skinny ties. They got it done!

[@PhilStewart-xf9rp]

Love how the wing-tips move down to "surf" the super sonic shockwave like it's big brother XB-70 Definitely a family tradition

[@AZAce1064]

Beautiful plane. ❤ Back in the day I thought of Edwards as the place where dreams come true.

[@kevinjohanson5718]

I remember seeing one of the demo escape capsules on a field trip to the Lone Star Flight Museum in Galveston, Tx when i was a kid. It was right after Memphis Belle came out and a buddy and i were on a warbird kick so its still vivid in my head of the guide demonstrating the clamshell.

[@larryhimes6224]

My Dad & I just did a Road Trip back in May 2024 during which we visited the Museum at Wright Patterson AFB... What a DIFFERENCE from a visit I did back in 1985! SO MUCH to see!! {:0

[@quattro4s]

Together with XB-70, TSR-2, the F-108 is among the sexiest planes ever designed

[@blidderbla]

What a beast of a plane!

[@bobmano66]

I would of thought the B-58 hustler with some modifications could of filled this role of long range bomber interceptor.

[@mpetersen6]

Remember missile armed interceptors are not fighters as in dogfighters.

[@jeffery7281]

The B-58 is basically just a giant F-106 with engines in the nacelles.

[@米空軍パイロット]

Fun fact, years before the F-15's ASAT demonstration, the B-58 had also been used to test a prototype ASAT missile. Tests were inconclusive as they lost telemetry data on the last test firing.

[@Completeaerogeek]

I have always loved the XB-70 (traveled half the Earth to see in person) but the reality is that with an IR/Radar signature that big, and the fact that in a non L/O aircraft you can't turn at Mach 3.0 in any meaningful way, the SA-2 (a/la U-2) means that basic physics made it redundant.

[@tomdtom5407]

SA2 did not stop SR71s which was not maneuverable too at Mach 3.

[@Logan4661]

​@@tomdtom5407SR-71 didn't overfly long distances over near peer adversary territory, a bomber would have needed too.

[@nickdangerthirdI]

MacNamera under underqualified for his position as Sec. of Defence.

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

And a real prick, too.

[@jimb9063]

Nice. Took one look at the thumbnail and thought "Did the Swedes make a bomber?"

[@alpenfoxvideo7255]

North America’s design evoqued a sense of speed… Meanwhile the Phantom II looking like a pile of machinery doing supersonic effortlessly

[@waldundwiesenandi4079]

...perfect timing. Thanx! 👍

[@Dronescapes]

You're welcome!

[@intercommerce]

Wow. The IBM plant shown in the first 10 minutes is actually the main manufacturing plant of IBM Canada Ltd., in Toronto, Ontario, right up the street from the Ontario Science Centre. In 1980, I applied for a job there and was hired within a week. (Those were the days!). I was given a 6-month contract position, but not hired permanently despite my stellar performance, as I had dropped out of university to get the job, and they were only offering permanent positions to university grads. This gave me the motivation to return to university and finish my degree. Sadly, Big Blue seemed to shrink & dissappear within the decade.

[@makestank4800]

The irony of the old B-52 replacing the plane that was meant to replace it the B-1.

[@billballbuster7186]

The threat of Soviet supersonic bombers never emerged and so the F-106 Delta Dart was capable easily of intercepting all threats encountered, with SAM missiles as back up. The specialist Interceptor concept was replaced by the Multi-Role Fighter like the F-4 Phantom, equally good air to air or air to ground.

[@kevinhickman3775]

Theres a full 40 min they talk about the RCAF Avro Arrow in this.

[@kentonian]

Funny how everyone else was and still is blind that American Protectionism and corruption was working as intended to destroy industry in Canada and the UK

[@BillRobison]

Century series = Model numbers from 100?

[@sferrin2]

Yep. Sort of. The F-100 to XF-108 for sure. The XF-109 is murky. It's generally attributed to the Bell D-188 but, apparently, never officially assigned. Then the USAF called the F-4 Phantom the "F-110" for about 15 seconds. The F-111 was never really considered a Century Series and neither was the F-117.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

F-100 Super Sabre is kinda not part of the group. F-101 Voodoo, a long range “penetration fighter” that saw service in other roles as a long range interceptor, fighter-bomber, and recon platform. The XF-108 would have replaced this if the Phantom hadn’t. F-102 Delta Dagger, an early delta wing design and a flop that led to F-106. XF-103 Thunderwarrior, a hybrid turbojet/ramjet super-fast design that never actually got built though the anticipated speeds led to a lot of metallurgy research. F-104 Starfighter, notorious for the bribery scandals but very big in the export market in Europe. F-105 Thunderchief (“Thud”), really more of a light bomber than a fighter. Big part of the war in Vietnam. F-106 Delta Dart (“Six”), probably more accurately thought of as an F-102B. The “ultimate interceptor” that had long service but little combat. F-107 Ultra Saber (“Maneater”) - a prototype that went nowhere, competed against and lost to the F-105. F-108 Rapier (this video) F-109 was a planned VTOL tilt jet fighter that never happened, basically a role filled by the Harrier. F-110 was the F-4 Phantom’s designation under the old Air Force system (it was the F4H in the navy’s old system). F-111 Aardvark F-112 through F-116 if I remember right were designations for captured enemy aircraft (e.g. the F-113 was the Shenyang F-5, basically a MiG-17). F-117 was the last known designated under that system, which isn’t a fighter and likely got the designation as intentional disinformation.

[@sferrin2]

@@Justanotherconsumer F-100 is definitely part of the group. Any picture of "Century Series" will include it.

[@javitoindustries1390]

wowwww. superb video ! congratulations !!!!

[@Dronescapes]

Thanks for visiting

[@gandalfgreyhame3425]

You did a HUGE disservice to Edgar Schmued, who was the Chief Designer responsible for the P-51 and the F-86. Dutch Kindelberger was the President of North American during the development of those two aircraft. Atwood, who chiefly oversaw the B-25 and other programs during the war, became President of 1948 after Kindelberger had to step down because of health problems. Schmued was involved also in the beginnings of the F-100 program but left after a bitter dispute with Atwood over how to solve the early F-100's many many problems (this is all described in detail in the book "Mustang Designer", the biography of Edgar Schmued). The F-100 would continue to have a long teething period to fix all of its many problems after Shmued left. You also left out the F-107, and its weird air intake over the cockpit. Atwood was the one who led North American towards a postwar shift towards rocket propulsion and the space program. This unfortunately culminated in the fire that killed three astronauts in the Apollo 1 command module in 1967, which was a terribly flawed (from both a design and shoddy manufacturing standpoint) North American product. The public outcry and Congressional investigations into that disaster put such a black mark on North American that it looked unlikely to ever get a government contract again, and so this forced it into a merger with Rockwell. This merged company, North American Rockwell, soon dropped the once famous, now infamous North American name, and became just Rockwell. So, yeah, Atwood oversaw the disappearance of the once famous North American name.

[@MrKentaroMotoPI]

You're full of it, moron.

[@larryhimes6224]

(Toward the end of the Avro Aero section) The greatest "Oxymoron" is NOT "Military Intelligence", rather either of these two: 1) Human Organization/Efficiency 2) Human Goodness. . .

[@Retroscoop]

The Arrow wasn't as beautiful as the British TSR 2 (which also had folding wingtips as the Valkyrie), but of course, it isn't a beautycontest. Anyway, both programs ran into "beancounters" and 'yes-men" ready to execute the wishes read commands of Washington. It has always amazed me that both programs weren't just stopped, financing dried up, but that destroying everything related to these programs was such an issue. That's more than just complying with the USA, that's being over-zealous to a ridiculous extend. That is like a tamed hamster that is being teased rolling on its back and showing its belly to signal it is surrendering completely. Even if the decision of stopping the program might have had sound financial reasons (it remains and IF), then there was no need for such a "destalinization" effort afterwards: the plane was far too interesting historical heritage to be destroyed. There was NO reason to destroy pictures and movies. Sad sad politicians !

[@christhesmith]

I love the TSR too. But it looks like a suitcase compared to the B70!

[@kinohotaruYT]

XB-70墜落事故直前のあの編隊飛行の映像が結構ありますね

[@philcamp8621]

A rapier is a type of sword originally used in Spain and Italy. The name designates a sword with a straight, slender and sharply pointed two-edged long blade wielded in one hand.

[@GauntletKI]

20:00 scope creep. The infrared missile story is a good one.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

The YF-12 was probably just a cover story, but the existence of it and that it was already there and operational (and a closely related variant operational for decades) showed that there was no need for the XF-108.

[@larrybremer4930]

IMO the B-70 was a fantastic feat of engineering, but what got it cancelled was not so much the availability of ICBMs but the improved capabilities of SAMs. When first envisioned and scoped it would fly fast and high enough to evade interception but by the time they were testing it air defense technologies had overtaken it with Mach 2.5 interceptors with high speed BVR missile capability and very long range, high flying SAMs. While it would require the enemy to have a very comprehensive and expensive defensive network of high end SAM sites and/or aircraft like Mig-25s to truly counter it Russia was truly capable of defending against it around high value targets and likely enemy approaches. Survivability switched to very low altitude intrusion to reduce reaction time making a strategic bombing mission more survivable, along with largely switching that job to light and slower bombers better suited to low altitude terrain following/masking for survivability. Even the venerable B-52 became a better option, which we already had in numbers and were far cheaper to operate.

[@coodudeman]

They had Beryllium spheres already?!?!?! AWESOME!!!

[@karenstein8261]

Looks like the Canadian Arrow.

[@user-gj9cn7tn5r]

Good grief…here we go…greatest interceptor…revolutionary design…canceled by jealous American companies…

[@garycorbin625]

@@user-gj9cn7tn5r yep 👍 and what did Canada get in return ? Substandard equipment.

[@scottross5495]

The F-15 probably looks like the Arrow too

[@anthonydavies9535]

The F-108 was not North American's last fighter design, The NA335 was a contender to the F-15, it got to the mockup stage. It's generally considered that the USAF chose the wrong aircraft, even the the head of the Sukhoi design thought the NA335 was the better design and used it as a basis for the T10 which became the SU-27.

[@dougball328]

And that was followed by the XFV-12A

[@anthonydavies9535]

​I'm not really sure the XVF-12A counts as North American design as it official manufacturer was Rockwell International @dougball328

[@intercommerce]

Note similarities to NA's other planes, the A-5 Vigilante and XB-70 Valkyrie...

[@CONCERTMANchicago]

*_28:49_**_ Those little known facts that stack up to multiple story sky scraping history._*

[@1joshjosh1]

Reminds me of Canada avro arrow

[@Bellthorian]

Except it was light years more advanced in EVERY way. Comparing the Arrow to it would be like comparing a biplane with a P-51 Mustang.

[@Justanotherconsumer]

It was cancelled for the same reasons. The only one of that group that actually got built was the MiG-25.

[@AB-bu9go]

You can tell the Valkyrie took tons of design inspiration from the x108. Put another way, It’s like the 106 and a Valkyrie had a baby lmao

[@GauntletKI]

34:45 dang, someone walking across the wrong surface that needed to be redone delayed it a year. Dang

[@MrCenturion13]

Mini XB-70.

[@JacobDrJIsrael]

Front of the plane looks like a crane of a heron...

[@archangel1221]

Looks like a delta wing vigilante

[@brianv1988]

It's like a MIG 23 with a delta wing instead of sweep wing

[@coodudeman]

I can tell how smart General Ascani is by the fact that he says several things in what has to be the worst way possible... lol

[@mpetersen6]

I'm old enough to remember major American cities ringed by Nike missile sites. Interceptors such as the Rapier and Avros Arrow would have been great additions. But even the USAF could not buy everything. Also the Republic project of the same era would have been awesome. North American's Vigilantly would have been capable of doing the same job.

[@daleallen7634]

@mpetersen6 : Vigilante. 😐

[@dbs555]

A waverider, like the XB-70.

[@thelovertunisia]

This was the US at its zenith.

[@stormhawk31]

Yup

[@ChristopherSloane]

Imagine the gut check making something so awesome to see it ruined by odd issues.

[@brokendowndog]

Also very Valcourie.

[@uingaeoc3905]

A-5 Vigilante.

[@daleallen7634]

@brokendowndog : Valkyrie 😐

[@jordankashuba3467]

Looks alot like the Avro Arrow

[@ioanbota9397]

Realy I like this powerful fighters jets

[@jeffery7281]

A-5 should be called FB-108N. *CHANGE MY MIND*

[@JeffreyWilliams-dr7qe]

Guess we were smart enough not to build an American version of the Aero and Tsr ?.Beautiful Aurcraft All!

[@gp33music41]

Guess Britain and Canada also weren't smart enough to either

[@Retroscoop]

So, when the Pentagon evaluated the Rapier in the early 1960's.... they "went ballistic"... The Valkyrie looked like a swan... It became the swan song of one American aircraft producer. It probably would have been even more expensive as the ridiculously expensive B 2, which costs the amount of 3 times its own weight in gold....

[@MaxVerslappin48]

The B2 is only worth a little more than half its weight in gold.

[@fredeb67]

Looks almost as the good as the B-58 Hustler.

[@thesmirkingwolf]

Plenty of them saw action during the one year war in Universal century 0079😅

[@wtywatoad]

IF the B-58, and the F-15 had a love child.

[@Tomkinsbc]

The way I heard it, was that the North American builder of the P 51 came up with that design so quickly was that the makers of the P 40 gave or sold them that design. The P 51 was a good fighter but an exceptional longrange exscort fighter. Canada chose the P 51 over the Spitfire for the defense of North America after the war, because of the vast size of Canada and the range of the P 51. Australia I heard chose the P 51 for the same reason. The Spitfire was built for the European theatre where range was not a concern. They did not have to fly 2,500 miles form one side to the other. Besides the pilots who flew the P 47 appear to have shot down more enemy aircraft than the P 51. They will argue which was the better fighter. I am just restating the words of those who flew them. Also there is some controversy on how the attention was directed to the P 51 over other aircraft built in the US.

[@andrewhefner289]

@@Tomkinsbc Curtis had nothing to do with the design of the Mustang, although they had multiple designs for a follow on to the P 40, none of them were deemed worthy of production.

[@Tomkinsbc]

@@andrewhefner289 Okay, but someone wrote on KZbin that it was orginally a Curtis Plane. I thought it was true as I had heard they came up with it quickly. Sorry about that

[@andrewhefner289]

@@Tomkinsbc if you ever find yourself writing "someone wrote on KZbin" as a reliable source of information, you need to reassess how you interact with social media. Just sayin

[@Tomkinsbc]

@@andrewhefner289 I did mention in the original post that I had heard and not that it was a given. I make sure to type in if I do not know for a fact that it is what I heard. As I have also stated what I have heard from pilots with personal experience on a given aircraft. If it is possible I even send the link. Sometimes I have not saved a link for something and therefore I have not added it.

[@franksizzllemann5628]

@@Tomkinsbc The development story I hear did involve Curtis. England wanted more P-40s, Curtis didn't have the production capacity, NAA was approached (by England, IIRC, not Curtis,) and NAA said something like "give us 100 days and we'll build something better and cheaper." In 98 days they delivered P-51 prototypes. That's the story arc, if not the most accurate version.

[@richardfredericks4069]

Looks like a mix between the F-14 and the Firefox.....

[@rieldylanburrows6439]

Oh absolutely but again that would have been gen 1 of the engine. I agree it wouldn't have been a massive game changer right away. But it would also have been based on spec, it would have been far more efficient on top of the speed. Thank you regarding the engine name. It would have been interesting to have seen it completed enough to have at least tested the engines. Another example of the government's lack of vision and looking to be toadies.

[@dougball328]

A couple of minor comments. Toward the end of the video an aviation author implies that the Vigilante was a southern California airplane. This is wrong. The Vig came out of the North American plant in Columbus, Ohio. Also, in the early 70s, North American Columbus was engaged in designing the XFV-12A, a vertical takeoff and landing fighter for the Navy. The F108 was not the last fighter design for North American.

[@AZAce1064]

I think that the USSR was threatening repercussions possibly war if the plane went into full production. Sometimes things that we don’t know are better unknown.

[@EricDPeterson56]

Looks a lot like the North American Vigilante.

[@foxmulder3268]

the father of F14 tomcat. superlative "opera d' arte" in the years of "gioconda" xb-70 valkyrie two north american gold times

[@frankthespank]

Looks like… The Firefox!

[@tonyb6821]

LOVED that Eastwood movie!

[@frankthespank]

@ Me too! It might have been a bit.. “cheesy” but so were most movies in the 80’s and that’s part of what made them great 😎

[@TheGoldwing1950]

Looks like a copy of the Canadian Avro Arrow.

[@OrbitalBipbohb]

...the way this guy explains through this content is as if he's giving this secrets away 🍺💪🥴🤳

[@afriendofafriend5766]

Two and a half hours is wild.

[@xchrisx84x10]

What you get when you cross a tomcat and an XB70

[@bsharp6812]

The first few minutes we didn't need

[@swainscheps]

Is there no video of the F-104 / Valkyrie crash? What is the meaning of the phrase ‘century series’? Someday I’d love for someone to explain why SAGE was so revolutionary instead of just asserting how revolutionary it was. Radar picks up an intruder…then directs an interceptor toward it… and…how is that different from how radar was used pre-SAGE? 47:00 “S. A. C.” Just say ‘sac’ as in the word ‘sack’ - nobody ever refers to it with the letters. Reminds me of listening audiobooks where the voice over person says ‘M K’ instead of ‘Mark’- like the American ‘M K 13 Torpedo’ (jabbing ice pick into temple)

[@justinavery8664]

Century meaning "100yrs" In this case, the Century Series aircraft were number in the hundreds.... F-100 super sabre F-101 Voodoo F-102 Delta Dagger XF-103 F-104 Starfighter F-105 Thunder Chief F-106 Delta Dart Etc....

[@jimb4090]

Century Series......🤫

[@ile2038]

I this video was 28 minutes long, not 2 hour and 28 minutes…but I'm here for it

[@Bramon83]

close captioning at :22 "im going to kill you." words never spoken....... oooookay

[@Dronescapes]

Captions are made automatically...

[@Bramon83]

@@Dronescapes i know................................................... but the line is never spoken. so what in GODS name is going on there?

[@conroypaw]

The title of this video should've been "XB-70 Valkyrie: The North American Ultimate Weapon That Never Was and other Experimental Aircraft Like the Avro Arrow and the XF-108 Rapier" About 1.5 hours of XB-70, 30 minutes of Avro Arrow, and 20 minutes of XF-108 Rapier

[@garycorbin625]

Squint hard and the AVRO Arrow shines through

[@Bellthorian]

This was being developed at the same time and had NOTHING to do with the Arrow and it was LIGHT years more advanced in EVERY WAY!!!

[@richardweernink9050]

look at the timeline. The Huge sadness of f-108 and c105 is that with both teams working together, (remember the interceptor was to defend both countries). would have given us a really great plane. The Arrow and Rapier actually were to use the same weapons system with the AIM-9 from Hughes.

[@Bellthorian]

@@richardweernink9050 The ICBM made the interceptor obsolete over night.

[@sferrin2]

You'd have to squint so hard as to be hallucinating. The XF-108 would have blown the doors off the Arrow.

[@garycorbin625]

​@@sferrin2tsk tsk , defensive. Why is that ? Oh let me see , is it that canada shat all over the USA ? And the yanks poachec most of the design staff and sold that crappy bomarc system and leany on Canada's government? The arrows lines are apparent if you squint .

[@ExecuteBrandon]

lol…P51 was the cow of WWII. 😂

[@damirsirotic052]

Vigilante on stereoids.

[@stephenwalsh1332triumph]

Brand Leland 😊

[@ChrisJetton]

How about those socks?

[@slotcarfan]

Nice looking, but based in faulty assumption that big, lumbering missle platforms was the future of fighter jets.

[@Sixerfixer-i7l]

So how come the F-108 in the thumbnail has the tail markings of the 84th FIS?

[@stickiedmin6508]

Because that's what the artist decided to put there?

[@larryhimes6224]

LOL! Mayne THAT is why so many GM automotive products have peeling paint?!? They go SO FAST that their metallic skin heats up & flakes the paint?!? (Nah! Likely kust crappy paint or processes!)

[@stickiedmin6508]

48:13 *_BorANE,_* not boron.

[@mark37f]

no mention of the YF107 Ultra Sabre? :(

[@otpyrcralphpierre1742]

This plane would not be even Possible in the era of Trudeau.

[@JosephMitchell-zw3db]

Cool it looks more like Firefox movie 😅

[@brokendowndog]

So cool it appears to have the same supersonic ejection Pods, "capsuleles"? As B-58. Looks like a US rip off of the Canadian Avro Arrow. Don't know. First I ever heard of this developmental aircraft.

[@CaptainSeato]

You can't fool me; I recognize the Russian Firefox in USAF livery. 😅😂

[@rieldylanburrows6439]

The Canadian Avro arrow was more advanced and was killed off by political BS. It would have been still flying with upgrades and would have reached Mach 2 (1.98 in tests) and with the upgraded engines that were being developed it could have reached higher speeds. Which most AI only take the magazine statements not the biography and movie based on the actual development.. It was a long range interceptor fighter. All weapons were in an inner body rack but could mount additional weapons on the wings if required. Check it out. The Avro Arrow. The reality is yes this one could potentially go Mach 3. But it was never actually developed and tested.

[@gp33music41]

Haha the plane designed to go mach 2 that never even reached that was definitely more advanced than the one designed to properly sustain mach 3+

[@rieldylanburrows6439]

@gp33music41 yup it was using different engines and was just short of Mach 2. The new type of engine Canada was developing would have put it over the Mach 2 speed it was suspected. What's really sad is all that talent when to the USA with all their knowledge and really fast forwarded the US program back then.

[@gp33music41]

@@rieldylanburrows6439 the Iroquois actually put less thrust out than the j75s the arrow prototype used but were lighter, so the gains would have not been that exceptional. At best it might have topped out at Mach 2.1 or 2.2

[@rbilleaud]

Finest fighter of WWII is generally accepted to be the Me-262. That evaluation is confirmed by Eric Brown, the definitive source for WWII aircraft. Would have been more accurate to say the Mustang was, "argumentatively the finest propeller driven aircraft of WWII."

[@Dronescapes]

When it comes to the Me 262 (and Brown’s comments since you mentioned him), if you are being objective, you had a great airframe, and a disastrous engine. As a matter of fact that Jumo turbojet was so flawed that after the end of WWII, everyone with the exception of France, literally ignored it. The Jumo was merely good for propaganda purposes, which did not last very long, since the Me 262 was deployed months before Nazis were definitely defeated. That engine made the Me 262 operationally untenable. It was what we would call today a beta program with very little practical future, as it would take the French, together with 120 (ex) Nazi engineers, a whooping eight years to fix it, and in order to do so they had to radically modify it and seek help from both the U.S. and Britain. As a reminder Britain had been working on all turbojet variants since the late 20s, but they had no intention of deploying unproven and novel technology, they were too busy winning the war. The Jumo, even for a master like Brown, was also a nightmare to handle, on top of its other deficiencies.