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