What the hell is this?

[Felix/FFDS]

In defense of the T-2 buckeye - I offer the dorsal "outline" ...  the TF9'ss canopy has a pronounced "bulge" down to the dorsal "line" .. the T-2's dorsal outline is a smooth transition.....

[Hagar]

[quote]In defense of the T-2 buckeye - I offer the dorsal "outline" ...

[Felix/FFDS]

Look at the nose gear in relation to the front cockpit...

The TF9's gear is in line with the front pilot's seat.
The T-2's is forward of the pilot seat practically in line with the forward edge of the canopy....

The mystery plane's forward landing gear seems to be in line with the forward edge of the canopy.

[Hagar]

Look at the nose gear in relation to the front cockpit...

The TF9's gear is in line with the front pilot's seat.
The T-2's is forward of the pilot seat practically in line with the forward edge of the canopy....

The mystery plane's forward landing gear seems to be in line with the forward edge of the canopy.

Your eyesight must be a lot better than mine. I find it almost impossible to make out the nose gear at all.
I think the quality of that pic is so bad you can make it fit whatever profile you wish.

PS. The rear fuselage is the giveaway for me. The Buckeye has a tapered rear end. The tail pipes of the engines are just behind the wing trailing edge. Pity that deckhand is in the way.

[Smoke2much]

I found this and I thought of you guys!!!





I think It's the T-2C Buckeye.  Blurred and from a distance the angular Tail fin looks curved.

Will

[Hagar]

Thanks Will. That just goes to make me even more certain. The belly on that pregnant T-2 is almost scraping the ground. Now take another look at the original pic. There's a good 3 foot ground clearance. You can see right under it. No way is that the same tail either.  ;)  :P

[Smoke2much]

Yes mate you are right about the belly.  I was fixating on the tail and canopy LOL.

Feeling foolish here............

Will

[Felix/FFDS]

Kissimmee warbird restoration museum has a TF-9 - and even considering deflated tires there's not even a 12-inch clearance between the belly and the deck ....

[quote]Thanks Will. That just goes to make me even more certain. The belly on that pregnant T-2 is almost scraping the ground. Now take another look at the original pic. There's a good 3 foot ground clearance. You can see right under it. No way is that the same tail either.

[Hagar]

Kissimmee warbird restoration museum has a TF-9 - and even considering deflated tires there's not even a 12-inch clearance between the belly and the deck ....

That thought had also occurred to me. So what the heck is it.............?  ???

[Felix/FFDS]

L-39 Albatross being covertly spirited away from some East European rendezvous?



[quote]
That thought had also occurred to me. So what the heck is it.............?

[Smoke2much]

I'm begining to agree Felix, It does look vaguely like that (Albatros).  There is also a similarity to the  Bae Hawk.

Will

[Hagar]

L-39 Albatross being covertly spirited away from some East European rendezvous?

TF-9J hanging from a skyhook? T-2C with the engines removed & a modified fin? I give up. LOL

[denishc]

 Gentlemen, I'm going to have to stick by my guns and say the aircraft in question is a Lockheed T-1A SeaStar.
 Felix has a point about the forward landing gear.  If you look at the photo of the aircraft in question there is no gear directly under the cockpit, that would eleminate the TF-9.  There is no gear directly under the windshield of the canopy, that would eleminate the T-2 Buckeye.  In fact the forward gear appears to be well forward of the canopy, about where the crease in the photo is.  
 Also the rear decking behind the back seat and spine of the aircraft in question is much too tall to be that of a TF-9.
 One thing for sure the aircraft is not a T-2 Buckeye.  The aircraft's lines are much too smooth and flowing to be that of the angular Buckeye.

 For a good profile view of a Lockheed SeaStar check out this site:    "mitglied.lycos.de/FlugzeugArchiv/db/ULT1_T-1A.htm"

 There's also a snapshot that comes with the profile view and that photo clearly shows the front landing gear well forword of the canopy.

P.S. Well Crazy this has become quite the argument...hope your happy now!!

[Hogans_Alley]

The date on the newspaper was March 2, 1974. I was stationed aboard the USS Essex (CVA-9) in 1956 whereby we had F9F Cougars, F8F Panthers, F2H Banshees, AD Skyraiders and the A3D Skywarriors. Those planes went out with the dinasaurs by the early 60's. The insignia on the tail of the F14 indicated it belonged to a training squadron. The planes in the background looked to me like a couple of prop jobs, much like the T33s which were extensively used for carrier quals. I will even surmise to say that the carrier in the picture was the old USS Princeton operating out of Pensacola, Fla.

Hogans Alley

[Tequila Sunrise]

my moneys definatly on the Sea-Star now, thanks for the link Denishc, and yes I'm happy