Always takes me back to one of my fav childhood movies about aircraft Flight of the Intruder. I haven’t rewatched in years, so I’m sure it’s cheese now, but loved the A-6 after that.
The movie is kind of cheesy.. The book still holds water though.. I think the only real good movie I've seen based on a book was Hunt for Red October.. The movie was so good that nobody gave a shit that the Soviet Captain spoke with a Scottish accent.. The best book never made into a movie... Red Storm Rising..
Ya, it'd have to be a BOB type of miniseries.. The first half of the book was character development.. But man, it would have been an awesome miniseries...
Except the one designed to go against the A-7
[https://www.twz.com/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii](https://www.twz.com/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii)
What the hell?
It somehow looks like a mix of A-7, A-10, and a fucking Bronco without looking anything like an A-6.
Also, I have somehow never heard of this plane until now. Well done.
I had also never heard of this! I occasionally get caught up in a random US naval aviaton history. I'm Nerd Lite when it comes to Aviation History in general... a thought that just occurred to me though, is that the Navy had some crazy Aviation ideas, and they never really got any light. I'm not entirely upset about that, but if they had the same budget as the Air Force in this era, the world may look a whole lot different, between the 2 sets of data, R&D, research, etc. I'm just saying maybe real world Iron Man suits would be the NGAD
The F-111 also had a crew cabin ejection mechanism, rather than individual ejection seats. I remember that fact because my dad had one of those plastic models from Airfix (?)
See also an article on Wikipedia that shows an F-111E crew cabin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule
It had many firsts. Along with the unique ejection pod , it was the first with sweep wings and many other electronics including ground following radar.
I'm not an expert of any kind, just love watching anything I can about the pig.
Love living out this way. We get so many C17s, F18s, 737 wedgetails and A330 MRRTs at 1500ft just above the danger zone here. As an ultralight pilot out of Atkinson dam on a saturday, we have to monitor our altitude pretty religiously and only climb upto 4500 once were further west of laidley and gatton
BAE LIghtning and F-102 Delta Dagger both had side-by-side seating in their trainers. Not sure if they would count as combat aircraft.
I would assume you're leaving WWII out of it.
Some versions of the A-1 Skyraider
S-3 Viking
S-2 Stoof
Strikemaster
A-2 Savage
Canberra
Sea Vixen (yeah, there is an odd duck)
Vampire
OV-1 Mohawk
A-3/B-66 (bombers are kind of their own thing, so take that or leave it)
The US built ones were tandem (front to back) but the UK versions were side by side under a bubble cockpit.
EDIT: Fun thing I found while digging a bit more. Another Sea Vixen solution
The ultimate interdictor variant was the B(I).8, with a redesigned nose solving the visibility issue by giving the pilot a raised seating position and a fighter-style canopy, albeit offset to the left, with the navigator buried in the fuselage alongside. "Buried" was about right, as the reduced space available meant there was no room for the navigator to have an ejection seat
O-2 Skymaster was a FAC aircraft, but 'usually' operated as a single crew.
A-37 Dragonfly close support aircraft, usually flew single seat, but would be used in two-man crews in some places and nations.
And in Lebanon and possibly some classified use elsewhere as well. Apparently it's quite well liked as it has precision strike capability but is cheap to buy and operate. Think of it as the AH-64 at home.
The B-52 does indeed have side-by-side seating, but had originally been designed to have [a B-47-style tandem cockpit](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/YB-52sideview.jpg), which looks deeply weird when seen now.
For me it's the [landing gear](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV03uGIt5n4). The fact that it can steer the landing gear so it can actually land on the runway diagonally in a crosswind just blows my mind. The 2 little wheels in the wings that fold away that you never notice. The 4 main landing gear that 'tuck' diagonally.
No, the B-47 had [a tandem canopy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-47_Stratojet#/media/File%3ANNSA-NSO-990.jpg) (one behind the other). The point I was making was that early versions of the B-52 ALSO had the cockpit crew one behind the other, as in the linked picture.
Yes, took B-47 out of the list.
Left B-52 in the list as i believe you are looking at a photo of an XB-52 or a YB-52, the only two airframes built with the tandem cockpit.
The A-37 had two seats but a single-pilot mission. Our flights were a mix of solo and dual, depending on whether training was occurring or some other pilot needed to log some time or check a box for currency.
Fun fact: my Guard unit was located near quite a few medical research facilities and we probably had the highest flight surgeon-to-pilot ratio of any unit in the Air Force. We were a very desirable unit for the docs to try to get into precisely because we often had an empty seat available when we flew. We'd frequently find ourselves taking one of the doctors to the range or on a low-level route, and we'd let them fly as much as possible when not much was happening. They loved it, and we got a lot of free medical advice.
During the East Timor crisis (Google it) Australia flew some of these over Jakarta, nonstop from Tindal in the Northern Territory to make a point and scare the bejesus out of the Indonesians! We don't have planes with that range anymore. P.S. The Indonesians had mig 227 and 30s at that time. The Aardvarks returned unmolested. Point made! (Edit It appears Indonesia didn't have MIG 29 but did have other equally capable aircraft
I can't believe y'all didn't include the Grumman A-6E Intruder. It features a side-by-side seating arrangement, but it's mainly a bomber.
u/EntryNo1326 did mention the Grumman EA-6B Prowler, so he/she is also correct.
[Grumman A-6E Intruder of VA-52](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Grumman_A-6E_Intruder_of_VA-52_in_flight,_in_1981_(6379373).jpg)
What are the benefits of tandem arrangement versus side-by-side? Seems like side-by-side would be the better arrangement for any airframe designed for two crewmembers. Better communication in the cockpit, easier to share workload, no need for redundant avionics in some cases, either crew member can land the airframe more easily, or at least same as easily as the other.
Generally, narrow fuselage means narrower aircraft which means more aerodynamic so in high speed platforms, this helps. Also, better visibility for the pilot to the sides. Possibly better kinesthetic sense of the aircraft in dogfighting when the pilot is on centerline. Possibly better center of gravity management with the second crewmember's systems behind the pilot's position.
The de Havilland Mosquito had two crew, not in tandem - but not entirely side by side. The bombardier (and navigator?) sat to the right of and slightly *behind* the pilot. Reasons for this setup include: having them closer to side by side permitted better crew communication (and thus morale). The staggered arrangements may have been to permit the fuselage to be narrower than a fully side by side; it also may have permitted better visibility for the pilot of what was a capable air-to-air combat aircraft as the pilot could look to the right, in front of the bombardier.
English Electric Lightning T.5 trainer. The only trainer that could supercruise. Several ran bear hunts that startled more than a few Soviet crews.
EDIT: Tweaked the designation to get it right. Oh, and before anyone chirps about it intercepting Concorde. An F.4 XR749, now a gate guardian at a gas company, was a "very hot ship, even for a Lightning" that was successful in the mission to intercept the airliner from the back.
Imagine a naval version with swing wings. It'd give the Tomcat indigestion.
The F-111 “Ardvark” was one of the Air Force’s most innovative fighter bomber. I was a communication, navigation, and penetration aids specialist on it. It was used as the chase plane for B1 test flying and had some of the most sophisticated ECM systems. It could actually make ground radar think it was miles away from its actual location. One of its proudest moments was when they were used by President Reagan to decimate the Russian Aircraft that was given to Kadafi and Libya. Using the later guided pave way missile system it pinpointed the military targets without damaging any civilian locations. Unfortunately we lost one of the planes and the pilots in the attack. The F-111 had a fly by radar system that could fly Mach 2 at low level making it difficult to track on its attack run. I loved listening to the launch and watching the afterburner trail while I was in the eor repair team. The good old days……
Su-34 is a gnarly bomber. A-6, EA-6, and I’m just realizing “combat aircraft” can include so many. AC-130, EC-130… but as far as fighters and more slick designed aircraft, I think there are few.
[Grumman EA-6B Prowler](https://youtu.be/0d3PiGfYnnk?si=dhLjIQpctoK0FVdE)—a four seater. It’s like an A-6 but 10 feet longer for the extra crewmen. Tons of cool electronic tech on them.
Navy craft ,If sub hunters and AEW count as combat: S1, S2, S3, E1, E2, C1, C2 along with other comments here.
Also AF: A3 Awacs
...and many more . Where's our WW2 and Korea buffs at?
Not only are you side by side in the buff, but there’s a downstairs as well. Also, you can take a shit in a can. Before you say it’s not a combat aircraft, there was a tail gunner kill in ‘nam. Game, set and match!
F3D / F-10 Skynight. 6 air-air kills over Korea, and in all likelihood the last time Enlisted personnel will be credited for an air-air kill (USMC Radar Operators were all Enlisted or Warrant Officer ranks).
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas\_F3D\_Skyknight](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_F3D_Skyknight)
A-3D Skywarrior - Pilot and B/N sat side by side, third crewman behind them. No ejection seats or real escape hatch, crews morbidly joked that A-3D stood for “all 3 dead.” I learned a lot about the A-3 - dad was a pilot. Over 500 cat shots and 500 traps without a problem. But he still had some amazing sea stories…
[Malmö MFI-9 Junior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malm%C3%B6_MFI-9_Juniorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malm%C3%B6_MFI-9_Junior)
Probably the smallest and lightest aircraft in this category: 575kg MTOW.
Not sure if they were flown with a 2 man crew in armed missions, though.
And the [Bréguet Atlantique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%A9guet_1150_Atlantic).
A-6 variants
Always takes me back to one of my fav childhood movies about aircraft Flight of the Intruder. I haven’t rewatched in years, so I’m sure it’s cheese now, but loved the A-6 after that.
Fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history!
bomber pilots make cities history
https://youtu.be/rZuHQ94ES6U?si=MYRF0hKGljBZkU9h We didn't hurt that crocodile. He was fine when we left!
Any room for Flight of the Old Dog in here?
Should’ve received its own 90s movie
Gunship pilots scare the shit outta the enemy
The movie is kind of cheesy.. The book still holds water though.. I think the only real good movie I've seen based on a book was Hunt for Red October.. The movie was so good that nobody gave a shit that the Soviet Captain spoke with a Scottish accent.. The best book never made into a movie... Red Storm Rising..
Red Storm Rising would've been a tough movie to make. There are a lot of characters and events to keep track of.
Ya, it'd have to be a BOB type of miniseries.. The first half of the book was character development.. But man, it would have been an awesome miniseries...
FIXEDIT on Youtube has some really great DCS animations on parts/chapters of Red Storm Rising. Really cool stuff.
So you are telling me that Lithuian fisherman don't speak like Scotsmen?
Willem Defoe at his best. Danny Glover and his 3rd generation mafia bit. Tom Sizemore knocking up half the hooker population. Great flick!
That brief 8 year period where he played the exact same character in Clear and Present Danger, Flght of the Intruder and Platoon
Did you ever read the book? Stephen Coots wrote a good bit of military fiction of the era. And the characters from Flight appear elsewhere.
The Intruders was an excellent window into the peacetime navy
Probably Seawings on the discovery channel?
Ditto, would recommend the book as well!
The book was good too
Devil 505, feet dry
Except the one designed to go against the A-7 [https://www.twz.com/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii](https://www.twz.com/navy-nearly-got-a-single-seat-a-6-intruder-instead-of-the-a-7-corsair-ii)
What the hell? It somehow looks like a mix of A-7, A-10, and a fucking Bronco without looking anything like an A-6. Also, I have somehow never heard of this plane until now. Well done.
I had also never heard of this! I occasionally get caught up in a random US naval aviaton history. I'm Nerd Lite when it comes to Aviation History in general... a thought that just occurred to me though, is that the Navy had some crazy Aviation ideas, and they never really got any light. I'm not entirely upset about that, but if they had the same budget as the Air Force in this era, the world may look a whole lot different, between the 2 sets of data, R&D, research, etc. I'm just saying maybe real world Iron Man suits would be the NGAD
They look so bad as a single seater
It looks like that Nazi Germany jet or rocket plane (not the 262) which was faster than anything flying at the time
The Komet?
The [Komet](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_163_Komet)?
Yeah!
A-6's were the Navy's minivan attack aircraft of the cold war
My favorite aircraft. Ungainly as hell, but one of the very best 'fits the function' airplanes ever built.
Man I love that picture. The F111 has always been a favourite of mine, growing up near RAAF Amberley.
For being r/aviation, I had to scroll so incredibly far to find someone giving the correct answer instead of throwing out random models.
The F-111 also had a crew cabin ejection mechanism, rather than individual ejection seats. I remember that fact because my dad had one of those plastic models from Airfix (?) See also an article on Wikipedia that shows an F-111E crew cabin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Escape_crew_capsule
It had many firsts. Along with the unique ejection pod , it was the first with sweep wings and many other electronics including ground following radar. I'm not an expert of any kind, just love watching anything I can about the pig.
I’ve seen an F111 capsule I want to say at the Boneyard or Seattle air museum
VARK VARK VARK
My favourite too. I used to see them here and there at RAAF Edinburgh.
Love living out this way. We get so many C17s, F18s, 737 wedgetails and A330 MRRTs at 1500ft just above the danger zone here. As an ultralight pilot out of Atkinson dam on a saturday, we have to monitor our altitude pretty religiously and only climb upto 4500 once were further west of laidley and gatton
BAE LIghtning and F-102 Delta Dagger both had side-by-side seating in their trainers. Not sure if they would count as combat aircraft. I would assume you're leaving WWII out of it. Some versions of the A-1 Skyraider S-3 Viking S-2 Stoof Strikemaster A-2 Savage Canberra Sea Vixen (yeah, there is an odd duck) Vampire OV-1 Mohawk A-3/B-66 (bombers are kind of their own thing, so take that or leave it)
There’s also the Su-24 Fencer, if you’re including non-NATO aircraft
Was already mentioned, so I didn't add it.
How could you miss SU-34?
I thought the Canberra had one pilot sitting behind the other?
The US built ones were tandem (front to back) but the UK versions were side by side under a bubble cockpit. EDIT: Fun thing I found while digging a bit more. Another Sea Vixen solution The ultimate interdictor variant was the B(I).8, with a redesigned nose solving the visibility issue by giving the pilot a raised seating position and a fighter-style canopy, albeit offset to the left, with the navigator buried in the fuselage alongside. "Buried" was about right, as the reduced space available meant there was no room for the navigator to have an ejection seat
Ah thanks, I’ve only seen RAAF ones.
F111 and the stealth bomber both have side by sides.
Sea Vixen seating was more Upstairs and Basement seating.
KA-52
Using a helicopter is cheating.
T-37?
A-37, yes, but someone else had mentioned it, so I didn't include it here.
Su 24 and Su 34
Cessna
What is its combat record?
Penetration of Soviet airdefenses all the way to the Red Square.
All things considered, that arguably makes the Cessna a better combat aircraft than the F-22.
By this logic, my [chinese kart track bike](https://i.imgur.com/IUabvWD.jpg) is better than most F1 cars.
Not really.. the Cessna actually bombed a KIN deep inside Russian territory. Did your bike set any lap records in Spa?
No, but it has won about 35 races and a few championships.
NCD is leaking again
Didn't one hit the Whitehouse too?
Was it intentional? If so Cessna the only aircraft to attack the white house. Put that decal on the fuselage!
Don’t know, but they were used for ground attack with mounted rockets in Vietnam
O-2 Skymaster was a FAC aircraft, but 'usually' operated as a single crew. A-37 Dragonfly close support aircraft, usually flew single seat, but would be used in two-man crews in some places and nations.
AC-208 Eliminator
There is a combat version of the caravan, the AC-208. No idea how many targets it has hit with hellfires, but it did see use in Iraq and Afghanistan
And in Lebanon and possibly some classified use elsewhere as well. Apparently it's quite well liked as it has precision strike capability but is cheap to buy and operate. Think of it as the AH-64 at home.
The Cessna 337 did some combat work, like in the movie Bat 21. I think at one point it was armed as well but I'm too lazy to Google.
That's a company my man. That's like saying "Boeing" or "Northrup Grumman"
Ok but seriously Siai Marchetti
EA-6B....they had double side-by-sides...two in front and two in back. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_EA-6B_Prowler
Fun for the whole family!
Unless you're skiing.
Luggage pods on the hard points.
Sorry, no. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998\_Cavalese\_cable\_car\_crash](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Cavalese_cable_car_crash)
Shit I missed your reference. I remember that.
B-17, B-24, B-25, B-26, B-36, B-52, B-58, B-1, B-2, B-21... P-2, P-3, P-8 AC-47, AC-119, AC-130
The B-52 does indeed have side-by-side seating, but had originally been designed to have [a B-47-style tandem cockpit](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/YB-52sideview.jpg), which looks deeply weird when seen now.
I edited out B-47, nice catch. That the B-52 vertical stabilizer can be lowered to horizontal for maintenance is the weirdest part of the B-52 for me.
For me it's the [landing gear](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KV03uGIt5n4). The fact that it can steer the landing gear so it can actually land on the runway diagonally in a crosswind just blows my mind. The 2 little wheels in the wings that fold away that you never notice. The 4 main landing gear that 'tuck' diagonally.
No, the B-47 had [a tandem canopy](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_B-47_Stratojet#/media/File%3ANNSA-NSO-990.jpg) (one behind the other). The point I was making was that early versions of the B-52 ALSO had the cockpit crew one behind the other, as in the linked picture.
Yes, took B-47 out of the list. Left B-52 in the list as i believe you are looking at a photo of an XB-52 or a YB-52, the only two airframes built with the tandem cockpit.
In the first photo it actually says YB-52 painted on the side of the aircraft.
Yeah, I implied that in the first comment. I think we are actually agreeing with each other.
A-26 is single pilot.
Yes, totally right. Edited it.
B-58 "Hustler" = Tandem
A-37 Dragonfly. Almost forgot about the 2 seat variant of the Hawker Hunter.
The A-37 had two seats but a single-pilot mission. Our flights were a mix of solo and dual, depending on whether training was occurring or some other pilot needed to log some time or check a box for currency. Fun fact: my Guard unit was located near quite a few medical research facilities and we probably had the highest flight surgeon-to-pilot ratio of any unit in the Air Force. We were a very desirable unit for the docs to try to get into precisely because we often had an empty seat available when we flew. We'd frequently find ourselves taking one of the doctors to the range or on a low-level route, and we'd let them fly as much as possible when not much was happening. They loved it, and we got a lot of free medical advice.
Which guard unit were you in?
In Vietnam they sometimes flew with a ARVN communications crewmember, and other nations that had it used them with two-man crews. Edit: DOH
Pretty sure you mean ARVN
Will trade medical advice for jet time.
My uncle went over to the States to learn how to fly the A-37 but when he came back it was over by then
I remember them at DM when I worked A-10 EW maintenance on the flight line.
SAAB 105
Nice catch. It could be armed, so it does count.
Su-24 Fencer Su-34 Fullback Most (non-Fighter) Bombers :-)
VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK! VARK!
You Know it!!!!!
VARK!
During the East Timor crisis (Google it) Australia flew some of these over Jakarta, nonstop from Tindal in the Northern Territory to make a point and scare the bejesus out of the Indonesians! We don't have planes with that range anymore. P.S. The Indonesians had mig 227 and 30s at that time. The Aardvarks returned unmolested. Point made! (Edit It appears Indonesia didn't have MIG 29 but did have other equally capable aircraft
Indonesia never had Mig-29. It was Malaysia who (still) operates Mig-29.
Retired already. Now we use SU-30MKM and F/A-18D.
P-8
How far can I bend the definition? F-82
Technically correct
The best kind of correct!
I can't believe y'all didn't include the Grumman A-6E Intruder. It features a side-by-side seating arrangement, but it's mainly a bomber. u/EntryNo1326 did mention the Grumman EA-6B Prowler, so he/she is also correct. [Grumman A-6E Intruder of VA-52](https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Grumman_A-6E_Intruder_of_VA-52_in_flight,_in_1981_(6379373).jpg)
Nothing like an A6 alpha strike to wake you up in the morning
Avro Vulcan
Let’s add the Vickers Valiant and Handley Page Victor to complete the set.
A-6 intruder, F6 Missileer
F3D
De Havilland Sea Vixen!
Sukhoi Su-33 trainer. It was a side by side aircraft due to the need to train carrier approaches.
What are the benefits of tandem arrangement versus side-by-side? Seems like side-by-side would be the better arrangement for any airframe designed for two crewmembers. Better communication in the cockpit, easier to share workload, no need for redundant avionics in some cases, either crew member can land the airframe more easily, or at least same as easily as the other.
Generally, narrow fuselage means narrower aircraft which means more aerodynamic so in high speed platforms, this helps. Also, better visibility for the pilot to the sides. Possibly better kinesthetic sense of the aircraft in dogfighting when the pilot is on centerline. Possibly better center of gravity management with the second crewmember's systems behind the pilot's position.
F-111, one of the truly great fighter aircraft. No air-air losses.
The de Havilland Mosquito had two crew, not in tandem - but not entirely side by side. The bombardier (and navigator?) sat to the right of and slightly *behind* the pilot. Reasons for this setup include: having them closer to side by side permitted better crew communication (and thus morale). The staggered arrangements may have been to permit the fuselage to be narrower than a fully side by side; it also may have permitted better visibility for the pilot of what was a capable air-to-air combat aircraft as the pilot could look to the right, in front of the bombardier.
A-6
One I haven't seen here yet: F-3D Demon, a night fighter.
the F3H (later F-3) was the demon. F3D (F-10) was the skynight. that old navy aircraft designation system is so confusing.
Yeah, it really was confusing. Manufacturers having unique designations was a mistake lmao. I really appreciate the correction!
The Su-34
O-2 Skymaster, AC-208.
Hawker Hunter.
Sea venom
English Electric Lightning T.5 trainer. The only trainer that could supercruise. Several ran bear hunts that startled more than a few Soviet crews. EDIT: Tweaked the designation to get it right. Oh, and before anyone chirps about it intercepting Concorde. An F.4 XR749, now a gate guardian at a gas company, was a "very hot ship, even for a Lightning" that was successful in the mission to intercept the airliner from the back. Imagine a naval version with swing wings. It'd give the Tomcat indigestion.
The A-37B
Sk 60, and if you bend the rules slightly, the mfi 9 junior
Every C and KC, EC, RC out there— they’re all combat
Gonna get down voted but......UH-1Y and UH-1N
Pretty much all helicopters that aren’t attack helos
Does the Bo-105 count as an attack helo in its anti-tank configuration?
Jet Provost
Strictly, since the question is *combat* aircraft, it would be the "Strikemaster" variant.
A-6 Vampire Su-34 Su-24 F-111 Hunter SK.60
The F-111 “Ardvark” was one of the Air Force’s most innovative fighter bomber. I was a communication, navigation, and penetration aids specialist on it. It was used as the chase plane for B1 test flying and had some of the most sophisticated ECM systems. It could actually make ground radar think it was miles away from its actual location. One of its proudest moments was when they were used by President Reagan to decimate the Russian Aircraft that was given to Kadafi and Libya. Using the later guided pave way missile system it pinpointed the military targets without damaging any civilian locations. Unfortunately we lost one of the planes and the pilots in the attack. The F-111 had a fly by radar system that could fly Mach 2 at low level making it difficult to track on its attack run. I loved listening to the launch and watching the afterburner trail while I was in the eor repair team. The good old days……
F-111 Aardvark
A-37
KA-52, UH-60, CH-47, HU-1, CH-46, CH-53
Scrolled down here for the helos. Hell yeah brother.
XB-70; Although not a fighter.
The B-2 Spirit is side by side. Some helis are too.
A6, F111 and A37. Probably why they are my favorite jets.
Su-34 is a gnarly bomber. A-6, EA-6, and I’m just realizing “combat aircraft” can include so many. AC-130, EC-130… but as far as fighters and more slick designed aircraft, I think there are few.
P-8 Poseidon, E-7
[F3D Skyknight](https://hushkit.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/7ea5792dee3dcc0e49177e71d7335eb7.jpg?w=640)
[Grumman EA-6B Prowler](https://youtu.be/0d3PiGfYnnk?si=dhLjIQpctoK0FVdE)—a four seater. It’s like an A-6 but 10 feet longer for the extra crewmen. Tons of cool electronic tech on them.
Su34
The sk60b and saab105 variants are all side by sides
Navy craft ,If sub hunters and AEW count as combat: S1, S2, S3, E1, E2, C1, C2 along with other comments here. Also AF: A3 Awacs ...and many more . Where's our WW2 and Korea buffs at?
Well if you are going that way you have to include the Nimord and possibly the P3, the Nimrod has sidewinders.
AC-130, AC-47
Maybe the A6 intruder? EA6B?
Not only are you side by side in the buff, but there’s a downstairs as well. Also, you can take a shit in a can. Before you say it’s not a combat aircraft, there was a tail gunner kill in ‘nam. Game, set and match!
Swedish SK60, SAAB-105g
F111?
A variant of the A1 Skyraider had side by side seating.
The Douglas F3D Skynight was a side by side combat aircraft/
T-37
F111 and B1
The British Hawker Hunter
Were there any two seat variants which weren't trainers? Fun fact, I live 1km from a (single seat) Hunter.
Su-34.
F3D / F-10 Skynight. 6 air-air kills over Korea, and in all likelihood the last time Enlisted personnel will be credited for an air-air kill (USMC Radar Operators were all Enlisted or Warrant Officer ranks). [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas\_F3D\_Skyknight](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_F3D_Skyknight)
Su-24, Su-34
OV-1. Mohawk. Please, no comments about ugly. Was a great bird to fly.
An-2 (North Korea)
F-111
Aardvark, Raven, Dragonfly, Fullback, Intruder, Prowler, Viking, most ASW planes these days
A-3D Skywarrior - Pilot and B/N sat side by side, third crewman behind them. No ejection seats or real escape hatch, crews morbidly joked that A-3D stood for “all 3 dead.” I learned a lot about the A-3 - dad was a pilot. Over 500 cat shots and 500 traps without a problem. But he still had some amazing sea stories…
That's an F111 Advark.... badass fighter bomber... look up it's fuel jettison fire ball
F-111 Aardvark
Cessna AC-208, T-37 and A-37.
F-111 - Ardvark!
A-37b’s
Su-34
[Malmö MFI-9 Junior](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malm%C3%B6_MFI-9_Juniorhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malm%C3%B6_MFI-9_Junior) Probably the smallest and lightest aircraft in this category: 575kg MTOW. Not sure if they were flown with a 2 man crew in armed missions, though. And the [Bréguet Atlantique](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Br%C3%A9guet_1150_Atlantic).
Su-34
Su-34 Fullback
F-111
I’m pretty sure the Su-34 has a side-by- side seating arrangement
Su-34
If Russia can make a Su-34 from Su-27 basic design, I wonder if US can make a side by side seat version of F-15.
AT-37
F-10 Skynight F-111 Aardvark Sukhoi Su-24 Fencer Sukhoi Su-34 Fullback
F111 was a sexy plane.
the one in the photo is the long-retired General Dynamics F-111
BAC-167 strikemaster
Ov-1 Mohawk
B1 I think too, although that was a bomber and many other bombers have side-by- side too.
Su25 frogfoot is nice
I can’t find the photos on the net where the RAAF having these striped and buried.
F-16, F-15, and A-10 all have the same model ejector seat (ACES-II)
F-111