Which post-WW2 combat aircraft have not been used in combat?

"Jack G" wrote:
Don't think aerial refueling fits the original
posters intent:

"which post-WW2 combat aircraft (any country)
have NOT been used in their
intended roles in an actual shooting war (or
police action, or soccer riot,
or whatever it's called these days)?"

I don't think a B-50 ever dropped a bomb in
anger.

An F11F did shoot itself down accidentally by
diving through the path of its
own shells, but I don't think that counts as
a shooting war.

Jack

"Tex Houston"
wrote in message
...

"Jack G"
wrote in message
...
Just did a quick read, may have missed these:

Boeing B-50
Grumman F11F Tiger

Jack

421ARS operated the KB-50J from Yokota 1960-Oct
1964 including operating a
Detachment at Takhli.

Tex





RB-50s did return fire on several occasions when jumped in international
airspace by MiGs, and the MiGs opened fire. That's combat by anyone's definition.


Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

"Jack G" wrote:
Could add as well:

Martin AM-1 Mauler
Grumman AF-2S Guardian

Jack


"Kirk Stant" wrote in
message
. com...
Just for fun, off the top of your heads, which
post-WW2 combat
aircraft (any country) have NOT been used
in their intended roles in
an actual shooting war (or police action,
or soccer riot, or whatever
it's called these days)?

And why?

Some ROE:

1. Combat aircraft means it was designed
or modified to employ
air-to-air or air-to-ground/ship/boat weapons.

2. Combat means someone was activily shooting
back (or really wanted
to) while the aircraft was performing it's
mission.

3. Let's leave out recce, that just gets
too complicated!

To start things off, here are my USAF candidates:

B-36 - Held back from Korea for Nuke mission.
B-47 - Too early for Korea, too late for Vietnam
(remember, no recce).
F-84F - Too early for Korea (ef considered
a separate aircraft from
straight-wing F-84s), too late for Vietnam.
Combat use by other
countries?
F-89 - Too late for Korea (?), not needed
(no bomber threat).
F-106 - Not needed in Vietnam - F-102s deployed
instead.
F-101 (Yeah, I know about the RF-101 in Cuba
and Vietnam). Don't know
why F-101Cs weren't used early in Vietnam.
Being phased out by then?

Everything else got lots of chances to do
their thing.

At first glance, looks like the US taxpayer
is getting a pretty good
deal for his money!

Kirk
(tired of all the non-mil av bull**** on this
group)


AF-2S/W were in Korea for ASW if needed. Kept a few Soviet subs at bay
during that period.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!

"H" *****.*******@**.****.** wrote in message ...
"Jack G" kirjoitti
et...
Could add as well:

Martin AM-1 Mauler
Grumman AF-2S Guardian

Jack


"Kirk Stant" wrote in message
om...
Just for fun, off the top of your heads, which post-WW2 combat
aircraft (any country) have NOT been used in their intended roles in
an actual shooting war (or police action, or soccer riot, or whatever
it's called these days)?

And why?

Some ROE:

1. Combat aircraft means it was designed or modified to employ
air-to-air or air-to-ground/ship/boat weapons.

2. Combat means someone was activily shooting back (or really wanted
to) while the aircraft was performing it's mission.

3. Let's leave out recce, that just gets too complicated!

To start things off, here are my USAF candidates:

B-36 - Held back from Korea for Nuke mission.
B-47 - Too early for Korea, too late for Vietnam (remember, no recce).
F-84F - Too early for Korea (ef considered a separate aircraft from
straight-wing F-84s), too late for Vietnam. Combat use by other
countries?
F-89 - Too late for Korea (?), not needed (no bomber threat).
F-106 - Not needed in Vietnam - F-102s deployed instead.
F-101 (Yeah, I know about the RF-101 in Cuba and Vietnam). Don't know
why F-101Cs weren't used early in Vietnam. Being phased out by then?

Everything else got lots of chances to do their thing.

At first glance, looks like the US taxpayer is getting a pretty good
deal for his money!

Kirk
(tired of all the non-mil av bull**** on this group)




Calquin (copy of Mosquito) from Argentina
Canadair CL-28 Argus
Breguet 1150 Atlantic
Bristol Brigand
Lockheed P-3 Orion
Beriev Be-6
Beriev Be-10
Beriev Be-12
Tupolev Tu-12
Tupolev Tu-14

The Orion fired a number of SLAM's against Serb targets during
Operation Allied Force, and has performed various combat missions
during ODS, OEF, and OIF. Pakistan was using the Atlantic at one time,
IIRC, and ISTR they lost one due to Indian fire?

Brooks

"Kirk Stant" wrote in message
om...
Just for fun, off the top of your heads, which post-WW2 combat
aircraft (any country) have NOT been used in their intended roles in
an actual shooting war (or police action, or soccer riot, or whatever
it's called these days)?

Haven't seen anyone mention the Canadair CL41G Tebuan, a strike version of
the Canadair CT114 Tutor trainer flown by the Malaysian air force. Or did
the Malaysians find someone to actually use it against?

tim gueguen 101867

In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Keith Willshaw wrote:
ground attack in Malaya and Sea Venoms operated in Korea

No Sea venoms that I'm aware of. Only the Colossus-class light fleets
were
deployed to Korea, and they had air groups of Seafires or Sea Furies and
Fireflies.

Quite right they arrived too late for service in Korea now I think
about it, I suspect they were used over Suez though.

From the last asking/reading about that particular mistake, Suez
featured Venoms, (Sea Vemons?), Squarks, Wyverns, Meteors, Valiants
and Canberras. And Vampires, on the Egyptian side, plus some Soviet
types (Tu-16, I think, amongst others)

--
Andy Breen ~ Interplanetary Scintillation Research Group
http://users.aber.ac.uk/azb/
"Time has stopped, says the Black Lion clock
and eternity has begun" (Dylan Thomas)

"ANDREW ROBERT BREEN" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Nick Pedley wrote:
Hawker Firebrand, Tupolov Tu-20, Hawker Sea Vixen, McDonnell F2H-4
Banshee,

Hawker Sea Vixen certainly saw no action (or indeed existance), but there
have been suggestions in this thread that the De Havilland Sea Vixen might
have seen active service over Borneo

I can't find any online sources which include the Sea Vixen as an aircraft
that saw action over Borneo.
Despite the link on this page- http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Borneo/
But it does hint that the Victor may have carried out a bombing raid there!
http://www.britains-smallwars.com/Borneo/air-war.html

Nick

On Fri, 17 Oct 2003 00:38:01 +0100, "Nick Pedley"
wrote:


"Mike Marron" wrote in message
.. .
(Kirk Stant) wrote:

Just for fun, off the top of your heads, which post-WW2 combat
aircraft (any country) have NOT been used in their intended roles in
an actual shooting war (or police action, or soccer riot, or whatever
it's called these days)?

And why?

Some ROE:

1. Combat aircraft means it was designed or modified to employ
air-to-air or air-to-ground/ship/boat weapons.

2. Combat means someone was activily shooting back (or really wanted
to) while the aircraft was performing it's mission.

3. Let's leave out recce, that just gets too complicated!

I have trimmed the list according to my own research and the ideas of others
in this thread... feel free to amend this further!

B-36, B-47, F-89, F-106, F-101, F-86D, Saab Draken, F-4D Skyray, F7U
Cutlass, Handley Page Victor, Supermarine Scimitar, Fiat G.91, English
Electric Lightning, Saab Viggen, Sukhoi Su-15, Shin Meiwa, Alpha Jet, Fuji
T1F2, Supermarine Swift, Tupulov Tu-26, B-58 Hustler, North American B-45,
Hawker Firebrand, Tupolov Tu-20, Hawker Sea Vixen, McDonnell F2H-4 Banshee,
North American FJ-4B Fury, Yakolev Yak-25A, McDonnell FH-1 Phantom,
McDonnell F3H Demon, Supermarine Attacker...


HTH,
Nick

Note that the RB-47 was in "combat" over the SU. One came back with a
rather impressive hole in it where a MIG's cannon shell hit.

Al Minyard

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"av8r" wrote in message
...




My guess is that the only British type to see no combat is the
Lightning -

Hi

You can add the Supermarine Swift and Gloster Javelin to that list.


Its already been mentioned that the Javelin saw service in Malaya
operating from RAF Butterworth

Keith

Keith, did it actually shoot, or at least get shot at? There were one
or two US type aircraft that made it to emergency areas, such as
Lebanon and Quemoy, but never apparently engaged in combat--is that
the case with the javelin in Malaya, or did it perform CAS? I can't
seem to find any evidence either way.

Brooks

(Kirk Stant) wrote in message . com...
I had forgotten the B-58 - Duh!

If you are going to include the RB-45 for its recon trole, don't
discount the B-58 yet. I believe there was a recent article published
that indicated the Hustler flew a sortie around Cuba during the
missile crisis with a recon pod ILO the weapons pod.

And I guess the FB-111 should be included.
B-45 was used in Korea, but for recce only?
F-94 was used in Korea (supposedly not as successfully as the F4U-5N,
especially against Bedcheck Charlie). Not sure what model.
French used Vampires and maybe Venoms in Algeria and Suez?
Lots of early French and Brit types used in Suez (my favorite -
Westland Wyvern - that must have been a bitchin' prop job to push
around!)
Some Alpha Jets were sold to African countries, and may have been used
there.

My guess is that the only British type to see no combat is the
Lightning - if only because it was not really optimized for airbase
defense and couldn't get anywhere else to fight! Just joking, but
only the Saudi's could have used it, using what, those goofy over the
wing bomb ejector racks? - I would have loved to have seen that. The
pilot would be safe from and optically guided AAA, however - the gun
crew would be laughing so hard it would be hard to aim their piece!

Don't laugh too quickly:

"The Saudi's F.53s saw brief action in December 1969 during a brief
conflict in the South Yemen border area. Several ground attack sorties
were flown, these ending the situation almost without any help from
the Saudi army."

www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/ lightning/history.html

Brooks


Looks like all the French hardware, except for the Mirage IV (in the
bomber role), got used (and still gets used). FAF Mirage IVPs did a
lot of good recce work for us lately, I believe. Even Rafales (off
the CV Charles DeGaulle) were deployed over Afghanistan in Air Defense
roles, while 2000's were dropping LGBs. Where were the Typhoons?

A similar picture for US and Soviet designs: Specialized Air Defense
fighters have less likelyhood of actual use (which is logical).
Bombers and "Frontal
Aviation" types - to use the soviet term - are much more likely to be
used.

All this isn't meant to prove anything, other than there sure are a
lot of people out there that apparently need bombs dropped on them or
missiles shot at them. Don't sell that stock in the Military
Industrial Complex yet! And lets start cranking out those F-35s.

Kirk

(ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) wrote in message ...
In article ,
Keith Willshaw wrote:

"Guy Alcala" wrote in message
...
Keith Willshaw wrote:
ground attack in Malaya and Sea Venoms operated in Korea

No Sea venoms that I'm aware of. Only the Colossus-class light fleets
were
deployed to Korea, and they had air groups of Seafires or Sea Furies and
Fireflies.

Quite right they arrived too late for service in Korea now I think
about it, I suspect they were used over Suez though.

From the last asking/reading about that particular mistake, Suez
featured Venoms, (Sea Vemons?), Squarks, Wyverns, Meteors, Valiants
and Canberras. And Vampires, on the Egyptian side, plus some Soviet
types (Tu-16, I think, amongst others)

Best I can determine the Tu-16's were delivered to Egypt after the 56
War, but before 1962, when US State Department records first mention
them. I believe their primary bomber available in 56 was the Il-28
Beagle.

Brooks