Back in 2008 I just assumed Rivet City was a museum ship and moved on. It wasn't until many years later I thought, "If it's a museum ship, why does it have so many of the same type of aircraft?" I really like your pulled out of mothballs theory. If you follow the idea, it paints a picture of an America in an extremely severe shortage of equipment, willing to put 130 year old air frames back into service. Still aware of their limitations however, they are deployed in the quiet Atlantic theater, not the Pacific theater which is where the Sino-American War rages on. Great job!
The museum ship theory was actually my theory as well, and is really just another variation of mothballs if you think of it. Sure in our universe museum ships are generally heavily altered for guest safety and therefore not great candidates for reactivation, in the fallout universe who knows. I actually provide the museum scenario as a slightly different approach in the actual Rivet city video that's in progress, so great minds think alike! Thanks much!
Let me be the devil's advocate In Bethesda's defense, but I repeat myself. In thrust, you trust. You don't necessarily need a better airframe if you can just put ridiculously powerful engines on it. I always assumed all the jet engines in the Fallout UniFirst use some variant of plasma technology. Instead of having a race to see who could make the best airframe because jet engine technology evolved relatively slowly (relative to the progress of war), In the Fallout world, all the points were put into engine technology. You don't need arresting cables when your thrust reversers are that good. It's not a solid explanation, but if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit. Look at the wookiee look at the cute little wookiee. I rest my case. 😈
@@spydingo the museum ship theory makes sense until you consider the point lookout crashed jet, listening to the black box the pilot is using navy terms meaning it was in active service just as the bombs went off.
@@jtjames79 Wouldn't you at least need to have modified the rear of the vehicle to allow for the thrust to be directed in the other direction then? I'm no aerospace engineer or anything, but it doesn't seem like that's the type of thing you want to use your intakes for, and that is the only way I can see that the reverse thrust could be applied.
@@itaybron The museum ship theory still works though, if the US Military needs to reactivate a century old ship its not a particularly large leap to reactivate ancient fighters as well. I agree though, there is no doubt to me that both Rivet City and the Shooting Star were in active service when the bombs fell, no matter how much I don't like it.
I was under the impression it was an aesthetics decision. In a "looks like the 40s/50s world" it fits well aesthetically. But there were more viable carrier based designs available like the F9F-Cougar. I imagine since it's such a small part of the game, someone just looked up "50s jet fighter" and this was the first thing they landed on. On the aesthetic front, this jet does have a lot of the "bulbous" and rounded designs of other vehicles and designs of the 50s though. It does heavily lend itself to a early sci-fi look like you would see in a B film or a sci-fi comic of the time.
I agree with you on the likely motive and on the aesthetic front. What bothers me is the technology stagnation just doesn't really fit with the rest of the timeline.
The boneyard theory is cool, but it would be cheaper to just scrap the P-80s and use the metal to build new aircraft. Also, the F-89 would be a better fit for the Fallout universe in my opinion, both because of the Air to Air nuclear missiles and because of the design. Also, when it comes to things that don't belong in the Fallout universe, you could make a video about the soviet MAZ-7310 firetrucks and KAvZ-685 buses that are in Fallout 76's West Virginia for some ungodly reason.
ngl, if they had chosen to use the F-89 saber it still wouldn't have made a lot of sense, but I'd have loved it thanks to the Enforcers from "Swat Kats" using the good ol' saber. I'm sure that I'll get to cover those fire trucks one of these days! My initial guess would be because soviet stuff looks really strange to a western audience and allows them to get a "wild" look without a lot of effort lol.
@@spydingo Sorry I'm a bit late with this reply, I just have a little correction. The F-89 is the Scorpion, not the Sabre. Although, the Sabre would have still made a bit more sense since it had a real navy version, FJ-4
I don't know if this lore is still current, but in the Fallout universe prior to Bethesda's additions, the USSR never fell and was actually on good terms with the US in the run up to the nuclear war. We don't have a great deal of information as to why the USSR never fell and why relations were no longer hostile, but it seems the Sino-Soviet split continued into the 2000s and the US eventually pivoted away from China. If the US and USSR were friendly with each other, then it stands to reason they probably traded with one another.
@@basileusbasileon3369 AFAIK they weren't exactly friendly, but weren't openly hostile either. I think it was something like the relationship between the US and India or Turkey or something like that. And while trade could have happened, I'm not trying to disprove that, my main gripe with the firetrucks and buses is that they look exactly like they do IRL, and these aren't vehicles from the 50s, so they look quite out of place.
Carrier wings can lock on their own, you don't need a bar, wing locks just exist. Aircraft carriers can roll quite a bit depending on the carrier and the sea, hence the hurricane bow on modern US carriers.
@@spydingo Yeah, early carriers had an open bow like normal ships, but later on, depending on the nation and carrier, carriers got hurricane bows. Lexington-class had it in the 1920, British armored carriers had them because the North Sea has strong whether, Essex class had them added. What a hurricane bow does is connect the hull up to the edges of the square flight deck, instead of just an open deck being there. Real useful in heavy seas because the water is pushed up and to the sides as opposed to washing over the deck.
It was also somehow surprisingly safe, I think they did a test fire ~5km off the ground with a couple soldiers standing right underneath the detonation and they had no issues whatsoever, not even long term afaik
@@spydingo They were also testing a nuclear anti-satellite missile and a Gatling missile launcher, which explains the line of thought that led to a nuclear rocket
I agree. Always confused me as to why they used the P-80 and, now that you mention it, an Essex class carrier. One would think that with all the nuclear technology available, the U.S. Navy would go with a fusion powered carrier…I have to disagree with your theory as to why she was in DC though, as it doesn’t make sense if she was damaged in Hampton Roads, why run aground in DC? Would make more sense if she did so in Norfolk, Newport News or Portsmouth than DC. Personally, I think she was either docked at the DC Navy Yard or it was Fleet Week
Your not wrong, the ending up in DC is a bit of a stretch since navigating the Potomac river just to run her aground doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Perhaps nortfolk was well and truly cratered and the majority of the crew's families were in DC so they sailed her there. I'm certainly not opposed to her simply being based in DC though, then you could hand wave it away with something like rudder damage making her un-controllable and thus forcing her to run aground.
Well, in real world the Oriskany served through Vietnam, as did many Essex class carriers, though they got several series of postwar mod packages. I can see the USN in the Fallout timeline using all kinds of kit right through, though of course more than a century is pushing it.
about the wing folding strut thing, it does sorta make sense because of the heavy wingtip tanks, but then again if you're gonna make a folding wing that can withstand 8G's, it'll definitely be able to support some empty tanks.
I agree with you that it fits the fallout aesthetic and is a sharp looking fighter, so I'm not angry with them for selecting the shooting star based on that. It all falls apart for me though, when you look at how such a craft would fit within the timeline. I mean you can't convince me that aeronautics as stalled so much so that a fighter from the 50s is still relevant when you've got eyebots floating around lol. As for the wings, that's a good point, I hadn't really thought of the increased weight that would result from the wing tanks. I agree though, the wings should have been able to take it without the bar. In retrospect though, I suppose I should just be happy Bethesda tried to do anything with the model to make it fit the carrier role, even if it wasn't great.
The "bars" on the wings are called "jury struts". They're a very common feature on flight decks along with uplocks and downlocks. They aren't a part of the aircraft, but support equipment that's installed after the aircraft lands. Anything that can flop around in the wind, and there is always wind on the flight deck, is usually secured with one of them to prevent that flopping around. While the wing can support itself, any flopping will accelerate wear on the hinges or joints or whatever the struts are holding still. Plus it's a safety thing.
The wing bar is simple. There's 30 kts or more of wind going over the deck. The bar is for storage/parked aircraft, like tie down chains. Alerts wouldn't have had the bar installed.
This makes me wonder if aircrafts such as the F-86, F-89, F-84 and even possibly the F-100 were in service. Although this probably depends on which the divergences occured. Since if it did happen later a lot of irl vehicles were likely retired, storage, scrapped, testing bed, etc.
Well we know the divergence began occurring shortly after wwII and we know that as part of that the transistor wasn't invented. So likely the divergence occurred slightly before 1947, that being the case the F-86 almost certainly existed since its first flight was in 47' meaning it was already in development in the years prior. The same would be true of the F-84 whose first flight was in 46'. As for the others, I still think it is highly likely those aircraft existed in the fallout universe as for them not to, the divergence would have needed to be extremely rapid with the F-89 flying in 1948, and the F-100 in 53'.
@@spydingo yeah I'm not as familiar with fallout lore as I am with aviation but it sounds right that the centuries-series aircraft would still come up with the 1950's aesthetics and all that. It might be a stretch but at most you'd probably see the F-4 Phantom and then after that, whatever fictional evolutions of aircraft design in a world without transistors but with crazy nuclear tech
@@spydingo didn't realize you responded 3 months ago. But yeah I agree with that. If I also recall the P-80 was also the first aircraft to be given the designation of fighter. Also fun fact the P-59 Aircomet was the first US jet, successful in terms of research although too slow to truly perform with other aircraft at the time.
the thought of military using late WW2 weapons in the hecking 2070s when they have the power of 1950s atomic wetdream sound's unreal but somehow made sense, kinda wished they would go for some more wacky designs that's also possible within fallout universe's capability like an F7U
I don't know where I heard this, but someone mentioned that rivert city carrier might have been a carrier on display, similar to the Yorktown museum in Charleston S.C., that would explain why ww2 era ships and planes are there, it might have been a museum for the public before the war, also that idea of the u.s. reactivating older equipment due to lose in war is nice though and could explain this as well.
I certainly think it is possible Rivet city was a museum ship, she has no AA arms, a parking lot, fancy statues, and a ready built gangway right next to a metro station. Also that gangway has support cables that block the flight deck. That being said though, it would be odd for a museum ship to have so many of the same aircraft in place, and would be a huge inconvenience to US logistics where she is located. She is blocking about half of the Potomac the way she is beached. Also there is the fact she is haphazardly beached on top of rocks and such, not exactly a good way to maintain your exhibit. Those aren't really details most are worried about I'd hazard to guess though, I mean after all it is a game =P.
@@spydingo It being a museum ship, and given how little there is up on the actual flight deck, I think it's possible that the planes were basically there for show. They were old, spare planes that hadn't been scrapped or sold yet, so wildly out of date to modern standards such that they could be written off to a museum setting handily, even while the war was ongoing. It's very possible, I think, that the planes up top on deck were basically just there to show visitors what the flight deck would have looked like on an older model US Carrier, and thus they didn't actually need to have carrier-ready planes perse nor did they require a varied number of different carrier-ready planes, as they'd basically have been there for aesthetics. I think that idea of 'it's basically there for aesthetics' is fitting plenty with the US armed forces as they're shown in Fallout. Obsessed with saving important resources, and wildly overspending on the cheap stuff to make it look cool.
@@J0hnzie Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if the shooting stars were just for show, but another commenter pointed out that's likely not the case. There is a crashed P80 in point lookout whose black box can be looted, and consists of a conversation between the pilot and air command suggesting the P80's would still be flight worthy and were in service with the USN. Also, I mean, I haven't been to all the museum ships, but generally I'd assume exhibit planes are like trees, once you've seen one of a type you've seen em' all, so there is generally a variety of aircraft present not just the one as is the case with rivet city.
2:03 sure, the Messerschmitt ME262 can outrun any Allied aircraft during ‘44 and ‘45 but it can’t outmaneuver them. The Red Tails(Tuskegee Airmen)on P-51C Mustangs escorting bombers on their way to Berlin, destroyed three ME262s and damaged five more by using the un-maneuverability of the Germans to make the 262s overshoot and have the P51s get on their 6 o’clock position and squeeze the trigger before the target gets away
its really interesting to think about the situation these designs of tech would be found in, and how they shape the world of fallout. thanks for the vid❤
@@m60pattoncovidiot29 as much as I love the Tomcat personally they weren't wrong to retire it. The thing had a more expensive unit cost than even the F-35 while having remained an overly specialized design with little potential for enhancement in capability to justify the cost. It doesn't even stack up to the current and cheaper F-15's and F/A-18's. Really was sad day to see the Tomcat go, especially the way hundreds of them had to be essentially shredded because the Govt. was worried that keeping them around in boneyards might lead to some shady backdoor deals with the Iranians to help them keep up their fleet of aged F-14A's.
@@Jaysin412 I don't know about that lol. I mostly feel like I just nerd out on history and then rant about things that bother me, that probably shouldn't. =P
Yup, air to air nuclear weapons were absolutely a thing during the Cold War! The interceptor variant of the Blackbird family, the YF-12, was designed for Soviet nuclear bomber and fighter interception, and it’s primary intended armament was an air-to-air tactical nuke, intended to maximize the odds of a kill to prevent several more nukes from reaching the US. There were also similar weapons used on other fighters in the form of unguided nuclear rockets lmao. All have since been retired from US service IIRC.
Absolutely loco for loco puffs that. Greenlighting unguided nuclear rockets... oh boy in retrospect that looks like such a bad call. Though I have to admit such a weapon system makes a lot of sense to continue on existing in the wonderful world of fallout.
Just from my rudimentary understanding of folding wing aircraft, it’s not like it’s just a loose hinge that they’re actuated on. Its got locks and reinforcements built into the system so you don’t need a support bar or anything like that.
Another idea was that Rivet City may have been a training Carrier (like the Wolverine in World War II) with the P-80s being hypothetical modernized training variants.
I honestly like the choice made by Bethesda. The Shooting Star looks so violently 1950s and that is the look Bethesda is going for in all tech in their Fallout games. Only the Sabre would have been as fitting but I guess the Sabre looks too much like a Mig 15-19 to the untrained eye. The P-80 also makes sense from a military point of view (if you don't want to use the Sabre). There are no microprocessors in the Fallout lore and vacuum tubes are the standard for computers. This means that fighters could not carry a computer and that guided munitions for planes like heat-seeking missiles or semi active radar guided missiles were never developed. The air to air doctrine therefore didn't change since WW2 and you needed a plane good at dogfighting. This means that the P-80 is not as obsolete as it may seem since it is essentially a warbird with a jet engine and probably not an completely awful dogfighter. Due to the lack of guided A2A munitions stuff like the F-4 or the F-14 (and most planes after that) would have most probably not existed. The F-4 was initially designed without dogfighting in mind as it lacked a gun. The F-14 was also primarily designed (in terms of A2A) to fly high and fast, shoot their Aim-54 Phoenix missiles and return to the carrier. This makes me doubt that the a plane like the F-14 would have ever been conceptualized in the Fallout universe since you don't want a dogfighter as large and heavy since a plane in Fallout it doesn't require to carry missiles. The P-80 also has another advantage. It's a small, simple plane with one engine. It's probably neither expensive in 2070 nor hard to maintain. Whilst the P-80 makes a lot of sense to be a plane in Fallout I still see some problems with the representation in Fallout. You have brought most of them up already like the wingfold mechanism or the missing tailhook but a thing that doesn't make sense is that all planes are seemingly only armed with machine guns. A mixture between laser and machine guns would probably have been the best option since you have the spread of bullets to shoot down planes but also rather precise lasers. The only other problem I have is the engine (assuming it is still the original in Fallout). It would probably make sense that the Fallout P-80 was equipped with a more modern (potentially nuclear) engine.
It always seemed weird that so much of Fallout's late 21st century military was actually stuck in 1950. I mean I got that the universe is a divergent timeline where our wacky,1950's horror/scifi movies are just documentaries and the aesthetic of that time was petrified into culture. But it's not like there are any civilian cars and aircraft that don't use atomic engines in the game. There's another found jet plane in FO4 that is an experimental, German WWII flying wing fighter (the Horten), it's not even that far from a giant, atomic powered, airliner wreck. Lazy designers I guess.
6:00 control locks are a common feature on aircraft for storage in adverse weather conditions. Idk about on a carrier aircraft though. Normally those aircraft are so robust they can weather a lot of that damage (or so I understand I'm not military)
@6:11 Supports are a thing actually used on some planes, but they're put on by the ground crew after a flight. Just keeps them in the right place, mainly wind is an issue.
It would have been more appropriate for Bethesda to portray the F2H Banshee instead of the P-80 Shooting Star on the carrier, an image of which can be seen at 8:04
We have the exact airframe on display outside our town on pillars. Cool looking craft but not something I'd want to be in either. But for something that is 60+ years old, it only looks like it needs air in the tires and she is ready to fly. They did a good job preserving her.
It's a thing that pisses me off about Bethesda fallout technology, how they keep thinking a 130 year old technological stagnation=different timeline. In the OG fallouts and Vegas it's established that the US military had at least 1980's level technology with hueys, humvees and picatinny rails being a thing, but Bethesda prefers to simply ignore that and do wacky shit.
I'd argue that that was established in fallout 3 as well, I mean just read the museum plaque on the vertibird. There's also the lunar lander too. Wild inconsistency within the games even.
I don't recall ever seeing aircraft actually in-theatre, except in Anchorage, and that was a homeland defense. What you're seeing in the American wastelands are the reserves; all the good aircraft have already been deployed and possibly lost in the resource wars.
Mrs. spydinggo : A shooting star is one of my favorite aircraft, especially in fallout to look at detail wise. This video is one of my favorite videos of your series so far and I like how you have improved in your art and your microphone quality. I will always like to see if more fallout, or any other contact made by you regardless. sincerely, your subscriber : USS Hornet 53🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I'd go Vertibird, Airliner, Shooting star, all others, and then Deluxe lol. I'm glad the improvements are coming through, every video is a chance to do something better! Thanks much Hornet!
@@spydingo 🇺🇸♥️ imagine if they added the F86 in fallout five as a laser fighter?.. just a cool idea that I know will not make sense in the timeline but it would be cool to see🇺🇸 also, a Vertibird with heavy Gatling gun and laser weaponry is the way to go💰😂
Interesting video. About those "support bars", I think they're just added for aesthetics but, having said that, there is a precedent for them in the real world. The Supermarine Seafire, (the carrier version of the Spitfire), had virtually identical bars, known as "jury struts". A well trained ground crew could have the wings unfolded and ready to go in 50 seconds.
Possible justification for the folding-wing struts you see at 5:40 are travel locks. These are common on tanks as barrel locks, tactical vehicles use similar suspension wedges, and helicopters have blade tie-downs. Lore friendly explanation could be if the crew didn't expect to deploy the aircraft, they would've used the struts to prevent unnecessary stress on the folding mechanism and avoid extra maintenance.
It's interesting to assume that fallout modern military hardware would be in front line or overseas units. Thus aircraft like the shooting star would remain in reserve or home units.
7:46 I recongnize that livery anywhere. The Turbocat is a staple of fictional aircraft design and Im glad you included it in the slides. Loved the SWAT KATS and still do!
If your going to talk as an authority on WWII jets. The ME262 did not outclass any of the prop fighters that you mentioned. Nor was it the best non prop fighter that germany had. It was only faster than the allied prop planes. But was less durable, less agile (turning and energy preservation), poor weaponry for fighting other fighters (fine for downing bombers), far less reliable, and were being picked off like flys towards the end of the war.
Hi there! I've never claimed to be an authority on anything. I'm just a fan of video games that also has an interest in military craft and vehicles who is looking to have fun and hopefully create a good video. There are MUCH MUCH better sources out there as far as being an authority on any historical vehicle I might cover. Thanks for stopping by and have a good day!
Mothballing is my theory of guns and use of Soviet designed technology in Fallout as well. Also vacuum tubes and simple transistors. In Fallout, The Soviet Union never collapsed and acted “neutral” like Yugoslavia courting both blocs for their own benefit so it’s not unlikely deals were made for super cheap shit (including old NATO gun clones) with the hyperinflation and resource shortages. This and late 20th century guns in canon games leaves room for a more modern side of pre-war America.
Air to Air nukes were supposed to be used to take out bomber formations back when that kind of mass bomber attack was still a tactic. Certainly not a great reason, but it was... *a* reason. 😅
2:20 Can't remember the source, but supposedly very early versions of the P-80 were sent to Italy in 1945 to intercept Arado 234's doing high speed, high altitude reconnaissance. However, it couldn't catch them
Same here I know it was deployed near the very end of the war, but had no operationnal success. I also don't think it was specifically developed to counter the Me-262, because it was under development a year before the Me was in operation, and pretty much everybody had some kind of jet powered aircraft in the late 30s. I might be wrong but to me that's one of the stuff that's been assumed, because afterwards it's easy to connect dots like that.
5:48 The support bar there is supposed support the heavy fuel tank at the ends on the wings, so that the folding mechanism wouldn't snap. (The pods at the ends of the wings of the P-80 are fuel tanks)
The F4F wildcat did have temporary 'struts' connecting the folded wings to the tail that would be removed by the crew before unfolding, I'm guessing that's what the strut on the p-80s folded wings would also be for
If they were going for first gen carrier jets they should’ve gone with the f9f of the phantom 1 since they actually flew in carriers. They probably could’ve even used corsairs instead since the navy was still using them during the p-80’s service life and most people recognize the Corsair unlike the p-80.
The support beam was probably there to support the weight of the wings because at the end of the wings have fuel tanks but honestly, it doesn’t really make sense
Couple points: 1.) The wing support struts are unneeded in the first place because... wings lock into position. You could even take off in some aircraft with the wings folded and not only will you have enough lift (assuming a very light fuel load and no ordnance whatsoever), but the wings will not fail. 2.) The P-80 really doesn't have anything going for it past the 1950s in our own world, so I'm not sure why they'd be re-activated, assuming we even have enough of them. We have fighters sitting out in the Boneyard in the real world that are well past their prime, but even then they're not *_hopelessly_* antiquated aircraft and we have enough to keep some semblance of a logistics train going for a time. Why you'd store P-80s for literally over a century and bringing them out... I dunno. It'd be like the USAF today getting desperate and fielding WWI aircraft like the SPAD S.XIII back into service... Not only did we not keep them around in storage for a century-plus later, but... they're just not useful. It'd be the same issue with the P-80 in Fallout's universe in 2077. Even if the electronics technology was similar, the actual properties and capabilities of the aircraft were not. This is a universe where nuclear powered aircraft where common place, after all. That's not going to compare to a lackluster post-war first generation jet engine.
As an aside carriers dont quite move side to side. They are super stable and if they ever actually rock either its doing highspeed turns or its off kilter in which things have gone horrible wrong.
my theory for why they are even used is because they didnt want to waste valuable material on a patrol ship, and since its an older plane more pilot possibly had more experience with such fighter systems. its better to have a few fighters to toss at a problem then having to fully rely on just the warship alone
The Colorado ANG had a pretty famous aerobatics team that originally used the P-80 called... The Minutemen! I wouldn't be surprised if someone at Bethesda knew about that when they chose the P-80 model
Love your content already, so I’m commenting for the algorithm. Sweet commentary. Would love to see long-form, listenable content going over vehicles from different games or even what you think makes a good jet/tank/vehicle for any specific games. Maybe design your own.
Your help to appease the algorithm gods is much appreciated! I'm going to try branching out to another universe pretty soon, I hope it goes well so I can continue to do so. Otherwise I'll run out of content and be up a creek lol.
For Cobras and Hueys back in the day, on the assault carriers there would be tie down straps and grounding cables for the rotor blades of those helicopters, however, I don't know what the fixed wingers would have used for their birds.
I think the P80 in fallout 3/NV is pretty cool, even tho there’s not a lot that gives it somesort if futuristic architect I think it’s safe to say it’s possibly a more modernized version of the P80, like the machine guns that would be on it could be laser types
your forgetting the transistor chip was never invented in the fallout universe meaning integrated circuits or microchips werent invented completely changing the trajectory of technology like mixing new western tech with soviet
I'm actually not forgetting that, and sadly the transistor being invented or not is up for debate. There is a theory floating out there that the transistor did get invented in 2067 that has some compelling evidence. I'd much prefer personally if it just was never invented in the fallout timeline though. As for your point though, the shooting star is the first successful US Jet fighter, but the F86 Sabre was significantly better and was introduced in 1949. My reason for stating that is the fact that the aerospace industry advanced rapidly before the modern electronic avionic suites were a thing. I mean in our universe the first aircraft that featured a transistors doesn't seem to have been until in the 60s with the F-14, so to assume that fallouts aircraft design wouldn't advance in over a century just because the transistor is missing seems like folly to me.
The Navalized F-111B prototype or the A5 would've also been a good choice. Real prototypes were flown from carriers, 1960s/70s tech, nuclear capable, and not too familiar to the gaming audiences of the early 2000s. Something based on A4s and A6s would've also been good picks.
I do believe if it had such a folding wing system in real life it wound have locking pins that could lock them in place for flight or below deck storage and looking at the hinge they took some inspiration from real navy aircraft the f-4 phantom had such pins and are hydraulically powered so a bar was never needed but I do see Bethesdas thinking especially for someone that doesn’t know too much about aviation or naval aviation
Aircraft carriers do rock in the sea, but you are correct about how stable they are. On the flight deck you really can't tell, but lower down in the hull you really feel it.
I must add that the US Navy already have carrier based jets. FH-1 Phantom, F2H-2 Banshee, the list goes on. Though if they wanted to use the P-80 for a carrier, perhaps the bar is there because the engineers weren’t able to make the wings be able to stay folded on their own for whatever reason, so perhaps the bar for the wings and the lack of essential equipment like an arresting hook is a statement on how desperate the US is to use an Air Force plane on a carrier
Folded wings means you can carry more aircraft, as well as make it easier to get on elevators, possibly allowing two on an elevator per trip. I have no problem with the folded wings, it actually makes sense.
The airplane is good. Even a Me 163 or the Goblin would be good enough. Or that floating body landing craft, but used as a fighter. It's in period, as Fallout doesn't happen in the future of this universe, but in the 1950s future which is different. It was a good choice.
The supports exist because the wings are PROBABLY manually folded, not hydraulic, and they are to keep the wings from falling against the fuselage, not to prevent them from flapping around
So, I honestly think with the bar on the wings, it is a hydraulic bar with hydraulics in the wings and actually slides along a rail on the wing and is flush with the wing when they are down, it just isn't modeled
We are all familiar with Bethesda's work, especially their earliest Fallout games. I also remind you that you can see the clear progression of the engine, from Morrorwind to Skyrim with Fallout 3 in-between. As to the fighter jet itself, I never really noticed except they were designed before my own favorite, the F-16. Bethesda also introduced a couple of other jets as well, which look far more ridiculous than what he has here. Still, you wanted to know what those cross-bars are for... Wind. It is not uncommon for the flight decks to have high winds that could change direction suddenly because of ship menu. In fact a carrier will turn into the wind and attempt to get as much air velocity as possible to help with aircraft takeoff. When the aircraft is brought to the ready, the ground crew will remove the spars like they do with other safeties. For a person so interested in aircraft, have you never seen how an aircraft carrier works?
I thought Rivet City was a museum ship, and the museum procured the p-80 to fill the deck it would be funny if the museum jurry rigged the wings in the process destroying multiple historic p-80, that'd fit fallout the museum caring more about attracting customers than preserving history
I would point out that it is not a one to one conparison. There was no super carriers program in the Fallout Universe due to resorce limitations. The shooting star in cannon is a SPACE capable airframe. its equiped with 6 LASER's and a nucler Pulse engine. Health and safety at work is not a thing in fallout clearly as the amount of rads these pups would pump out when fired up would cook deckcrew. The wing pods cover the RCS jets used for out of atmo. basic info on the aircraft is available in game at the museium of technolagly.
Back in 2008 I just assumed Rivet City was a museum ship and moved on. It wasn't until many years later I thought, "If it's a museum ship, why does it have so many of the same type of aircraft?" I really like your pulled out of mothballs theory. If you follow the idea, it paints a picture of an America in an extremely severe shortage of equipment, willing to put 130 year old air frames back into service. Still aware of their limitations however, they are deployed in the quiet Atlantic theater, not the Pacific theater which is where the Sino-American War rages on. Great job!
The museum ship theory was actually my theory as well, and is really just another variation of mothballs if you think of it. Sure in our universe museum ships are generally heavily altered for guest safety and therefore not great candidates for reactivation, in the fallout universe who knows. I actually provide the museum scenario as a slightly different approach in the actual Rivet city video that's in progress, so great minds think alike! Thanks much!
Let me be the devil's advocate In Bethesda's defense, but I repeat myself.
In thrust, you trust. You don't necessarily need a better airframe if you can just put ridiculously powerful engines on it.
I always assumed all the jet engines in the Fallout UniFirst use some variant of plasma technology.
Instead of having a race to see who could make the best airframe because jet engine technology evolved relatively slowly (relative to the progress of war), In the Fallout world, all the points were put into engine technology. You don't need arresting cables when your thrust reversers are that good.
It's not a solid explanation, but if the glove doesn't fit you must acquit. Look at the wookiee look at the cute little wookiee.
I rest my case. 😈
@@spydingo the museum ship theory makes sense until you consider the point lookout crashed jet, listening to the black box the pilot is using navy terms meaning it was in active service just as the bombs went off.
@@jtjames79 Wouldn't you at least need to have modified the rear of the vehicle to allow for the thrust to be directed in the other direction then? I'm no aerospace engineer or anything, but it doesn't seem like that's the type of thing you want to use your intakes for, and that is the only way I can see that the reverse thrust could be applied.
@@itaybron The museum ship theory still works though, if the US Military needs to reactivate a century old ship its not a particularly large leap to reactivate ancient fighters as well. I agree though, there is no doubt to me that both Rivet City and the Shooting Star were in active service when the bombs fell, no matter how much I don't like it.
Early Detection Systems in the Fallout Universe:
Some guy up in a tower mashing the VATS button on his pipboy while he looks around
All things considered in the fallout universe, that's not a bad gig for the guy.
RobCo brand TXP-33 search radars are capable of pulsing VATS waves on the S band over a thousand times a second
@@SaturnVII me just imagining the vats sound effect but four times as loud and playing continuously
I just figured that shooting stars fit in with the retro futuristic 1950s look.
The shooting star certainly fits with the retro part of retro futuristic, they just forgot to add any futuristic elements, a fact that disappoints me.
That's the problem with Bethesda games. They implement something based on whether it "fits the look", not that it actually makes sense or not.
@@deptusmechanikus7362 it’s fiction, who cares.
@@Saltasaur it is fiction, that's why it takes effort to make it believable.
@@SOLOcan the whole point of fiction is to escape the harsh confines of reality.
I was under the impression it was an aesthetics decision. In a "looks like the 40s/50s world" it fits well aesthetically. But there were more viable carrier based designs available like the F9F-Cougar. I imagine since it's such a small part of the game, someone just looked up "50s jet fighter" and this was the first thing they landed on.
On the aesthetic front, this jet does have a lot of the "bulbous" and rounded designs of other vehicles and designs of the 50s though. It does heavily lend itself to a early sci-fi look like you would see in a B film or a sci-fi comic of the time.
I agree with you on the likely motive and on the aesthetic front. What bothers me is the technology stagnation just doesn't really fit with the rest of the timeline.
That’s because it is.
The boneyard theory is cool, but it would be cheaper to just scrap the P-80s and use the metal to build new aircraft. Also, the F-89 would be a better fit for the Fallout universe in my opinion, both because of the Air to Air nuclear missiles and because of the design. Also, when it comes to things that don't belong in the Fallout universe, you could make a video about the soviet MAZ-7310 firetrucks and KAvZ-685 buses that are in Fallout 76's West Virginia for some ungodly reason.
ngl, if they had chosen to use the F-89 saber it still wouldn't have made a lot of sense, but I'd have loved it thanks to the Enforcers from "Swat Kats" using the good ol' saber. I'm sure that I'll get to cover those fire trucks one of these days! My initial guess would be because soviet stuff looks really strange to a western audience and allows them to get a "wild" look without a lot of effort lol.
@@spydingo Sorry I'm a bit late with this reply, I just have a little correction. The F-89 is the Scorpion, not the Sabre. Although, the Sabre would have still made a bit more sense since it had a real navy version, FJ-4
@@Krajenda opps that's my bad, flipped the 9.
I don't know if this lore is still current, but in the Fallout universe prior to Bethesda's additions, the USSR never fell and was actually on good terms with the US in the run up to the nuclear war. We don't have a great deal of information as to why the USSR never fell and why relations were no longer hostile, but it seems the Sino-Soviet split continued into the 2000s and the US eventually pivoted away from China. If the US and USSR were friendly with each other, then it stands to reason they probably traded with one another.
@@basileusbasileon3369 AFAIK they weren't exactly friendly, but weren't openly hostile either. I think it was something like the relationship between the US and India or Turkey or something like that. And while trade could have happened, I'm not trying to disprove that, my main gripe with the firetrucks and buses is that they look exactly like they do IRL, and these aren't vehicles from the 50s, so they look quite out of place.
Carrier wings can lock on their own, you don't need a bar, wing locks just exist. Aircraft carriers can roll quite a bit depending on the carrier and the sea, hence the hurricane bow on modern US carriers.
Thank you! I'm glad you understand my annoyance with that dang bar. It's amazing how cool combining "hurricane" and "bow" sounds.
@@spydingo Yeah, early carriers had an open bow like normal ships, but later on, depending on the nation and carrier, carriers got hurricane bows. Lexington-class had it in the 1920, British armored carriers had them because the North Sea has strong whether, Essex class had them added. What a hurricane bow does is connect the hull up to the edges of the square flight deck, instead of just an open deck being there. Real useful in heavy seas because the water is pushed up and to the sides as opposed to washing over the deck.
Helicopters on ships - even carriers - have bars that hold the rotor and the folded tail in place.
It’s a video game autizmo calm done and touch grass lmfao
US navy used bars to hold folded wings in place for a long time with even a-6 that was retired in late 90s having them
4:00 The Scorpion wasn't just equipped with Air to Air nuclear rockers. The AIR-2 Genie was an UNGUIDED Air to Air nuclear rocket.
Yikes, I guess I get why they called it the Genie. Fire it and wish you didn't lol.
It was also somehow surprisingly safe, I think they did a test fire ~5km off the ground with a couple soldiers standing right underneath the detonation and they had no issues whatsoever, not even long term afaik
@@jefflei215 Wow, you could not get away with that type of testing these days. How times have changed!
Close counts in nukes n hand gernades
@@spydingo They were also testing a nuclear anti-satellite missile and a Gatling missile launcher, which explains the line of thought that led to a nuclear rocket
I agree. Always confused me as to why they used the P-80 and, now that you mention it, an Essex class carrier. One would think that with all the nuclear technology available, the U.S. Navy would go with a fusion powered carrier…I have to disagree with your theory as to why she was in DC though, as it doesn’t make sense if she was damaged in Hampton Roads, why run aground in DC? Would make more sense if she did so in Norfolk, Newport News or Portsmouth than DC. Personally, I think she was either docked at the DC Navy Yard or it was Fleet Week
Your not wrong, the ending up in DC is a bit of a stretch since navigating the Potomac river just to run her aground doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Perhaps nortfolk was well and truly cratered and the majority of the crew's families were in DC so they sailed her there. I'm certainly not opposed to her simply being based in DC though, then you could hand wave it away with something like rudder damage making her un-controllable and thus forcing her to run aground.
in irl DC that's where it would sit if it were a museum piece, which makes more sense for late WW2 airbirds on a WW2 carrier
Well, in real world the Oriskany served through Vietnam, as did many Essex class carriers, though they got several series of postwar mod packages. I can see the USN in the Fallout timeline using all kinds of kit right through, though of course more than a century is pushing it.
about the wing folding strut thing, it does sorta make sense because of the heavy wingtip tanks, but then again if you're gonna make a folding wing that can withstand 8G's, it'll definitely be able to support some empty tanks.
I agree with you that it fits the fallout aesthetic and is a sharp looking fighter, so I'm not angry with them for selecting the shooting star based on that. It all falls apart for me though, when you look at how such a craft would fit within the timeline. I mean you can't convince me that aeronautics as stalled so much so that a fighter from the 50s is still relevant when you've got eyebots floating around lol. As for the wings, that's a good point, I hadn't really thought of the increased weight that would result from the wing tanks. I agree though, the wings should have been able to take it without the bar. In retrospect though, I suppose I should just be happy Bethesda tried to do anything with the model to make it fit the carrier role, even if it wasn't great.
@@spydingo there's some pretty cool aircraft out there they could've taken inspiration from, for example: the BAE P.1214, a literal X-wing, with VTOL!
@@random_femboy_protogen Wow, yeah! That actually fits reasonably well with their current flying wing kick too!
I don't think there was P80 variant that could operate on naval carriers
The "bars" on the wings are called "jury struts". They're a very common feature on flight decks along with uplocks and downlocks. They aren't a part of the aircraft, but support equipment that's installed after the aircraft lands. Anything that can flop around in the wind, and there is always wind on the flight deck, is usually secured with one of them to prevent that flopping around. While the wing can support itself, any flopping will accelerate wear on the hinges or joints or whatever the struts are holding still. Plus it's a safety thing.
The wing bar is simple. There's 30 kts or more of wind going over the deck. The bar is for storage/parked aircraft, like tie down chains. Alerts wouldn't have had the bar installed.
This makes me wonder if aircrafts such as the F-86, F-89, F-84 and even possibly the F-100 were in service. Although this probably depends on which the divergences occured. Since if it did happen later a lot of irl vehicles were likely retired, storage, scrapped, testing bed, etc.
Well we know the divergence began occurring shortly after wwII and we know that as part of that the transistor wasn't invented. So likely the divergence occurred slightly before 1947, that being the case the F-86 almost certainly existed since its first flight was in 47' meaning it was already in development in the years prior. The same would be true of the F-84 whose first flight was in 46'. As for the others, I still think it is highly likely those aircraft existed in the fallout universe as for them not to, the divergence would have needed to be extremely rapid with the F-89 flying in 1948, and the F-100 in 53'.
@@spydingo yeah I'm not as familiar with fallout lore as I am with aviation but it sounds right that the centuries-series aircraft would still come up with the 1950's aesthetics and all that. It might be a stretch but at most you'd probably see the F-4 Phantom and then after that, whatever fictional evolutions of aircraft design in a world without transistors but with crazy nuclear tech
@@spydingo didn't realize you responded 3 months ago. But yeah I agree with that. If I also recall the P-80 was also the first aircraft to be given the designation of fighter.
Also fun fact the P-59 Aircomet was the first US jet, successful in terms of research although too slow to truly perform with other aircraft at the time.
@@spydingo Transistor "does" exist in Fallout universe. Stop with the "no transistor" myth in Fallout.
the thought of military using late WW2 weapons in the hecking 2070s when they have the power of 1950s atomic wetdream sound's unreal but somehow made sense, kinda wished they would go for some more wacky designs that's also possible within fallout universe's capability like an F7U
I don't know where I heard this, but someone mentioned that rivert city carrier might have been a carrier on display, similar to the Yorktown museum in Charleston S.C., that would explain why ww2 era ships and planes are there, it might have been a museum for the public before the war, also that idea of the u.s. reactivating older equipment due to lose in war is nice though and could explain this as well.
I certainly think it is possible Rivet city was a museum ship, she has no AA arms, a parking lot, fancy statues, and a ready built gangway right next to a metro station. Also that gangway has support cables that block the flight deck. That being said though, it would be odd for a museum ship to have so many of the same aircraft in place, and would be a huge inconvenience to US logistics where she is located. She is blocking about half of the Potomac the way she is beached. Also there is the fact she is haphazardly beached on top of rocks and such, not exactly a good way to maintain your exhibit. Those aren't really details most are worried about I'd hazard to guess though, I mean after all it is a game =P.
@@spydingo It being a museum ship, and given how little there is up on the actual flight deck, I think it's possible that the planes were basically there for show. They were old, spare planes that hadn't been scrapped or sold yet, so wildly out of date to modern standards such that they could be written off to a museum setting handily, even while the war was ongoing.
It's very possible, I think, that the planes up top on deck were basically just there to show visitors what the flight deck would have looked like on an older model US Carrier, and thus they didn't actually need to have carrier-ready planes perse nor did they require a varied number of different carrier-ready planes, as they'd basically have been there for aesthetics.
I think that idea of 'it's basically there for aesthetics' is fitting plenty with the US armed forces as they're shown in Fallout. Obsessed with saving important resources, and wildly overspending on the cheap stuff to make it look cool.
@@J0hnzie Don't get me wrong, I'd love it if the shooting stars were just for show, but another commenter pointed out that's likely not the case. There is a crashed P80 in point lookout whose black box can be looted, and consists of a conversation between the pilot and air command suggesting the P80's would still be flight worthy and were in service with the USN. Also, I mean, I haven't been to all the museum ships, but generally I'd assume exhibit planes are like trees, once you've seen one of a type you've seen em' all, so there is generally a variety of aircraft present not just the one as is the case with rivet city.
@@spydingo Flight shows are a thing you know. The military does them, sometimes.
2:03 sure, the Messerschmitt ME262 can outrun any Allied aircraft during ‘44 and ‘45 but it can’t outmaneuver them. The Red Tails(Tuskegee Airmen)on P-51C Mustangs escorting bombers on their way to Berlin, destroyed three ME262s and damaged five more by using the un-maneuverability of the Germans to make the 262s overshoot and have the P51s get on their 6 o’clock position and squeeze the trigger before the target gets away
I wished that the f 86 was in fallout. It does technically fit into the fallout time-line...
its really interesting to think about the situation these designs of tech would be found in, and how they shape the world of fallout. thanks for the vid❤
Totally agree! You are most welcome.
I feel like a futuristic version of one of the century series like an f 101 would make more sense
No arguments here. My main reason for suggesting the Tomcat is because of the Turbo Kat from SWAT Kats lol.
@@spydingo if the f14 was ina. Fallout game, that would make the us in fallout smarter than real world us military because they still use the f14
@@m60pattoncovidiot29 as much as I love the Tomcat personally they weren't wrong to retire it. The thing had a more expensive unit cost than even the F-35 while having remained an overly specialized design with little potential for enhancement in capability to justify the cost. It doesn't even stack up to the current and cheaper F-15's and F/A-18's. Really was sad day to see the Tomcat go, especially the way hundreds of them had to be essentially shredded because the Govt. was worried that keeping them around in boneyards might lead to some shady backdoor deals with the Iranians to help them keep up their fleet of aged F-14A's.
@@niggalini but retiring the f14 so Iran can't get it is the textbook definition of shooting yourself in the foot to spite someone else
@@m60pattoncovidiot29 If you think the F14 can accomplish anything in the 21st century world of fifth generation fighters, you're smoking something.
Sweet new spydingo!!!! Absolutely love your vehicle videos! Absolutely amazing insight!
I'm thrilled to hear it! Thanks for watching!
@@spydingo always man! I love me some fallout content and you dig really deep!
@@Jaysin412 I don't know about that lol. I mostly feel like I just nerd out on history and then rant about things that bother me, that probably shouldn't. =P
@@spydingo either way, you still do an amazing job and have become one of my top 3 fallout youtubers!
@@Jaysin412 That is high praise, thank you!
Yup, air to air nuclear weapons were absolutely a thing during the Cold War! The interceptor variant of the Blackbird family, the YF-12, was designed for Soviet nuclear bomber and fighter interception, and it’s primary intended armament was an air-to-air tactical nuke, intended to maximize the odds of a kill to prevent several more nukes from reaching the US. There were also similar weapons used on other fighters in the form of unguided nuclear rockets lmao. All have since been retired from US service IIRC.
Absolutely loco for loco puffs that. Greenlighting unguided nuclear rockets... oh boy in retrospect that looks like such a bad call. Though I have to admit such a weapon system makes a lot of sense to continue on existing in the wonderful world of fallout.
Just from my rudimentary understanding of folding wing aircraft, it’s not like it’s just a loose hinge that they’re actuated on. Its got locks and reinforcements built into the system so you don’t need a support bar or anything like that.
Exactly!
Another idea was that Rivet City may have been a training Carrier (like the Wolverine in World War II) with the P-80s being hypothetical modernized training variants.
Little known fact, apparently some P-80s were actually present is Europe during the final days of the war, and even did some patrols over Italy
I honestly like the choice made by Bethesda. The Shooting Star looks so violently 1950s and that is the look Bethesda is going for in all tech in their Fallout games. Only the Sabre would have been as fitting but I guess the Sabre looks too much like a Mig 15-19 to the untrained eye.
The P-80 also makes sense from a military point of view (if you don't want to use the Sabre). There are no microprocessors in the Fallout lore and vacuum tubes are the standard for computers. This means that fighters could not carry a computer and that guided munitions for planes like heat-seeking missiles or semi active radar guided missiles were never developed. The air to air doctrine therefore didn't change since WW2 and you needed a plane good at dogfighting. This means that the P-80 is not as obsolete as it may seem since it is essentially a warbird with a jet engine and probably not an completely awful dogfighter.
Due to the lack of guided A2A munitions stuff like the F-4 or the F-14 (and most planes after that) would have most probably not existed. The F-4 was initially designed without dogfighting in mind as it lacked a gun. The F-14 was also primarily designed (in terms of A2A) to fly high and fast, shoot their Aim-54 Phoenix missiles and return to the carrier. This makes me doubt that the a plane like the F-14 would have ever been conceptualized in the Fallout universe since you don't want a dogfighter as large and heavy since a plane in Fallout it doesn't require to carry missiles.
The P-80 also has another advantage. It's a small, simple plane with one engine. It's probably neither expensive in 2070 nor hard to maintain.
Whilst the P-80 makes a lot of sense to be a plane in Fallout I still see some problems with the representation in Fallout. You have brought most of them up already like the wingfold mechanism or the missing tailhook but a thing that doesn't make sense is that all planes are seemingly only armed with machine guns. A mixture between laser and machine guns would probably have been the best option since you have the spread of bullets to shoot down planes but also rather precise lasers. The only other problem I have is the engine (assuming it is still the original in Fallout). It would probably make sense that the Fallout P-80 was equipped with a more modern (potentially nuclear) engine.
Never realized Rivet City was meant to be the Oriskany
It always seemed weird that so much of Fallout's late 21st century military was actually stuck in 1950. I mean I got that the universe is a divergent timeline where our wacky,1950's horror/scifi movies are just documentaries and the aesthetic of that time was petrified into culture. But it's not like there are any civilian cars and aircraft that don't use atomic engines in the game. There's another found jet plane in FO4 that is an experimental, German WWII flying wing fighter (the Horten), it's not even that far from a giant, atomic powered, airliner wreck.
Lazy designers I guess.
6:00 control locks are a common feature on aircraft for storage in adverse weather conditions. Idk about on a carrier aircraft though. Normally those aircraft are so robust they can weather a lot of that damage (or so I understand I'm not military)
Those bars literally existed until at least 2015 on aircraft like the A-6 Intruder and EA-6B Prowler 🤣. Whatever tho
@6:11 Supports are a thing actually used on some planes, but they're put on by the ground crew after a flight. Just keeps them in the right place, mainly wind is an issue.
It would have been more appropriate for Bethesda to portray the F2H Banshee instead of the P-80 Shooting Star on the carrier, an image of which can be seen at 8:04
During WW2 the F4U Corsair and the SB2C Helldiver used wing supports when the wings were folded.
She could’ve been a trainer carrier
A lot of the Essex class ended up as trainers
We have the exact airframe on display outside our town on pillars. Cool looking craft but not something I'd want to be in either. But for something that is 60+ years old, it only looks like it needs air in the tires and she is ready to fly. They did a good job preserving her.
We already has supersonic fighter in 1950’s for example like F-100 for Air Force, also F-8 for navy.
theres an F-94 star fire crash sight in a nature pack neer myhouse close enought to the p80 shooting star
Depending on the aircraft, external bracing for folded wings and rotors is normal.
It's like you are in 50's perspective and see what movies or fictions might look like in that time.
It's a thing that pisses me off about Bethesda fallout technology, how they keep thinking a 130 year old technological stagnation=different timeline.
In the OG fallouts and Vegas it's established that the US military had at least 1980's level technology with hueys, humvees and picatinny rails being a thing, but Bethesda prefers to simply ignore that and do wacky shit.
I'd argue that that was established in fallout 3 as well, I mean just read the museum plaque on the vertibird. There's also the lunar lander too. Wild inconsistency within the games even.
I don't recall ever seeing aircraft actually in-theatre, except in Anchorage, and that was a homeland defense.
What you're seeing in the American wastelands are the reserves; all the good aircraft have already been deployed and possibly lost in the resource wars.
Mrs. spydinggo : A shooting star is one of my favorite aircraft, especially in fallout to look at detail wise. This video is one of my favorite videos of your series so far and I like how you have improved in your art and your microphone quality. I will always like to see if more fallout, or any other contact made by you regardless. sincerely, your subscriber : USS Hornet 53🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I'd go Vertibird, Airliner, Shooting star, all others, and then Deluxe lol. I'm glad the improvements are coming through, every video is a chance to do something better! Thanks much Hornet!
@@spydingo 🇺🇸♥️ imagine if they added the F86 in fallout five as a laser fighter?.. just a cool idea that I know will not make sense in the timeline but it would be cool to see🇺🇸 also, a Vertibird with heavy Gatling gun and laser weaponry is the way to go💰😂
Are you going to do Ribit city as well??🇺🇸
@@42Trainboy Yep, that's what is up next actually.
Two Sun. It's not Tucson anymore. Only Raul remembers it.
I'd completely forgot about that!
You got my subscription.
Interesting video. About those "support bars", I think they're just added for aesthetics but, having said that, there is a precedent for them in the real world. The Supermarine Seafire, (the carrier version of the Spitfire), had virtually identical bars, known as "jury struts". A well trained ground crew could have the wings unfolded and ready to go in 50 seconds.
Possible justification for the folding-wing struts you see at 5:40 are travel locks. These are common on tanks as barrel locks, tactical vehicles use similar suspension wedges, and helicopters have blade tie-downs. Lore friendly explanation could be if the crew didn't expect to deploy the aircraft, they would've used the struts to prevent unnecessary stress on the folding mechanism and avoid extra maintenance.
Stood next to a few real ones at the museum.
Absolutely marvelous pieces of aviation history.
Neat little jet. Armed with .50 Caliber
It's interesting to assume that fallout modern
military hardware would be in front line or overseas units. Thus aircraft like the shooting star would remain in reserve or home units.
That's a comforting thought, though I still wonder at a 40's design being used in reserve. Surely there are better obsolete craft available.
7:46 I recongnize that livery anywhere. The Turbocat is a staple of fictional aircraft design and Im glad you included it in the slides. Loved the SWAT KATS and still do!
If your going to talk as an authority on WWII jets. The ME262 did not outclass any of the prop fighters that you mentioned. Nor was it the best non prop fighter that germany had. It was only faster than the allied prop planes. But was less durable, less agile (turning and energy preservation), poor weaponry for fighting other fighters (fine for downing bombers), far less reliable, and were being picked off like flys towards the end of the war.
Hi there! I've never claimed to be an authority on anything. I'm just a fan of video games that also has an interest in military craft and vehicles who is looking to have fun and hopefully create a good video. There are MUCH MUCH better sources out there as far as being an authority on any historical vehicle I might cover. Thanks for stopping by and have a good day!
Mothballing is my theory of guns and use of Soviet designed technology in Fallout as well. Also vacuum tubes and simple transistors. In Fallout, The Soviet Union never collapsed and acted “neutral” like Yugoslavia courting both blocs for their own benefit so it’s not unlikely deals were made for super cheap shit (including old NATO gun clones) with the hyperinflation and resource shortages. This and late 20th century guns in canon games leaves room for a more modern side of pre-war America.
Air to Air nukes were supposed to be used to take out bomber formations back when that kind of mass bomber attack was still a tactic. Certainly not a great reason, but it was... *a* reason. 😅
Ummm the me262 did not outclass the p51 mustang
I assumed it was a modern fighter that just looked like the old model, it had the same same lines, but had nuclear engines and such
2:20 Can't remember the source, but supposedly very early versions of the P-80 were sent to Italy in 1945 to intercept Arado 234's doing high speed, high altitude reconnaissance. However, it couldn't catch them
Same here I know it was deployed near the very end of the war, but had no operationnal success.
I also don't think it was specifically developed to counter the Me-262, because it was under development a year before the Me was in operation, and pretty much everybody had some kind of jet powered aircraft in the late 30s. I might be wrong but to me that's one of the stuff that's been assumed, because afterwards it's easy to connect dots like that.
5:48 The support bar there is supposed support the heavy fuel tank at the ends on the wings, so that the folding mechanism wouldn't snap. (The pods at the ends of the wings of the P-80 are fuel tanks)
Folding wings on carrier based aircraft were implemented to increase the number of available aircraft the carrier can hold.
The F4F wildcat did have temporary 'struts' connecting the folded wings to the tail that would be removed by the crew before unfolding,
I'm guessing that's what the strut on the p-80s folded wings would also be for
"You can never go wrong with 6 .50 cal machine guns"
-Bethesda probably
I love how these planes imply that nothing changed in jet technology from the 1940's to 2077 in the fallout universe.
If they were going for first gen carrier jets they should’ve gone with the f9f of the phantom 1 since they actually flew in carriers. They probably could’ve even used corsairs instead since the navy was still using them during the p-80’s service life and most people recognize the Corsair unlike the p-80.
I completely agree! Weird that until a day ago I didn't actually know the f-4 was the phantom the second.
Nice this video made my day man, thanks for the upload.
Awesome! That's what I'm here for =)
The support beam was probably there to support the weight of the wings because at the end of the wings have fuel tanks but honestly, it doesn’t really make sense
Couple points:
1.) The wing support struts are unneeded in the first place because... wings lock into position. You could even take off in some aircraft with the wings folded and not only will you have enough lift (assuming a very light fuel load and no ordnance whatsoever), but the wings will not fail.
2.) The P-80 really doesn't have anything going for it past the 1950s in our own world, so I'm not sure why they'd be re-activated, assuming we even have enough of them. We have fighters sitting out in the Boneyard in the real world that are well past their prime, but even then they're not *_hopelessly_* antiquated aircraft and we have enough to keep some semblance of a logistics train going for a time. Why you'd store P-80s for literally over a century and bringing them out... I dunno. It'd be like the USAF today getting desperate and fielding WWI aircraft like the SPAD S.XIII back into service... Not only did we not keep them around in storage for a century-plus later, but... they're just not useful. It'd be the same issue with the P-80 in Fallout's universe in 2077. Even if the electronics technology was similar, the actual properties and capabilities of the aircraft were not. This is a universe where nuclear powered aircraft where common place, after all. That's not going to compare to a lackluster post-war first generation jet engine.
I like to think the bar isn't for normal operations, but for getting a nuke nearby and still trucking
As an aside carriers dont quite move side to side. They are super stable and if they ever actually rock either its doing highspeed turns or its off kilter in which things have gone horrible wrong.
my theory for why they are even used is because they didnt want to waste valuable material on a patrol ship, and since its an older plane more pilot possibly had more experience with such fighter systems. its better to have a few fighters to toss at a problem then having to fully rely on just the warship alone
I love your art style. Do you do the art yourself or do you have an artist and animator for help?
I'm glad you like it! Yepp, I do the whole kit and caboodle myself.
The Colorado ANG had a pretty famous aerobatics team that originally used the P-80 called... The Minutemen! I wouldn't be surprised if someone at Bethesda knew about that when they chose the P-80 model
Love your content already, so I’m commenting for the algorithm. Sweet commentary. Would love to see long-form, listenable content going over vehicles from different games or even what you think makes a good jet/tank/vehicle for any specific games. Maybe design your own.
Your help to appease the algorithm gods is much appreciated! I'm going to try branching out to another universe pretty soon, I hope it goes well so I can continue to do so. Otherwise I'll run out of content and be up a creek lol.
For Cobras and Hueys back in the day, on the assault carriers there would be tie down straps and grounding cables for the rotor blades of those helicopters, however, I don't know what the fixed wingers would have used for their birds.
f4u corsairs had that support strut along with several other folding wing planes
I remember in Iraq when USS North Carolina was firing off Wright Flyers
lol yepp, this exactly.
I think the P80 in fallout 3/NV is pretty cool, even tho there’s not a lot that gives it somesort if futuristic architect I think it’s safe to say it’s possibly a more modernized version of the P80, like the machine guns that would be on it could be laser types
Canada used the CT-33 "T-Bird" from 1948-2005. She had a good career but damn, it's an old bird.
your forgetting the transistor chip was never invented in the fallout universe meaning integrated circuits or microchips werent invented completely changing the trajectory of technology like mixing new western tech with soviet
I'm actually not forgetting that, and sadly the transistor being invented or not is up for debate. There is a theory floating out there that the transistor did get invented in 2067 that has some compelling evidence. I'd much prefer personally if it just was never invented in the fallout timeline though. As for your point though, the shooting star is the first successful US Jet fighter, but the F86 Sabre was significantly better and was introduced in 1949. My reason for stating that is the fact that the aerospace industry advanced rapidly before the modern electronic avionic suites were a thing. I mean in our universe the first aircraft that featured a transistors doesn't seem to have been until in the 60s with the F-14, so to assume that fallouts aircraft design wouldn't advance in over a century just because the transistor is missing seems like folly to me.
The Navalized F-111B prototype or the A5 would've also been a good choice. Real prototypes were flown from carriers, 1960s/70s tech, nuclear capable, and not too familiar to the gaming audiences of the early 2000s. Something based on A4s and A6s would've also been good picks.
I do believe if it had such a folding wing system in real life it wound have locking pins that could lock them in place for flight or below deck storage and looking at the hinge they took some inspiration from real navy aircraft the f-4 phantom had such pins and are hydraulically powered so a bar was never needed but I do see Bethesdas thinking especially for someone that doesn’t know too much about aviation or naval aviation
Aircraft carriers do rock in the sea, but you are correct about how stable they are. On the flight deck you really can't tell, but lower down in the hull you really feel it.
if im not mistaken alot of war ships also have sea stabilizers to the point where they dont rock side to side
The “test platform” you showed was a photo of the McDonnell FH-1
I thought that they were either museum ship with museum planes or just the same idea of the plane just retrofitted/built as it is.
I must add that the US Navy already have carrier based jets. FH-1 Phantom, F2H-2 Banshee, the list goes on.
Though if they wanted to use the P-80 for a carrier, perhaps the bar is there because the engineers weren’t able to make the wings be able to stay folded on their own for whatever reason, so perhaps the bar for the wings and the lack of essential equipment like an arresting hook is a statement on how desperate the US is to use an Air Force plane on a carrier
Look at pictures of carriers in typhoons
They rock with the waves
Even corsairs had support bars. Not even a carrier is immune to rough seas.
Folded wings means you can carry more aircraft, as well as make it easier to get on elevators, possibly allowing two on an elevator per trip. I have no problem with the folded wings, it actually makes sense.
The airplane is good. Even a Me 163 or the Goblin would be good enough. Or that floating body landing craft, but used as a fighter. It's in period, as Fallout doesn't happen in the future of this universe, but in the 1950s future which is different. It was a good choice.
Well, there was at least one used in "service" in the fallout universe, theres a crashed one in Point Lookout
The U.S.S. Oriskany was sunk to be used as an artificial reef in May 2005.
The supports exist because the wings are PROBABLY manually folded, not hydraulic, and they are to keep the wings from falling against the fuselage, not to prevent them from flapping around
So, I honestly think with the bar on the wings, it is a hydraulic bar with hydraulics in the wings and actually slides along a rail on the wing and is flush with the wing when they are down, it just isn't modeled
Also, arresting hooks are often put up when on deck and in a covered spot in the tail
A F104 would have been nice to see, or some other incredibly dangerous mid 20th century planes.
We are all familiar with Bethesda's work, especially their earliest Fallout games. I also remind you that you can see the clear progression of the engine, from Morrorwind to Skyrim with Fallout 3 in-between.
As to the fighter jet itself, I never really noticed except they were designed before my own favorite, the F-16. Bethesda also introduced a couple of other jets as well, which look far more ridiculous than what he has here. Still, you wanted to know what those cross-bars are for...
Wind. It is not uncommon for the flight decks to have high winds that could change direction suddenly because of ship menu. In fact a carrier will turn into the wind and attempt to get as much air velocity as possible to help with aircraft takeoff. When the aircraft is brought to the ready, the ground crew will remove the spars like they do with other safeties.
For a person so interested in aircraft, have you never seen how an aircraft carrier works?
Nice Swatkats reference Spydingo.👍
You betcha! If only that show had more seasons.
@@spydingo with sk rev in the works to continue the series. we can only wait and hope.
I've always assumed she was a museum ship by the time of the Great War.
that is a clever call on just how olf the tech is compared to fallout standards, I never thought of it like that for some reason.
I thought Rivet City was a museum ship, and the museum procured the p-80 to fill the deck it would be funny if the museum jurry rigged the wings in the process destroying multiple historic p-80, that'd fit fallout the museum caring more about attracting customers than preserving history
Honestly I think they should have aircraft heavily based on the F-100
Atompunk F-100 and F-105
I always thought it looked really close to F2H banshee which was carrier based, also, wouldn’t you know it, it has FOLDED WINGS… wild 😂
This was part of the Paraguayan Air Force second squad, "Indios"
I would point out that it is not a one to one conparison.
There was no super carriers program in the Fallout Universe due to resorce limitations.
The shooting star in cannon is a SPACE capable airframe. its equiped with 6 LASER's and a nucler Pulse engine. Health and safety at work is not a thing in fallout clearly as the amount of rads these pups would pump out when fired up would cook deckcrew. The wing pods cover the RCS jets used for out of atmo. basic info on the aircraft is available in game at the museium of technolagly.
Had no idea it was the USS Oriskany, my uncle served on that carrier during Vietnam.
I find it hilarious how the shooting star straight up is just like not changed at all from its real life counterpart