Warbird Information Exchange

After some quick(and easy) research of what are some of the rarer jet aircraft types used by the USAF, three have a definite disadvantage.

Top 3:

The F-94 (less then a dozen surviving examples)
The F-89
The P/F-80

Other aircraft types of the era have better surviving numbers. Why there is a definite lacking in the top 3 is beyond me.

More cold war aircraft research later.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

They didn't build a lot of them to begin with for one, andhe P-80 is the only one with any utility beyond a very narrow mission that was soon obsolete. I was surprised at how long the F-89 stayed in service tho'

F-94 Production 855 Operational Life 9yrs
F-89 Production 1052 Operational Life 19yrs
P/F-80 Production 1750 Operational Life 28yrs
F-84 Production 7524 Operational Life 23yrs
F-86 Production 9860 Operational Life 45yrs

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

Where do you get 28 years for the F-80? Are you counting the T-33 or foreign use?
All USAF F-80s were gone by the 60s.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

Bolivia IIRC. Length of service on the others includes foreign service as well.
That may be a contributing factor to their survival.

_________________
Lest Hero-worship raise it's head and cloud our vision, remember that World War II was fought and won by the same sort of twenty-something punks we wouldn't let our daughters date.

To be fair, the F-94 was only designed as an interim type. The program got its initial go-ahead in late 1948..just 2 weeks after deciding to get the F-89. It was phased out in early 1959 meaning the entire program had a life of just over 10 years.The only other two seat al weather interceptor at the time was the F-82, so the F-94 looked pretty good and the AF needed a plane sooner than the F-89 would likely be on line since it was an advanced and a all-new design.

The F-94 was fairly cheap, about $530,000, a bit more than the F-86D/L price of $350,000.

The book says 86Ls weren't retired from ANG use until 65...I can't say I ever saw one that late at the ADC base open houses I used to go to.

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

You well and truly forgot the B-45!

I offer that "sexiness" or lack thereof, mission, looks, and war record may have something to do with it. None were considered good looking, hair on fire, pure fighters. Kids did not build models and dream of being a Starfire pilot, and they never had a movie centered on them. The F-89 and F-94 did not play in major combat- the F-80 was more of a footnote to most in Korea, and primarily in the much less glamorous air to ground mission- we here on WIX know it played a more significant role, and even got a few kills. Two were interceptors, and sitting on strip alert in North Dakota does not have the same alure as tangling with MiGs over the Yalu.

The F-86 is the jet that the public remembers from Korea. Single seat fighters defintitly had more alure, and would be higher on a museum must have list. Straight wing jets appear rapidly antiquated when compared to designs coming out at nearly the same time. Few straight wing F-84 are around for likely the same reasons. So these three went to scrap in large numbers as few cared to save more. B-45 met a simialr fate, and as quemford point out, are quite rare today (with a notably low production run and service life).

The three you mention had very limited or zero post service life in civil service, training, experiments, target towing etc which tends to result in some airframes lasting much longer that their first line roles. The F-86 was produced by several lines in several countires, and were used as drones, adversaries and as first and second string fighters by many airforces for decades after front line US service- this led to many more survivors.

The F-94 is a staight wing, two seater, with an ugly nose and awkward swept stab. No export.
The F-89 is a straight wing brutish, ugly two seater. No export
The P/F-80 was a straight wing fighter, rapidly eclipsed by the much more glamorous F-86. Export, but mostly to minor air forces with no major combat history overseas.

Look at their roles...interceptors.
The only possible export market would have been Canada (UK built their own back then...as did Sweden and France, and smaller air forces needed multi-role jets).

Sexiness had nothing to do with it...
They had state of the art AI radars for their day. The 89 was hampered by low powered engines, and as I mentioned, the F-94 was a interim type.

It's amazing more F-94s didn't survive.
I used to update the survivors lists of both types on wiki but quit when wiki nerds (guys who don't know about the subject but love editing others work) wanted citations for every sighting of an airframe and edited out the airframes prior display locations (handy to have to figure out what went where).

_________________
Remember the vets, the wonderful planes they flew and their sacrifices for a future many of them did not live to see.
Note political free signature.
I figure if you wanted my opinion on items unrelated to this forum, you'd ask for it.

We got this one here

_________________
Long Live the N3N-3 "The Last US Military Bi-Plane" 1940-1959
Badmouthing Stearmans on WIX since 2005

You missed my intent. The original poster wondered why more of these have not survived. I offered a whole list of possible reasons. My thought is lack of sexiness and lack of export does have a role in the number of airframes that survive.

Sexiness- some aircraft are quite popular due to looks and desireability, war record etc. Some are on the museum or gate guard must have list, some are not. I offer these three have a narrower appeal on looks. USAF interceptors were considered second fiddle by many, no matter how state of the art they were. Many interceptor units were stationed in the middle of nowhere, and never got that broad appeal and recogntion front line fighters did. Few of these were put on gate guard duty and simply forgotten as newer shinnier jets appeared. Fewer survived- there was not a clamor to save them. I am a fan of them all and wish more early jets survived, and I apprecaite interceptors- but to many they lack the broad appeal of other jets.

Export. Yes I fully realize that 2 of these were interceptors, and therefore had a limited export market. The lack of export for any aircraft does have a connection to the number of potential survivors of airframes. Many survivors owe their existance to second (or third) lives by overseas users. Many air forces used soem aircraft long after they were retired from USAF use, and these countries did not so seem so quick to scrap them, and many were just dumped to linger for decades. Use by other air forces also creates a broader appeal for aircraft, and many air forces want to save a few of each type as gate guards and musems. The surviving numbers of cold war F-86's, F-84's, Corsairs, P/F-51's, F-104's, F-100's, Sea Fury's, F-102's etc. was helped in a large part due to overseas service. The F-94 and F-89 (and to some extent the F-80) did not share in this.

Im talking jet fighter types, not bombers.

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

You have to understand that your last statement is a matter of opinion. As I find all the aircraft on my list of interest,and even looks. Just saying............

_________________
Shop the Airplane Bunker At
www.warbirdbunker.com

Oh I get that, and yes it is my opinion. I offered some thoughts on why some jets are not as popular. The views of others should not take away from your or my interest in a particular jet- some just have a smaller fan base. Heck I like the lines of the SkyKnight- which will never win a beauty contest.