PaperModelers.com

Go Back   PaperModelers.com > Card Models > Model Builds > Aviation

View Poll Results: Which one of the two is a more radical design?
F7U-3M Cutlass 43 81.13%
F-4D Skyray 10 18.87%
Voters: 53. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-06-2015, 05:14 PM
hyair hyair is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rehovot - Israel
Posts: 1,703
Total Downloaded: 52.76 MB
F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray

Dear All - the 50's jet fighter era is known to be the golden
jet era . Many trials were made and the outcome was that many unique jet fighters came
into service.
The Cutlass and Skyray both served the US navy and both are looking radical - one with twin tail design and the other with a bat wing.
In the next chapters I will compare more thoroughly between them .

The models are both in 1:48 scale .

Yair
Attached Thumbnails
F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_004758.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_004655.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_004644.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_005149.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_005140.jpg  

F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_004807.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_005243.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_005237.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_005215.jpg  
Reply With Quote
Google Adsense
  #2  
Old 11-06-2015, 06:32 PM
Yeti's Avatar
Yeti Yeti is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Shangrila
Posts: 205
Total Downloaded: 46.38 MB
Beautiful models Hyair, and lovely comparison photos. The two are quite similar in certain aspects; no horizontal tail, center line thrust, and wing surface extending so far back.

As to which one was a more radical design? That's a tough question. On the one hand, the F-4D's fuselage and wing are very well blended.

But the F7U-3M has those vertical tails that are attached to the wing. Outside of some of the early flying wing designs, I can't think of other aircraft configured like that.

The F7U-3M looks like it would be more stable in flight, but the F-4D looks more aerodynamically efficient. But that's just my guess.

Anyhow, I look forward to your discussion of these two unique aircraft.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-06-2015, 07:22 PM
hyair hyair is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rehovot - Israel
Posts: 1,703
Total Downloaded: 52.76 MB
Thanks for your very nice reply Yeti !
You are right that it is not so easy to distinguish
between the two , but in the next chapters things
will be clarify.

Yair
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-06-2015, 07:53 PM
Darwin's Avatar
Darwin Darwin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Eastern Idaho
Posts: 2,158
Total Downloaded: 314.05 MB
From what I've read about them, if the Gutless had as good a power plant as the Skyray, it could have been a really first class fighter. I've built several stick and tissue models of both, and both made terrific slingshot gliders (never could afford the Jet-X engines the kits were designed for).
__________________
It's not good to have too much order. Without some chaos, there is no room for new things to grow.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-06-2015, 08:26 PM
Yeti's Avatar
Yeti Yeti is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Shangrila
Posts: 205
Total Downloaded: 46.38 MB
Darwin, that's very interesting. Were those Jet-X designs offered as kits, or just plans? At some point I may have to have a go at a paper slingshot glider of the F7U-3M or F-4D.

I wonder how hard it would be to build the stick and tissue versions as rubber powered pushers?
Reply With Quote
Google Adsense
  #6  
Old 11-06-2015, 09:21 PM
hyair hyair is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rehovot - Israel
Posts: 1,703
Total Downloaded: 52.76 MB
Hi Darvin - you are right that the Cutlass never received the engine he was deserved.
Not only that the J46 that powered the gutless Cutlass was de- rated from 10000lb to around
6000lb in full AB. Had rhe J46 performed as advertised the Cutlass could have been one of the leading aircraft of the mid 50's.
But when I asked about radical the intention was also who was more innovative from the
perspective of initial design.

Yair
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-06-2015, 11:31 PM
hyair hyair is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rehovot - Israel
Posts: 1,703
Total Downloaded: 52.76 MB
F7U-3M vs F-4D photos

I attach here more photos of the two- this time not compared.

Yair
Attached Thumbnails
F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071230.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071219.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071314.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071251.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071337.jpg  

F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071452.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071603.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071655.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071617.jpg   F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071705.jpg  

F7U-3M vs F-4D - Cutlass vs Skyray-20151107_071847.jpg  
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-06-2015, 11:44 PM
OgdenBob's Avatar
OgdenBob OgdenBob is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Martinez Ca. USA
Posts: 645
Total Downloaded: 125.32 MB
An old Navy Chief used to talk about some of the aircraft he worked on way back when, one of which was the Cutlass. I remember him telling me that the nose gear strut was about 9 feet long when extended. He also said they were terribly under powered and difficult to work on. He said it was a happy day when the Navy got rid of them!

Bob
__________________
"Don't curse it, use it to your advantage"
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-07-2015, 12:28 AM
hyair hyair is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Rehovot - Israel
Posts: 1,703
Total Downloaded: 52.76 MB
Dear Bob - the Cutlass was a plane of many innovations that were never tried on former planes.
Therefore the maintainance was very hard for the ground crews. For instance it was the first navy
plane to have pressurised hydraulic system of 3000 psi - somthing that created leaks. The J46
engines were having a very short life between overhalls even after the power of them was derated.
But and this is a great but - the unique tween tail design and the overall look that exceeded the time
in a way that it resembles more the F-14 than it's contemporaries made it very popular among US naval aviation history lovers !!!
The fact that it's service was short with the navy was true with many other similar jets of the 50's and in the Cutlass case the navy lost intention in it as early as the Crusader F8U-1 was available from Vought.

Yair
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 11-07-2015, 12:39 AM
Darwin's Avatar
Darwin Darwin is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Eastern Idaho
Posts: 2,158
Total Downloaded: 314.05 MB
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeti View Post
Darwin, that's very interesting. Were those Jet-X designs offered as kits, or just plans? At some point I may have to have a go at a paper slingshot glider of the F7U-3M or F-4D.

I wonder how hard it would be to build the stick and tissue versions as rubber powered pushers?
Yeti, both were kits. The Skyray was a Comet kit, and shows up now and then on eBay. It was a pretty big model when built...a span of a couple of feet, if I remember correctly. I think it would adapt well to ductless fan. It was fairly common to convert the jet designs to rubber power, normally conventional puller configuration. I'm not all that positive who put out the Cutlass...it may have been Jasco or Struct-O-Speed. Memory of it is not as clear, but I think it was sheet balsa construction rather than stick-and-tissue, and was about half the size of the Skyray....much better for slingshot launch. I have run across a download for a stick-and-tissue version of the Cutlass on the net.

Last year I made some serious scores on stick-and-tissue kits including the Skyray...now have well over a hundred kits out in the shop waiting for their turn under the knife.
__________________
It's not good to have too much order. Without some chaos, there is no room for new things to grow.
Reply With Quote
Google Adsense
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Parts of this site powered by vBulletin Mods & Addons from DragonByte Technologies Ltd. (Details)
Copyright © 2007-2023, PaperModelers.com