Profile image

Why so L O N G?

35.7k Speedhunter  8 months ago

So I was looking at some 1950s-1970s Royal Navy Aviation Videos (totally not to simp the Sea Vixen) and then I saw the F-4 Phantom Fg.1 with the gear down....

It was L O N G

For comparison, here's a side by side of the US phantom

  • Log in to leave a comment
  • Profile image
    35.8k Graingy

    good lord

    +1 7 months ago
  • Profile image

    @Speedhunter It was made that way so that the pilots couldn't see where they were going on the deck

    +1 7 months ago
  • Profile image

    Squatted planes

    7 months ago
  • Profile image
    101k Kerbango

    @Mousewithamachinegun122 Yes
    @Speedhunter Pitch up for free vs. mechanical pitch.
    (This is my 2 cents, I am in agreement with what has been said.)

    +1 8 months ago
  • Profile image
    69.7k Monarchii

    loooong

    +1 8 months ago
  • Profile image
    21.8k LM0418

    Bricked up phantom (sorry lol)

    +4 8 months ago
  • Profile image
    35.7k Speedhunter

    @Pan @Noname918181 I see, the launch space was on average 100 feet shorter than US carriers, also the same reason why the Schimitars have to launch with the front hear lifted

    8 months ago
  • Profile image

    It probably helps with takeoff, British carrier decks were short after all

    +1 8 months ago
  • Profile image
    57.9k Pan

    bc royal navy carrier decks were shorter

    +1 8 months ago
  • Profile image
    59.0k TheMouse

    Me when I read the title: 💀

    +7 8 months ago