F-89 Scorpion in Overseas Service Query

Cobra · January 21, 2013, 12:45:02 AM

Hey Guys, a Question that's Always been on my mind,wasn't Sure if google could help is, Did thr RAF,RAAF,RNZAF,etc. ever Look at Purchasing the F-89 forthe Interceptor Role? it's Question that's been Bugging me for a Long Time! i know the RCAf might have used or Considered it, but who Else? Thanks for looking. Dan

PR19_Kit · January 21, 2013, 01:17:44 AM

I can't imagne that the RAF would have done so as we already had the Javelin either under development or in service. But they do make an interesting comparison being almost the same size, similar wing areas, similar radar, similar power etc. but TOTALLY different armament and configuration!

Hm, about a delta winged Scorpion or a straight winged Javelin? Now there's an idea, I have at least two of each of them......

Weaver · January 21, 2013, 04:40:26 AM

Don't know the answer, but since the Belgians bought the CF-100, you'd imagine that they at least looked at the Scorpion in the process of choosing it.

The Scorpion had lots of serious issues when it was new that might have put potential buyers off, then by the time they were resolved, there was probably something better in their sights (Voodoo/Delta Dagger/whatever). Things moved quick in the '50s.

Slightly off-topic: it's always surprised me that the F-94 Starfire didn't get some export orders. After all, it's broadly in the same category, cost/size-wise, as the Meteor/Vampire/Venom night fighters which sold well.

Dizzyfugu · January 21, 2013, 05:01:09 AM

For a whiffy version, I could imagine outphazed F-89 and F-94 ending up in Greece or Turkey service?
I just think of a Greek F-94 in all air superiority grey, just like the F-102 they got...?

Captain Canada · January 21, 2013, 05:24:17 AM

Not sure but I'll toss a couple half-informed comments in :

The Clunk had serious issues as well, when it was being developed. The wing join and ejection issues, so the RCAF may well have had an eye on the F-89 development.

John Maynard ( whom I had corresponded with when he wrote the old Tailwinds column in Aeroplane Monthly ) said that the RAF should have purchased the CF-100.

Not sure if the Belgians looked at the -89 at the same time as the Clunk or not. I'll dig my CF-100 book out and see if it has any answers on this question....

Weaver · January 21, 2013, 09:00:43 AM

Quote from: Captain Canada on January 21, 2013, 05:24:17 AM

John Maynard ( whom I had corresponded with when he wrote the old Tailwinds column in Aeroplane Monthly ) said that the RAF should have purchased the CF-100.

Damn straight: it makes the NF Meatbox look a bit sick, doesn't it? I don't see any reason in principle why it couldn't have had 4 x 20mm Hispanos or even 30mm ADENs in the belly pack and four Firestreak under the wings. Alternatively, it could have had serious quantities of UK-type 50mm Microcell rockets in the tip tanks, without even losing much fuel capacity.

That leads to an interesting thought: what would an RAF F-89 have been armed with? We know now that the RAF wasn't particularly impressed with Falcon, so maybe 50mm RPs in the tip pods and underwing Firestreaks?

(Thinking now: I've got a cheap F-89, principally as a Genie donor....

)

crudebuteffective · January 21, 2013, 09:15:52 AM

did this one OOB with added firestreaks

KJ_Lesnick · January 21, 2013, 02:30:46 PM

Why was it never used as a night-fighter? In Korea they did have a use for them after the F-84's proved inadequate and they switched to night-bombing.

pyro-manic · January 21, 2013, 02:44:27 PM

I think they were needed more to defend the continental US - they were designed to knock down Soviet heavy bombers more than anything else.

Plausible for NATO users instead of F-86D/Ks - I reckon it'd look great in natural metal with big French roundels and a large fin flash. Or that drab green of Danish fighters...

royabulgaf · January 21, 2013, 05:22:47 PM

Pyro, you are correct. Also, the main production versions of the Scorpion were armed with rockets only. For some reason, the US preferred to export only gunfighters at the time. As you will note, the export version of the F-86D, the F-86K reverted to a quad 20mm armament. Such Ds as were exported were for the most part used ex-USAF planes. The F-94 was a crash program, and had a host of problems that never really went away. The unguided rockets tended to gas out the air intakes, and the quad 50 cal gun armament that the early versions had was considered inadequate by 1944

royabulgaf · January 21, 2013, 05:24:06 PM

Also, the Scorpions and F-94s had radar and fire control equipment that the USAF would rather not see fall into the wrong hands.

rickshaw · January 21, 2013, 07:06:32 PM

Quote from: KJ_Lesnick on January 21, 2013, 02:30:46 PM
Why was it never used as a night-fighter? In Korea they did have a use for them after the F-84's proved inadequate and they switched to night-bombing.

They were needed in the US against the _real_ Commie threat, from over the Pole!

I doubt the F-89 would have fared any better than the F-94 Starfire. There simply weren't sufficient targets for them and their radars and armament weren't good enough.

rickshaw · January 21, 2013, 07:10:58 PM

Quote from: royabulgaf on January 21, 2013, 05:22:47 PM
Pyro, you are correct. Also, the main production versions of the Scorpion were armed with rockets only. For some reason, the US preferred to export only gunfighters at the time. As you will note, the export version of the F-86D, the F-86K reverted to a quad 20mm armament. Such Ds as were exported were for the most part used ex-USAF planes. The F-94 was a crash program, and had a host of problems that never really went away. The unguided rockets tended to gas out the air intakes, and the quad 50 cal gun armament that the early versions had was considered inadequate by 1944

I think you'll find that European Air Forces distrusted rocket only armed fighters. The threat that they faced was rather different to that the continental US did at the time. More fighters and fighter-bombers rather than strategic bombers and guns were a known and well understood system whereas rockets weren't. Rockets when they were used operationally had a bit of a dismal record anyway, so the Europeans might have had a point. The F-86K was IMHO a better aircraft than the D. They carried more rounds and were capable of longer, duration missions than the D, which was a single shot system really with that little tray of rockets.

pyro-manic · January 21, 2013, 07:54:10 PM

Earlier versions of the Scorpion had six 20mm guns, so that could be a plausible "export" weapons fit (even knock it down to four guns, and have a bit more room for fuel). Keep the wingtip pods purely for fuel, and maybe some Sidewinder/Sparrow rails underwing for later versions/refits.

British rocket-armed interceptors didn't seem to last long - the Lightning hardly ever carried the Microcell rocket pack (the Firestreak/Red Top pack was much more common), and the Sea Vixen lost it's Microcell packs when upgraded to the FAW.2. Can't help but think fitting a pair of ADENs instead would've been a better move (as in the original DH.110).

Daryl J. · January 21, 2013, 08:34:57 PM

Growing up on the Canadian Border in NE Montana, the Over the Pole Communist Attack was taken very seriously at the time by the locals. In first grade we had nuclear bomb drills....pull the very thick and crazy heavy classroom curtains shut when the alarm sounded and hide under our desks until the next arm sounded which would be a while after The Very Bright Light and don't worry too much if the windows broke.

Can you imagine?!?

And the MT ANG had F-89s at that time.

The Russians were coming.

Now with the eminent re release of the gorgeous Revell 1:72 Scorpion, some international exploration warranted. I'd vote USAF-Canada, USAF-England, and USAF-Norway. That and the Florida ANG. Note...they are all USAF...