>
>I don’t think that the engine was the only factor in its gaining that name,
>Chris.
>Although it was designed as a high-speed interceptor, the Germans and Italians
>(and
>perhaps other nations) used it for ground attack, nuclear strike in the case
>of the
>the latter, with the F104S (I think). But the machine had tiny wings, as you
>have
>pointed out, and wasn’t great on the recovery from dive attacks; so if you
>pulled
>too hard or were slow, I understand that the anti-stall measures would ensure
>that
>you didn’t pull out of the dive. We in the RAF heard that there were several
>aircraft that hit the ground 12 o’clock from the centre of the dive target.
>
I can see it being used as an interceptor or a one-way nuclear strike, but
not for ground support. The various F-5 derivatives probably had similar
problems when used for ground support.
Chris
When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro
- Hunter S. Thompson
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|