Jump to content

Anigrand's Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III 1/72


hsr

Recommended Posts

This is my rendition of Anigrand's Vought XF8U-3 Crusader III. This was a very good Anigrand kit, free of pinholes and with a surprisingly clear canopy. The only disappointment was the decals. These had yellowed and taping them to a sun facing window for a few weeks only slightly clear up the yellowing. They were also very glossy and thick. Other then that it was a pleasant 2 week OOB build. 

IwrdCh92_o.jpg

tNaMvhAM_o.jpg

tkGFfNOt_o.jpg

wjHCOIoP_o.jpg

Nu0vrZFt_o.jpg

RFWvjX8l_o.jpg

ObI5wgGl_o.jpg

 

What appears to be a second stabilizer would fold down in flight to augment the vertical fin.

 

Next up in the Hobby Boss UH-1B Huey.

 

Enjoy

 

  • Like 26
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I recall from the written references, it was the fastest accelerating aircraft NASA ever tested, and its top speed was limited only by the heat limitations of its canopy. Lost to the Phantom by nature of not being a two-seat, two-engine fleet interceptor. From all accounts it was an awesome performer. Maintrack also did a very nice 1/72 vacform in their Project X series. The two ventral fins were linked to the undercart and extended when the landing gear was retracted- they were for stability at high Mach numbers, IIRC/ I bet @Tailspin Turtle could tell us a lot more about it, or you could find the Naval Fighters monograph on it.

Mike

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 72modeler said:

As I recall from the written references, it was the fastest accelerating aircraft NASA ever tested, and its top speed was limited only by the heat limitations of its canopy. Lost to the Phantom by nature of not being a two-seat, two-engine fleet interceptor. From all accounts it was an awesome performer. Maintrack also did a very nice 1/72 vacform in their Project X series. The two ventral fins were linked to the undercart and extended when the landing gear was retracted- they were for stability at high Mach numbers, IIRC/ I bet @Tailspin Turtle could tell us a lot more about it, or you could find the Naval Fighters monograph on it.

Mike

Ginter has a few of my F8U-3 monographs left and I have some available:

http://www.ginterbooks.com/NAVAL/NF87.htm

 

One question you might have is what happens when a ventral fin didn’t fold out of the way when the gear was lowered. It did happen at Edwards during the test program. The pilot landed on the lakebed and the fin broke off cleanly. I also described the competition and the result in my F4H-1 monograph just published by Ginter. The F8U-3 was superior in every way save one. Vought tried hard to prove that a pilot could successfully manage the intercept alone but the admirals decided that dedicating the radar search and detection to a second crew member was worth the additional cost and weight of having him along relative to the risk of losing an aircraft carrier because a threat was overlooked or just detected too late.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tailspin Turtle said:

the admirals decided that dedicating the radar search and detection to a second crew member was worth the additional cost and weight of having him along relative to the risk of losing an aircraft carrier because a threat was overlooked or just detected too late.

If I recall correctly, F-4 pilots in Vietnam complained of information overload even with the additional crew member so it seems the admirals made the right decision. BTW I have your book and found it very helpful.

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Mark Joyce said:

but don’t seem to have as clear a canopy as yours.

Usually they are translucent at best, but this one was nice

 

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were rumors that the Vought was even better than the F-4 in Air to Air combat.

But the F-4 had two engines and a extra crew member for the weapons and that with

a bigger payload the NAVY was going for the F-4......

 

Gerhard

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also they both relied on missiles, neither had a gun, and the F-4 carried 4 and the F8U-3 carried 3. Of course both could be made to carry more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both this and the A-7 Corsair II were derived from the F8U-1 Crusader. In this case it was a follow on next generation and in the case of the Corsair the Navy wanted something based on an existing design.

 

Thanks 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...