Author Topic: Naval COD & AEW options  (Read 15170 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

B777LR

  • Guest
Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #30 on: March 22, 2007, 11:50:37 pm »
Quote
Douglas proposed a COD version of the DC-9 (yes, the DC-9!).  There's a painting of one in the "Great Airliners" book on the DC-9.

Big tall nose gear strut and a tail hook!

J
 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  

Offline JoeP

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3390
    • The Home Page of Connie and (Modeler) Joe
Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #31 on: March 24, 2007, 10:17:42 am »
Quote
Douglas proposed a COD version of the DC-9 (yes, the DC-9!).  There's a painting of one in the "Great Airliners" book on the DC-9.

Big tall nose gear strut and a tail hook!

J
Oo-rah! Gotta model one of those!  :wub:  B)

JoeP
In between jobs and homes.  New job starts soon, then search for new home, space for hobby room and display cases is non-negotiable.

Online Mossie

  • Twiglet doctor
  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 14120
  • Don't laugh at his mule
Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #32 on: March 24, 2007, 10:46:49 am »
Quote
I always thought a DHC Buffalo or Caribou with folding wings would be a great COD a/c.

Never thought about navalizing a Canadair Challenger, tho. Might be an idea !

 :cheers:
Raytheon have already militarised the Global Express as the Sentinel, so a naval version of that or the Chalenger wouldn't be to much of a stretch.  Range & payload should be a winner over the Learjet.

The RN operate the Jetstreams & the HS125, neither have operated from a carrier (we just don't have one big enough) but it might be a nice idea to add a hook & wing fold to them.
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

Offline elmayerle

  • What-IF SIG
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 6413
Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #33 on: March 25, 2007, 07:31:46 pm »
Okay, going for the outre', how about a COD 727 with the hook tying in where the rear stairs normally do?  Use the conversion that puts JT8D-2XX series engines in the nacelles and replace the center engine with a cropped-fan of the same engine, sized to use the maximum airflow the center inlet can handle.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Offline Jeffry Fontaine

  • Don't need no stinking instructions
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3376
  • What-If's "Uncle Jeffry"
    • http://www.facebook.com/jeffryfontaine
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #34 on: June 20, 2008, 03:29:51 pm »
Time for a thread revival.  If JP Santiago's (sentinel chicken) current crop of S-3 Viking profiles inspires you to get creative. 

From his previous profiles that disappeared thanks to the images not being where they should be, there was a concept of an S-3 that was modified to become an CS-3 with a ramp and wheels housed in sponsons along the sides of the fuselage.  I am still trying to figure out how to best approach that with a 1/48th scale S-3 kit.  While doing some check-fitting of that kit I happened to look up and spot one of the Italeri 1/72nd scale C-130 kits on the shelf.  I gave it some thought and decided that since it is a Lockheed design. What are the chances of the wing airfoil shape being similar?  Well they are pretty much the same save for the fact that the S-3 is swept ever so slightly and the C-130 is a straight-taper form.  Where it matters the most is on the join to the fuselage, the S-3 wing matches up with the wing profile on the C-130 fuselage which gave me the inspiration to consider a scale-o-rama kitbash between the 1/72nd scale C-130 and the 1/48th scale S-3 kits.  The advantage is that you get a cargo aircraft fuselage that already has a ramp feature included.  The front office can be converted over to a larger scale without too much interference from the internal parts.  The signature C-130 tail features can be removed and the S-3 tail parts can replace these parts with minimal obstruction. 
« Last Edit: June 20, 2008, 07:58:30 pm by Jeffry Fontaine »
Unaffiliated Independent Subversive
----------------------------------
"Every day we hear about new studies 'revealing' what should have been obvious to sentient beings for generations; 'Research shows wolverines don't like to be teased" -- Jonah Goldberg

Offline Sentinel Chicken

  • Targeted for assassination by JMNs
  • ****
  • Posts: 885
  • I reject your reality and substitute one of my own
    • http://www.airlinebuzz.com
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #35 on: June 20, 2008, 07:48:40 pm »

Offline Jschmus

  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 3248
    • My Photos
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #36 on: June 20, 2008, 09:36:35 pm »
I sometimes lurk over on Secret Projects, and one of the members there (Barrington Bond, IIRC) posted this:



This gives me all sorts of ideas.
"Life isnít divided into genres. Itís a horrifying, romantic, tragic, comical, science-fiction cowboy detective novel. You know, with a bit of pornography if you're lucky."-Alan Moore

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #37 on: June 21, 2008, 06:31:04 am »

          25s haven't been produced in years. They were replaced by the 35/36, & I don't think they're in production now.




Quote
learjet was originally designed as a strike fighter

Not quite. Lear borrowed the wing design from the FFA P-16, and designed the first Learjet (type 23) around it. That wing was used for the 23, 24 and 25. Only the 25 is still in production, it seems. Later Lear designs use a different wing.  

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #38 on: June 21, 2008, 06:35:51 am »

     IIRC, the 35/36 IS a 25 with different engines, essentially.



Quote
While the thought of a navalized Lear/Falcon/etc is really cool I dont think it would be practical.  The LR24/25/31/35 is a pretty short legged (as in range) machine as it is.  By the time you add the weight (a lot of weight) for stronger structure, landing gear, arrestor gear and all the other little odds and ends that go into making an aircraft carrier capable you're going to end up with a pretty heavy bird, with little left for fuel/payload.  
 
Well, I'd probably go with a Lear 24 or 25 fuselage (for capacity, the 25) with the tail section from a lear 35/36 and the Lear 55 engine nacelles.  I'd probably also go with a few mod center packages that improve the performance/range of the Lear.  Beefing up the wing isn't that difficult, in several cases all that's needed is to go back to the origina machined parts from the P-16 instead of the bent-up sheet metal parts the Lear uses.  The fuselage is already fairly sturdy and likely wouldn't take too much to upgrade it.  Since it has a "keel" beam already, fitting an arresting hook isn't that complicated.

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #39 on: June 21, 2008, 06:39:08 am »

      Fairchild had a COD proposal for the C-123. I've seen a 3 view & article somewhere.



How about using C-27Js as carrier onboard delivery plane? A C-130 could land on a carrier, so why not? Or perhaps that CASA C-235?

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #40 on: June 21, 2008, 06:43:29 am »

      1500 - 2000+ miles is short-legged?



While the thought of a navalized Lear/Falcon/etc is really cool I dont think it would be practical.  The LR24/25/31/35 is a pretty short legged (as in range) machine as it is.  By the time you add the weight (a lot of weight) for stronger structure, landing gear, arrestor gear and all the other little odds and ends that go into making an aircraft carrier capable you're going to end up with a pretty heavy bird, with little left for fuel/payload.  

It ceratainly woldnt be impossible, but probably impractical.  IIRC at one point De Havilland or Hawker proposed a COD version of the DH/HS125 (as recently modeled by someone on here I think).

The TBM is a nice idea, but again there isnt much room for added weight to start with.  The PC12 is pretty rugged to start with and has a huge useful load, so that one may not be such a challenge.

Offline Shasper

  • Can't say what he's thinking for fear of reaping the whirlwind
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • *****
  • Posts: 5934
  • Finally back in the Air!
    • My pics on Myspace.com
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #41 on: June 21, 2008, 09:03:34 am »
Just an opinion, but the Gulfstream II/III/IV & follow ons would be realisticly too big for CV Ops, both in height range and in wingspan, not to mention the cargo capacity would be no better than a cargo pod slung on a Bug.

Shas 8)
« Last Edit: June 21, 2008, 10:49:10 am by Shasper »
Take Care, Stay Cool & Remember to "Check-6"
- Bud S.

Offline famvburg

  • Scratchbuilds the entire model
  • ****
  • Posts: 605
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #42 on: June 21, 2008, 10:07:53 am »

    Not any more 'too big' than DC-9s, F.28s, etc. I can't really see a G-I being used tho.



Just an opinion, but the Gulfstream I/II/III/IV & follow ons would be too big for CV Ops, both in height range and in wingspan.

Shas 8)

Offline Gary

  • Gone but not Forgotten
  • Needs A Life Outside What-If
  • **********
  • Posts: 3076
Getting back into modeling

Offline mrdj

  • Out of the Whiffing Closet
  • **
  • Posts: 42
Re: Naval COD & AEW options
« Reply #44 on: June 24, 2008, 10:04:56 pm »
Fairey Rotodyne.

For all the Stovl carriers (and even larger ones)