If the F-111 never happened...

[Spino]

Seems that as soon as I get one project off my workbench there are at least two more begging for my attention!  I was down between this and an F-8H Crusader III (the earlier version of the Super Crusader I posted here), but this has been printed and waiting for a lot longer than the Crusader III has (in actual fact it was printed around the same time as the F-8S). so it comes first.  It's sort of a double what-if, going something along the lines of "USAF chooses the F-107 instead of the F-105, and then the F-111 never happens so the F-107 fleet (what's left of it after Rolling Thunder) gets an upgrade".  Anyway, here's a photo of the "kit":

You cannot view this attachment.

It was 3D-printed in 1:48 scale, and consists of the F-107 fuselage mated to a nozzle borrowed from the 3D model of the Convair 201 I printed recently.  The other bits are my generic '70s/'80s fighter pilot model, a Martin Baker seat, a pair of Hasegawa GBU-10s along with an ALQ-119 from the same set, a couple of Revell AIM-9Ls, and a 3D-printed targeting pod (let's see who can guess what that one is  ).

[Rheged]

No F111 could possibly mean either the TSR2 survives, or alternatively the RAF are compelled to buy Buccaneers in quantity at an earlier  date.  On the other hand, Westminster might find an alternative means of making a complete dog's breakfast of strike aircraft procurement

[PR19_Kit]

On the other hand, Westminster might find an alternative means of making a complete dog's breakfast of strike aircraft procurement

As usual then?

[Spino]

As cool as the F-107 is, the more I look at that top-mounted intake, the more I can't help but wonder what NAA was thinking.  I know putting it under the fuselage F-16-style would have been problematic with the special store carried semi-conformal under there, but surely they could have done intakes on the fuselage sides like what the F-106 had or something.  Speaking of that semi-conformal fuselage position, I have cut away the special store (which was part of the model as printed).  That leaves a hole that is quite nicely sized for, I don't know, a Pave Tack pod.  So that'll be what goes on the centerline.

[McColm]

A licensed built North American A-5B Vigilante with a larger wing , British engines and avionics as the relationship with France wasn't on the best of terms even if we had chosen the Breguet Br.1150 Atlantic to replace the Avro Shackleton MR.3s.

[Beermonster58]

As cool as the F-107 is, the more I look at that top-mounted intake, the more I can't help but wonder what NAA was thinking.  I know putting it under the fuselage F-16-style would have been problematic with the special store carried semi-conformal under there, but surely they could have done intakes on the fuselage sides like what the F-106 had or something.  Speaking of that semi-conformal fuselage position, I have cut away the special store (which was part of the model as printed).  That leaves a hole that is quite nicely sized for, I don't know, a Pave Tack pod.  So that'll be what goes on the centerline.

You have actually almost  answered your own question. The air intake was in the unusual dorsal location as the Air Force had required the carriage of an underbelly semi-conformal nuclear weapon. The intake also severely limited rear visibility.  NAA was  simply responded to the customer specs and, did so in an unorthodox but practical manner. The poor rear visibility aspect was not considered very important for a tactical fighter-bomber aircraft at that time, and furthermore it was assumed (wrongly as it turned out) that air combat would be via guided missile exchanges because " dogfighting was dead" according the flawed thinking of the time.

[PR19_Kit]

A licensed built North American A-5B Vigilante with a larger wing , British engines and avionics.......

That's almost a TSR2....................

[HarryPhishnuts]

As cool as the F-107 is, the more I look at that top-mounted intake, the more I can't help but wonder what NAA was thinking.  I know putting it under the fuselage F-16-style would have been problematic with the special store carried semi-conformal under there, but surely they could have done intakes on the fuselage sides like what the F-106 had or something.  Speaking of that semi-conformal fuselage position, I have cut away the special store (which was part of the model as printed).  That leaves a hole that is quite nicely sized for, I don't know, a Pave Tack pod.  So that'll be what goes on the centerline.

Actually the original NAA mockup/prototype for the for the F-107 (originally designated the F-100B I think) had the intake under the fuselage like a F-16. At that point NAA was proposing it as a successor to the F-100. The USAF asked NAA to put it up against the F-105 for the tactical nuke strike role but to do that it had to mount the weapon underneath the fuselage so that meant the intake had to go on top. The original prototype was really a cool looking bird.

[Weaver]

As cool as the F-107 is, the more I look at that top-mounted intake, the more I can't help but wonder what NAA was thinking.  I know putting it under the fuselage F-16-style would have been problematic with the special store carried semi-conformal under there, but surely they could have done intakes on the fuselage sides like what the F-106 had or something.  Speaking of that semi-conformal fuselage position, I have cut away the special store (which was part of the model as printed).  That leaves a hole that is quite nicely sized for, I don't know, a Pave Tack pod.  So that'll be what goes on the centerline.

Actually the original NAA mockup/prototype for the for the F-107 (originally designated the F-100B I think) had the intake under the fuselage like a F-16. At that point NAA was proposing it as a successor to the F-100. The USAF asked NAA to put it up against the F-105 for the tactical nuke strike role but to do that it had to mount the weapon underneath the fuselage so that meant the intake had to go on top. The original prototype was really a cool looking bird.

There was still room for the conformal store and the ventral intake, but the problem was that wind-tunnel testing indicated that turbulence from the intake lip would prevent the store from separating cleanly, so that's why they moved the intake to the dorsal position.

I have a couple of Trumpeter F-107s and it looks feasible in principle to move the intake back to the ventral position, although the result still wouldn't look exactly like the original North American concept. The main difficulty is that in the ventral position the intake needs to be further forwards than in the dorsal position, which leaves you scratchbuilding a section of fuselage. It's still doable though.

[HarryPhishnuts]

I have a couple of Trumpeter F-107s and it looks feasible in principle to move the intake back to the ventral position, although the result still wouldn't look exactly like the original North American concept. The main difficulty is that in the ventral position the intake needs to be further forwards than in the dorsal position, which leaves you scratchbuilding a section of fuselage. It's still doable though.

When I was building my Danish CF-107 last year I was looking at the kit thinking the same thing. With some of the 3D printing stuff I'm playing with I might give it a shot one day. I just love that the original looks so much like  "what if an F-16 was designed in the 50's."   

[Spino]

I have a couple of Trumpeter F-107s and it looks feasible in principle to move the intake back to the ventral position, although the result still wouldn't look exactly like the original North American concept. The main difficulty is that in the ventral position the intake needs to be further forwards than in the dorsal position, which leaves you scratchbuilding a section of fuselage. It's still doable though.

When I was building my Danish CF-107 last year I was looking at the kit thinking the same thing. With some of the 3D printing stuff I'm playing with I might give it a shot one day. I just love that the original looks so much like  "what if an F-16 was designed in the 50's."   

F-16 but MUCH MUCH bigger and heavier...

Unfortunately I'm stuck with the dorsal intake on this one, but I'll deal with it.  With the configuration I'm giving it, it's a bit like a single-seat, single-engine version of the Boeing TFX proposal in that regard.

You cannot view this attachment.

I haven't gotten too much more done on this so far, work has been taking up a lot of my time lately.  However I do have the Pave Tack pod installed, complete with the sensor face drilled out and filled with hot glue so it's somewhat transparent.  Also PSR on the gun ports is in progress; the drill bit tore out on a couple of them so the length was wrong.  I'm tempted to just pick the best one, fill the other three in, say they went with a Vulcan and call it a day.  I still need to print pylons for it and figure out what exactly the weapons load and paint scheme will be.  I have decals that would go well with an old-style USAF bare metal scheme, but I'd need a lot of flat aluminum paint for that.  I also have plenty of the usual camouflage spray colors, so I may just do an SEA scheme.  Due to a slight error I made when splitting the model up for printing, it's actually a bit longer than it should be, but the F-105D was longer than the B, so I can explain that away as a design modification for increased capability of some kind (maybe more fuel storage or something.  I'm also considering printing a plug to turn it into a tandem two-seat plane, but I have a piece of clear plastic that is nearly the perfect shape for the main canopy as it currently is, so I'm not sure a two-seat conversion is worthwhile.

[Spino]

Made a little more progress today.  Trimmed off the section I had left to divide the windscreen from the canopy, it was just too big.  I also added the seat, pilot, and instrument panel top cover.  The rear section of the conformal station has been filled in with a sloping piece to give the Pave Tack pod maximum field of view.

You cannot view this attachment.

You cannot view this attachment.

My original plan for the loadout was two F-15-style drop tanks on the mid-wing pylons, two GBU-10s on the inboard wings, and the ECM pod on one outboard pylon with twin Sidewinders on the other, but I'm honestly not sure now.  I might add a new station under the forward fuselage to take the ECM pod and have one Sidewinder on each outer wing pylon, or maybe add F-4 style rail mounts for the Sidewinders onto the inboard pylons and have another pair of smaller bombs or Maverick missiles on the outboard stations.  We shall see.  As for the paintjob, I was originally thinking I'd do a "Hill Two" grey scheme on this plane, or maybe an SEA scheme, but part of me really wants to do a desert scheme for some reason.  That would certainly make for an interesting backstory!

[Spino]

Considering I have decals to do something like this, this F-107 may end up with a grey scheme...

You cannot view this attachment.

[Spino]

Printed the pylons I need last night, and got four of them mounted.  I think I'm going with four bombs if I can come up with a couple more, not sure what they will be just yet though.  Maybe a pair of GBU-8s or something, though that would be a lot of weight for the outer pylons to handle.  On the F-100 I believe the limit for the outer pylons was something on the order of 1000 pounds.

[Captain Canada]

Great thread and great looking build ! I love the F-111 with the intakes atop. And for sure, the original mock up was a good looking bird !