Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts (1985)

Sundog

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
2 August 2006
Messages
3,216
Reaction score
1,355
Here's a couple more generic Hypersonic designs.

Hyper-1.jpg


As for that GE design, the L-M Falcon program proposal has similar inlets, in that they're very long at an acute angle to the airflow. This is done to minimize the area of the inlet lip that requires active cooling, which would basically be the "webbibg"/sections between the spikes that is more orthogonal/perpendicular to the airflow. By keeping it to the small areas at the back of the inlet it allows them to minimize weight with regard to the active colling requirements. There was an AIAA article online that showed a good CFD pic regarding this, but I can't find it atm.
 
Some aircraft concepts that should be flying in a year 2000 AD as viewed by Boeing in 1984
 

Attachments

  • 1984-substrike.jpg
    1984-substrike.jpg
    68.8 KB · Views: 899
  • 1984-stovl.jpg
    1984-stovl.jpg
    97.2 KB · Views: 744
  • 1984-assatr.jpg
    1984-assatr.jpg
    111.4 KB · Views: 756
  • 1984-sst.jpg
    1984-sst.jpg
    118.7 KB · Views: 602
And some were really hot stuff...
 

Attachments

  • 1984-hyper1.jpg
    1984-hyper1.jpg
    266.1 KB · Views: 383
  • 1984-hyper2.jpg
    1984-hyper2.jpg
    90.8 KB · Views: 296
The assault transport is very similar to Boeing's "Frog" tiltwing assault transport
 
Hm...not Superfrog, BWB more likely.

No, I haven't any 3-views...
 
Aren't these from some SAE collection of papers on this subject? I seem to remember seeing a copy in the library at Northrop.
 
Right - they are from a report on the future of aerospace that was put together either by SAE or AIAA. I don't recall them being tied to any particular company, although they were notable at the time for depicting stealth designs - which was a no-no even if they were not supposed to be accurate, because it was entirely possible to recreate a feature of some black project by accident!
 
I saw the top two pics in Bill Sweetman's 1986 book "Stealth Warplanes". I was looking through a second hand copy today, and nearly bought it for nostalgia's sake. I was about 13 years old, I remember devouring every page of that book. I even attempted to make a "faceted" F-19 using modelling putty. Looked a little like a disco ball.

One of the many books I threw away and regret!
 
Was it 'STEALTH: UNITED STATES AIR FORCE'S INVISIBLE WARPLANES' from AIRLIFE PUB., 1986
or 'Stealth Aircraft: Secrets of Future Airpower' from Motorbooks?
 
The Airlife one. Wasn't the other one by Joseph Jones, and notable for being completely wrong in all respects? I had that too :)
 
The Jones book was published by TAB and was subtitled "the art of black magic".
 
Can you give the title of the AIAA paper, flateric?
Also, the "Hypersonic interceptor" is numbered 11 in one image and 12 on the other; thus they are from different papers. I wonder what the other one is?
 
In the latest installment of British Secret Projects detailing hypersonics, there is a similar design to the twin-fuselage aircraft in Figure 4.
 
Meteorit said:
Can you give the title of the AIAA paper, flateric?
Also, the "Hypersonic interceptor" is numbered 11 in one image and 12 on the other; thus they are from different papers. I wonder what the other one is?
Click to expand...

Aeronautical technology 2000 - A projection of advanced vehicle concepts

ROSEN, C. C., III (NASA, Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology,Washington, DC) BURGER, R. J. (National Research Council, Washington, DC) SIGALLA, A. (Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., Seattle, WA)
AIAA-1984-2501
AHS, ASEE, Aircraft Design Systems and Operations Meeting, SanDiego, CA, Oct 31-Nov 2, 1984. 18 p.

PS different picture captions may just be because first pics posted in thread are from SAE reprint of original article, or vice versa
 
I've got these. Not sure they're all from the same series, but the artistic style looks about the same.
 

Attachments

  • Image30.jpg
    Image30.jpg
    24.1 KB · Views: 239
  • Image29.jpg
    Image29.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 278
  • Image27.jpg
    Image27.jpg
    19.1 KB · Views: 323
  • Image17.jpg
    Image17.jpg
    18.2 KB · Views: 337
  • Image15.jpg
    Image15.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 316
  • Image13.jpg
    Image13.jpg
    29.9 KB · Views: 340
To Sundog and Flateric,
Where did the hypersonic interceptor carry it's missiles? It looks like a ventral release would either fly into the intake or it's exhaust would screw-up the airflow into the ramjet...
Was the hypersonic interceptor manned?

To Orionblamblam,

I like that hypersonic airliner design. It kind of looked half supersonic and half hypersonic. Nice slick design.


K.J.
 
flateric said:
Aeronautical technology 2000 - A projection of advanced vehicle concepts

ROSEN, C. C., III (NASA, Office of Aeronautics and Space Technology,Washington, DC) BURGER, R. J. (National Research Council, Washington, DC) SIGALLA, A. (Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., Seattle, WA)
AIAA-1984-2501
AHS, ASEE, Aircraft Design Systems and Operations Meeting, SanDiego, CA, Oct 31-Nov 2, 1984. 18 p.

PS different picture captions may just be because first pics posted in thread are from SAE reprint of original article, or vice versa
Click to expand...

Thanks flateric. The whole issue about the origin of these was just very unclear in previous posts (Boeing? - AIAA? - SAE? etc.)
 
Orionblamblam said:
I've got these. Not sure they're all from the same series, but the artistic style looks about the same.
Click to expand...

Thank you Scott. The designs look very nice, especially in colours. And that's probably the only property by which they should be judged anyway ;).
 
I remember a couple news bites in AvWeek from back then that were pretty interesting at the time. The first talked about a contract to either Goodyear or Goodrich to study tires that could handle 300-400 mph takeoffs and landings. No joke. Another talked about studies the USAF was doing for releasing/ejecting weapons from internal bays at Mach 12.
 
KJ_Lesnick said:
To Sundog and Flateric,
Where did the hypersonic interceptor carry it's missiles? It looks like a ventral release would either fly into the intake or it's exhaust would screw-up the airflow into the ramjet...
Was the hypersonic interceptor manned?
K.J.
Click to expand...

KJ - Think of conformal carriage of weapons on the upper surface, for example. Nothing unrealistic was as well about manned hypersonic interceptor...OK, if there were projects of *desk-launched* hypersonic fighters as early as late 60s, you can believe that these times everything was possible (at least, on the paper).
 

Attachments

  • marquardtserj-carrierbasedfighter.jpg
    marquardtserj-carrierbasedfighter.jpg
    155.9 KB · Views: 284
Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts

117 page *full version* of this report available from NTRS

aeronautical technology 2000: a projection of advanced vehicle concepts - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

The Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) of the National Research Council conducted a Workshop on Aeronautical Technology: a Projection to the Year 2000 (Aerotech 2000 Workshop). The panels were asked to project advances in aeronautical technologies that could be available by the year...
hdl.handle.net hdl.handle.net
 
Fantastic document! :) I believe all the aircraft depicted in there are genuine company designs, not generic ones. A few of them can be identified, but what a shame there is no mention of at least the companies for each of them! :-\
 
Hi,

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1996/1996%20-%202054.html
 

Attachments

  • Tailless.JPG
    Tailless.JPG
    60.3 KB · Views: 178
Thanks for finding this, overscan! I posted a few designs I think I could identify to the relevant topics. It seems to be true that not all illustrated non-helicopter designs were Boeing. At least the Transatmospheric Aircraft in Figure 16 is clearly a McDonnell-Douglas Model 176 variant.
 
overscan said:
Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts

117 page *full version* of this report available from NTRS

http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19860003767
Click to expand...

Great find my dear Paul;

and I like those concepts.
 

Attachments

  • 5.JPG
    5.JPG
    69 KB · Views: 153
  • 4.JPG
    4.JPG
    129.1 KB · Views: 151
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    178.6 KB · Views: 118
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    168.7 KB · Views: 119
  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    85.4 KB · Views: 121
  • 6.JPG
    6.JPG
    103.6 KB · Views: 153
Thanks Hesham for the twin-boom solar #2. I note that, even if the NASA title speaks of year 2000, it was a future imagined in 1985 (thanks for the link explaining it).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ok, on number-4? Are those "windows" along the side of the next-gen Shuttle or lettering? Even in close up mode it's DAMN hard to tell :)

Randy
 
RanulfC said:
Ok, on number-4? Are those "windows" along the side of the next-gen Shuttle or lettering? Even in close up mode it's DAMN hard to tell :)

Randy
Click to expand...

Too regular and long to be lettering. Also, look at where the cockpit is, and the size of it. These are windows, by all means.
 
overscan said:
Aeronautical Technology 2000: A Projection of Advanced Vehicle Concepts

117 page *full version* of this report available from NTRS

aeronautical technology 2000: a projection of advanced vehicle concepts - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

The Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (ASEB) of the National Research Council conducted a Workshop on Aeronautical Technology: a Projection to the Year 2000 (Aerotech 2000 Workshop). The panels were asked to project advances in aeronautical technologies that could be available by the year...
hdl.handle.net hdl.handle.net
Click to expand...

The shortened link still works fine, but just in case a future NTRS upgrade accidently breaks it:
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom