Go to car

Latest Comments
Car: 97043   By: Skid   Comment: "Yeah, that's one odd little duckie. I'm wondering ..."
Car: 97038   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "same. I don't think I've ever seen one with it int..."
Car: 97038   By: DiRF   Comment: "I'd love to have one, but only if I could acquire ..."
Car: 97038   By: ricerocketboy   Comment: "Is that an EXA?..."
Car: 97036   By: wannabemustangjockey   Comment: "“Fully Original Roadside Decoration”..."
See last 25 comments
 Go to

Next picture
Ricecop Home
Bling Bling
Free Post

 Top 10

Top 10 Ricers
Top 10 Non-Ricers
Top 10 Other Good
Top 10 Other Bad

 New & Retired

Newest Images
Retired Images


Submit a picture
Profile Lookup
Site Log
Leader Board
Site Stats

 Online Now

0 Ricecops
1 Guests

Detailed List




Remember Login?

Sign up!
Why sign up?
Forgot my password

View this image at full size
Click here to let us know if the image above is broken.

Go back and vote on this image.

Picture Information
URL: http://riceornot.ricecop.com/?auto=85357
Submitted by: DiRF
Comments: 6  (Read/Post)     Favorites: 0  (View)
Submitted on: 08-26-2011
View Stats Category: Other Vehicle
Fisher P-75 Eagle...

Envisioned, designed, and built as cheaply as possible for one sole reason: To serve as an excuse by GM so that the US Government wouldn't take over their Fisher Body Plant during the war.


Showing page: 1 of 1
1 ]

8-26-2011 @ 05:18:22 AM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
"No, no, no... I'm sorry Uncle Sam, we can't turn our Fisher plant over so that you can build more B-29s, as we're using it to develop and build this amazing new fighter aircraft, see?" *used car salesman smile*

8-26-2011 @ 11:20:02 AM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
A mid-engined aircraft no less, and most of the parts were just copied wholesale from other designs, little wonder it was a dud.

8-26-2011 @ 03:54:30 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#2, ...and contra-rotating propellers, which, if my "World's Worst Aircraft" book is too believed, NEVER actually worked reliably in the early days of its use.

8-26-2011 @ 04:51:26 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
A short list of "worst" aircraft include quite a few contra-rotating designs, it seems that the complex gearboxes and mechanisms to make them work always cause headaches and the usual teething-troubles and the plane usually gets written off as a failure before the bugs can be ironed out. I can't think of any contra-rotating design aircraft that actually made it to service with the USAF, all kinda fizzled out in the prototype stages.

8-27-2011 @ 04:06:17 PM
Posted By : DiRF  Reply | Edit | Del
#4, It also doesn't help that contra-rotating propellers came out just about a decade shy of widespread jet engine use... so there wasn't really any time for the bugs to be worked out.

8-27-2011 @ 04:24:49 PM
Posted By : Low-Tech Redneck Reply | Edit | Del
#5, Another short lived experimental phase was turboprop fighters, again, by the time the kinks of supersonic-prop-driven aircraft were worked out, faster pure jet engines had been developed.

Showing page: 1 of 1
1 ]

Login to leave a comment

Click here to post your own classified ad

Want to send some feedback? Click here.

Server time: Monday, October 22, 2018 02:13:37 AM

All pictures on this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2000 - 2018 Ricecop. All rights reserved.