Can anyone provide details of:

Started by uk 75, January 16, 2004, 04:40:26 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

uk 75

Seeing the excellent scans of aircraft projects from various sources could I put in a request for some info, which I have so far not been able to find in any British magazines:

The A9 and A10 were the winners of the AX competition. Does anyone have pictures/drawings of any of the other competitors.

The B1 won the competition to find a replacement for the B52/B70. Did any companies apart from Rockwell?

VSTOL Grumman Mohawk?

Ralph

retro_seventies

found this re: the AX...

"Northrop Co. flying demonstrator ... represents the company's concept for the Air Force AX close-support aircraft design competition. Pusher system eliminates torque problems found in single-engine puller designs, Northrop believes." (1968 Aviation Week via Ron Dupas)



some more:

"The need for a Close Air Support and ground attack aircraft designed specifically for those roles was apparent and in the spring of 1970, the AX System Program Office (SPO) was established at the Aeronautical Systems Division at Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio. On May 8th, 1970, the AX SPO issued a request for proposal (RFP) to 12 aircraft manufacturers. Six of the 12 companies given the RFP responded with proposals: Boeing, Cessna, Fairchild Hiller, General Dynamics, Lockheed and Northrop. On 18 December 1970, the Northrop and Fairchild Hiller entries were selected for prototype construction. The USAF intended to test the prototype aircraft in a "Fly Before Buy" competition"

so the proposals we know about are the northrop a-9 and the fairchild a-10...what of cessna, general dynamics, lockheed and boeing?  i'll let you know if i dig anything up...

all the best,

ben  
"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean, if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." Kristin Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989.

elmayerle

I've been told that Cessna's proposal resembled nothing so much as a flying flat iron with straight wings and tail.  The Kansas Aviation Museum in Wichita Kansas might very likely have any info on it that was still extant.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Tophe

Problem : on the Web site of the Kansas Museum, the e-mail address seems outdated as the posts are rejected...
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

Tophe

QuotePusher system eliminates torque problems found in single-engine puller designs
Could you explain, dear Elmayerle ? I understand countro-roatating propellers do eliminate torque, but a single propeller has the same problem facing rear or facing front, I thought, no ?
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

elmayerle

Quote
QuotePusher system eliminates torque problems found in single-engine puller designs
Could you explain, dear Elmayerle ? I understand countro-roatating propellers do eliminate torque, but a single propeller has the same problem facing rear or facing front, I thought, no ?
Well...I'd certainly think that a single propeller, either in tractor or pusher position would still have a torque effect on the aircraft.  What a pusher propeller will not have, though, is the effect of the propeller's slipstream over the fuselage and tail surfaces.  In any case, I note that Northrop decided to go with a different approach to their final submission.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Tophe

Thanks Evan for the explanation. :)
I have checked my second-hand Jane's All the World Aircraft 1968-69 and 1969-70 and found nothing illustrated. But found many unbuilt projects I had forgotten like the one below, nice little Concorde... :wub:  
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

elmayerle

QuoteThanks Evan for the explanation. :)
I have checked my second-hand Jane's All the World Aircraft 1968-69 and 1969-70 and found nothing illustrated. But found many unbuilt projects I had forgotten like the one below, nice little Concorde... :wub:
Yeah, though I suspect it was still subsonic.  I would love to see the flow patterns around the fuselage from the engine nacelles aft; I rather suspect some "interesting" interferences.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Tophe

As usual : you are right, Evan, it was designed as subsonic. But so beautiful... :wub:  
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

elmayerle

QuoteAs usual : you are right, Evan, it was designed as subsonic. But so beautiful... :wub:
Oh, I agree.  It is quite an aesthetically appealing design.  Though it never saw the light of day, let alone production.  *Sigh* That seems to happen to a lot of Ed Swearingen's ideas; folks I know who've worked with him say he doesn't have a lot of patience with working out the details.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Shasper

I do know that the Cavalier A-51 & the Piper Enforcer versions of the P-51 were considered for A-X or as a part of a Hi-Lo AX mix.


Ves B)  
Take Care, Stay Cool & Remember to "Check-6"
- Bud S.

retro_seventies

"Computer games don't affect kids. I mean, if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." Kristin Wilson, Nintendo Inc, 1989.

Shasper

What I gathered was that the A-51/Enforcer was considered for *Lo*(stuff like COIN and FAC) while the A-9/A-10 wouldv'e been the *Hi* (CAS and battlefield Interdiction)


Ves
Take Care, Stay Cool & Remember to "Check-6"
- Bud S.

Tophe

Quotethe A-51/Enforcer was considered
Ves
A-51 Mustang Enforcer ?? I am interested... Could you confirm this code of P-51 derivative ? In my archives, the USAF XA-51 code had been given to Martin, for an Attack version of the XB-51. Could you tell me your source, I should check and correct... Thanks a lot, dear Ves !
[the word "realistic" hurts my heart...]

elmayerle

Quote
Quotethe A-51/Enforcer was considered
Ves
A-51 Mustang Enforcer ?? I am interested... Could you confirm this code of P-51 derivative ? In my archives, the USAF XA-51 code had been given to Martin, for an Attack version of the XB-51. Could you tell me your source, I should check and correct... Thanks a lot, dear Ves !
As far as I know, the Enforcer never got a designation for the tests conducted by the US; googling it turns up data from the US Air Firce Museum showing that it never received a US designation.  The only designation the Enforcer had was Piper's internal design number, PA-48.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin