What if

Hot Research Topics => Aircraft, Armor, Weapons and Ships by Topic => Topic started by: PR19_Kit on January 30, 2015, 10:57:05 AM

Title: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on January 30, 2015, 10:57:05 AM
It's often been a watchword of mine that two seater derivatives of some aircraft look a loot better than their single seater originals. On the other hand some are a lot worse, the Lightning being a case in point. Of course this is all very subjective but I'd be interested in the opinions of others on this stuff. Proposed two seaters that never got built are allowed in the list.

2 seater looks better than the single seater

Su-27
Skyhawk
F-106
F-100
F-86
Harrier
Mirage F-1


2 seater looks worse than the single seater

Lightning
Typhoon
F-102
Mig 15
Attacker
Scimitar
Mig-29


Neutral

Hunter
F-105
F-9F
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: GeorgeC on January 30, 2015, 11:04:39 AM
Some of those 2-seaters we so ugly Supermarine couldn't bring themselves to actually build them so you must be right!  Not sure about the Harrier though, having to stick all that 'boom' out the back stops it from looking 'right' to me...
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: darthspud on January 30, 2015, 11:19:11 AM
2 seater Spitfire?
I really just don't know.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: sandiego89 on January 30, 2015, 12:22:24 PM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on January 30, 2015, 10:57:05 AM
It's often been a watchword of mine that two seater derivatives of some aircraft look a loot better than their single seater originals. On the other hand some are a lot worse, the Lightning being a case in point. Of course this is all very subjective but I'd be interested in the opinions of others on this stuff. Proposed two seaters that never got built are allowed in the list.

2 seater looks better than the single seater

Su-27
Skyhawk
F-106
F-100
F-86
Harrier
Mirage F-1


2 seater looks worse than the single seater

Lightning
Typhoon
F-102
Mig 15
Attacker
Scimitar
Mig-29


Neutral

Hunter
F-105
F-9F


Good list, I will add:

2 seater better:
Hawk, Single seat 200 looks terrible/out of proportion
F-106, agree
Harrier (agree with Kit) first gen especially, second generation closer to neutral
Impala
Mitsubishi F-1- looks like they just sheet metalled over the second seat of the T-2
F-16D/F with the spine
F-8 "Two-sader" (one built)
F-5.  Two seat or T-38 has much better lines

2 seater worse:
Mirage III/Cheetah/Dagger
Rafale
Me-262
Meteor
A-7
F-15 B/D (somehow looks OK the F-15E)
F-16B
Saab 35 Draken
MiG-25 step down nose trainer
U-2 with the second bubble
F-22 (proposed only)
MiG-23
A-10

Neutral
F-101 Voodoo- both look pretty good in different ways.  
F-100
Saab Viggen
A-4 Skyhawk- disagree- just too much glass. And the double bubble singapore version looks bad.  
Su-25
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: McColm on January 30, 2015, 01:02:53 PM
I have to disagree about the Lightning as the layout is the same as the Hunter two seater ans that looks impressive now as it did when they were new.
The F-4 Phantom would have looked better as a single seater, same goes for the Tornado. The German's flew these as single seaters.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: martinbayer on January 30, 2015, 01:16:49 PM
To me, single seaters almost always invariably look better than two seaters, especially those in tandem arrangement. It's a bit like a sports coupe vs. a family sedan ;)...

Martin
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: JayBee on January 30, 2015, 02:09:00 PM
IMHO two seaters that were designed that way from the beginning look better than a single seat derivative.
Take the F-4, the original plan was to be a single seat fleet defence aircraft and in fact that is what the mock-up was built as. The final product looks right as a two seater.
The Tornado also does not look right as a single seater.
The Javelin would look just silly as a single seater.
The Sea Vixen..... OK who would know.
Etc, Etc, Etc.......
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on January 30, 2015, 02:31:25 PM
Quote from: JayBee on January 30, 2015, 02:09:00 PM
The Javelin would look just silly as a single seater.

Jim, I'm almost tempted.  ;D

I've found I have two T3s in The Loft...............  ;)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: scooter on January 30, 2015, 02:34:46 PM
Even though the Blackbird is a two seater, and looks pretty sexy (in the air, where its not leaking all over the place), SR-71B just looks...worse IMHO
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fd%2Fda%2FSR-71B_NASA_in_flight_1991.jpg&hash=d46631113f45b02bc57b5e2ca5ea504124e3eaa7)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: kitnut617 on January 30, 2015, 02:39:34 PM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on January 30, 2015, 02:31:25 PM
Quote from: JayBee on January 30, 2015, 02:09:00 PM
The Javelin would look just silly as a single seater.

Jim, I'm almost tempted.  ;D

I've found I have two T3s in The Loft...............  ;)


I think I'd be inclined to do one like this - --- that's the cockpit  --- not the rest of it

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi200.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa263%2Fkitnut617%2FBAC%2520STOVL%2520Canberra%2FStovlCanberra104.jpg&hash=0bd55c67c54ed52b4af11141cfec0447838efd2b) (http://s200.photobucket.com/user/kitnut617/media/BAC%20STOVL%20Canberra/StovlCanberra104.jpg.html)

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi200.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa263%2Fkitnut617%2FBAC%2520STOVL%2520Canberra%2FStovlCanberra011.jpg&hash=c5f7624f779e5e4bc685a273f7b233537a497086) (http://s200.photobucket.com/user/kitnut617/media/BAC%20STOVL%20Canberra/StovlCanberra011.jpg.html)



Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: jcf on January 30, 2015, 03:31:22 PM
Quote from: JayBee on January 30, 2015, 02:09:00 PM
The Javelin would look just silly as a single seater.

Hmm, really?

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi729.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww291%2Fjoncarrfarrelly%2FGLOSTER_PXXX_005.png&hash=f4bd84ea488ef46767e6ac225b3f806426240a0b)

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi729.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fww291%2Fjoncarrfarrelly%2FGLOSTER_PXXX_008.png&hash=b9352ca5d1ba1d1c3299e7cc4c6b41b22c26755c)

;D
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: ericr on January 31, 2015, 01:01:33 AM


one two-seater I just love is the Me163S

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airwar.ru%2Fimage%2Fidop%2Ffww2%2Fme163%2Fme163-9.jpg&hash=21ccb0a4a4d65c8bda2e11f92e766b4e924b8b5c)

and I agree with Kit that two-seater variants have something special, even when looking a bit ugly.
The Harrier and Skyhawk look great with their magnified bubble canopy. Like a big eye, or swollen brain?

Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: ericr on January 31, 2015, 02:23:43 AM
Quote from: ericr on January 31, 2015, 01:01:33 AM

and I agree with Kit that two-seater variants have something special, even when looking a bit ugly.
The Harrier and Skyhawk look great with their magnified bubble canopy. Like a big eye, or swollen brain?



oh, and what about this twin-seater? (for which the single-seater was already quite a challenge ...)

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.lonesentry.com%2Fblog%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F10%2Fv1-bomb-fieseler-fi103-trainer-re-3.jpg&hash=08d88a7126b3c7fe3f54ba4059ab12e701d6c042)

Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: ericr on January 31, 2015, 02:27:34 AM
Quote from: ericr on January 31, 2015, 02:23:43 AM
Quote from: ericr on January 31, 2015, 01:01:33 AM

and I agree with Kit that two-seater variants have something special, even when looking a bit ugly.
The Harrier and Skyhawk look great with their magnified bubble canopy. Like a big eye, or swollen brain?



oh, and what about this twin-seater? (for which the single-seater was already quite a challenge ...)

does this one count?

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.diseno-art.com%2Fnews_content%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2FGloster-Meteor-F8-Prone-Pilot-2.jpg%3Ff75118&hash=567f2bd4688b8bdcae4bf99f1e60a63393655642)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on January 31, 2015, 05:27:44 AM
Quote from: ericr on January 31, 2015, 02:27:34 AM
does this one count?

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.diseno-art.com%2Fnews_content%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2FGloster-Meteor-F8-Prone-Pilot-2.jpg%3Ff75118&hash=567f2bd4688b8bdcae4bf99f1e60a63393655642)


Absolutely, a wonderful looking aircraft.  ;D

Much better looking than a standard Meteor T7, and maybe better than a standard F8 too.

Not only does the real thing still exist at the Cosford Museum, but Special Hobby do it as a kit, and excellent it is too.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: NARSES2 on January 31, 2015, 05:34:50 AM
You've now got me thinking about what a Sea Vixen would like with a twin place cockpit rather then the coal hole it had.

Jon I've always liked those Gloster single seat projects ever since I first saw them in Putnams.


Quote from: sandiego89 on January 30, 2015, 12:22:24 PM

Mitsubishi F-1- looks like they just sheet metalled over the second seat of the T-2


I think that's what they did. Swear I've read that somewhere
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 08:10:43 AM
Quote from: NARSES2 on January 31, 2015, 05:34:50 AM
You've now got me thinking about what a Sea Vixen would like with a twin place cockpit rather then the coal hole it had.

Sea Venom canopy?

I agree with most of the list, however, IMHO of course:

The two-seat 1st gen Harrier is NOT better-looking than the single-seater: the canopy looks nice, but the goofy fin and tail spike spoil it for me.

F-9F Cougar: the two-seater DOES look better than the single-seater. There's nothing wrong with the single, it's just that the twin is so damned pretty.

The Skyhawk I would say is neutral: both versions look good for different reasons.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: sandiego89 on January 31, 2015, 09:30:00 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 08:10:43 AM


The two-seat 1st gen Harrier is NOT better-looking than the single-seater: the canopy looks nice, but the goofy fin and tail spike spoil it for me.



Counterpoint, whats not to like about this one:

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi1193.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Faa360%2Fsandiego89%2FHarrier27_zpsb659de69.jpg&hash=dfb69285d2cc4d95ca9067a21322c921ef0f0324)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: jcf on January 31, 2015, 09:30:00 AM
The F-1 is a straight conversion of the T-2, the rear seat position replaced with an avionics bay and the rear canopy
replaced with a hatch.

Straightforward and logical.  ;D
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: sandiego89 on January 31, 2015, 09:32:14 AM
Quote from: joncarrfarrelly on January 31, 2015, 09:30:00 AM
The F-1 is a straight conversion of the T-2, the rear seat position replaced with an avionics bay and the rear canopy
replaced with a hatch.

Straightforward and logical.  ;D

Agree a good approach, but it is uglier- and thus my nomination in this thread.   
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 10:02:20 AM
Quote from: sandiego89 on January 31, 2015, 09:30:00 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 08:10:43 AM


The two-seat 1st gen Harrier is NOT better-looking than the single-seater: the canopy looks nice, but the goofy fin and tail spike spoil it for me.



Counterpoint, whats not to like about this one:


Okay, I'll give you that the original T.2s were better than the T.4s...
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: sandiego89 on January 31, 2015, 10:34:44 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 10:02:20 AM
Quote from: sandiego89 on January 31, 2015, 09:30:00 AM
Quote from: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 08:10:43 AM


The two-seat 1st gen Harrier is NOT better-looking than the single-seater: the canopy looks nice, but the goofy fin and tail spike spoil it for me.



Counterpoint, whats not to like about this one:


Okay, I'll give you that the original T.2s were better than the T.4s...

Agree. The all black T-8's, and G-VTOL especially in a few schemes looked good as well. The laser nose on the gr3 and t4 made them the ugliest of the family.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on January 31, 2015, 01:22:06 PM
I much prefer the looks of the later Harrier T10/TAV-8B to the equivalent single seaters, something to do with the balance of the fin and canopy maybe.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: pyro-manic on January 31, 2015, 01:45:41 PM
The Hunter and Lightning two-seaters are hideous. A tandem two-seat Hunter would probably be quite attractive, though. I think a side-by-side Venom-style canopy on the Sea Vixen would completely ruin it...

It really depends on the design, and sometimes further modifications made later on improve the look. The latest F-16s, for example, with the big spines and CFTs look much better than the earlier smooth B/Ds. I think a big spine would massively improve the look of the two-seater Typhoon, too.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on January 31, 2015, 04:02:13 PM
Quote from: pyro-manic on January 31, 2015, 01:45:41 PM
A tandem two-seat Hunter would probably be quite attractive, though.

See here.  ;D

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,39695.105.html (http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,39695.105.html)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: pyro-manic on January 31, 2015, 04:53:49 PM
Thought so! ;D :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: Old Paul on January 31, 2015, 11:27:00 PM
Quote from: Weaver on January 31, 2015, 08:10:43 AM
Quote from: NARSES2 on January 31, 2015, 05:34:50 AM
You've now got me thinking about what a Sea Vixen would like with a twin place cockpit rather then the coal hole it had.

Sea Venom canopy?





How about a Modelimex Jet Provost canopy? (Must learn how to use the quote function)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: McColm on February 01, 2015, 01:16:47 AM
Quote from: pyro-manic on January 31, 2015, 01:45:41 PM
The Hunter and Lightning two-seaters are hideous. A tandem two-seat Hunter would probably be quite attractive, though. I think a side-by-side Venom-style canopy on the Sea Vixen would completely ruin it...

It really depends on the design, and sometimes further modifications made later on improve the look. The latest F-16s, for example, with the big spines and CFTs look much better than the earlier smooth B/Ds. I think a big spine would massively improve the look of the two-seater Typhoon, too.
And yet the F-111 and the A-6 were both two seaters and not branded hideous as well!
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: ericr on February 01, 2015, 01:31:57 AM

this Mig-9L has its specificity, esthetically

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.fantastic-plastic.com%2FMiG9LBoxArt.jpg&hash=82b4fbbc1843024d38262d78526771a23aa2da8a)

Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: sandiego89 on February 01, 2015, 06:30:11 AM
Quote from: ericr on February 01, 2015, 01:31:57 AM

this Mig-9L has its specificity, esthetically



Wow, that is really ugly....and must have been a plumbing nightmare...
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: NARSES2 on February 01, 2015, 07:21:38 AM
When you look at a lot of the Soviet trainer conversions they could only have happened on that side of the Iron Curtain. Completely different philosophy
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: pyro-manic on February 01, 2015, 10:31:59 AM
Quote from: McColm on February 01, 2015, 01:16:47 AM
And yet the F-111 and the A-6 were both two seaters and not branded hideous as well!

Those were both designed as side-by-side two seaters from the start, and are wide enough to accommodate. The Lightning and Hunter are both sleek and narrow, and jamming a side-by-side twin cockpit on gives them both an incredibly ungainly, bug-eyed look.

I actually quite like that Mig-9L. It's less ugly than the UTI trainer, in any case...

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffiles.ruslet.webnode.cz%2F200004975-cc230ce16e%2FMiG-9UTI_FT-2_02.jpg&hash=3db5ba4f561e760836d518b4adae3b3ccd7f089c)
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: scooter on February 01, 2015, 10:51:28 AM
Quote from: pyro-manic on February 01, 2015, 10:31:59 AMThe Lightning and Hunter are both sleek and narrow, and jamming a side-by-side twin cockpit on gives them both an incredibly ungainly, bug-eyed look.
Same with the F-102A/B.  The A, for all its sluggish faults, looks nice.  The B...what the hell was Convair thinking?
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: pyro-manic on February 01, 2015, 11:09:07 AM
Indeed!
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: PR19_Kit on February 01, 2015, 12:28:08 PM
Quote from: scooter on February 01, 2015, 10:51:28 AM
Quote from: pyro-manic on February 01, 2015, 10:31:59 AMThe Lightning and Hunter are both sleek and narrow, and jamming a side-by-side twin cockpit on gives them both an incredibly ungainly, bug-eyed look.
Same with the F-102A/B.  The A, for all its sluggish faults, looks nice.  The B...what the hell was Convair thinking?

At least they got their act together when they did the 2 seater Six!
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: kerick on February 01, 2015, 07:57:39 PM
The two seat Fury is curious. The Iraq version IIRC.
Title: Re: Two seaters versus single seaters
Post by: ericr on May 11, 2015, 04:28:31 AM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on January 31, 2015, 05:27:44 AM
Quote from: ericr on January 31, 2015, 02:27:34 AM
does this one count?

(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.diseno-art.com%2Fnews_content%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F08%2FGloster-Meteor-F8-Prone-Pilot-2.jpg%3Ff75118&hash=567f2bd4688b8bdcae4bf99f1e60a63393655642)


Absolutely, a wonderful looking aircraft.  ;D

Much better looking than a standard Meteor T7, and maybe better than a standard F8 too.

Not only does the real thing still exist at the Cosford Museum, but Special Hobby do it as a kit, and excellent it is too.

the kit is nice indeed, thanks for the tip, I just improved it (my way) a bit :

http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,40517.msg684028.html#msg684028 (http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,40517.msg684028.html#msg684028)