Lockheed ASTOVL, JAST, JSF projects

Attachments

  • x-32-AC95-0019-6_a.jpg
    x-32-AC95-0019-6_a.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 1,022
Triton said:
Lockheed artist's concept from Global Security grouped with Boeing X-32 pictures. Profile view of Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (CALF)?

Source:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/x-32-pics.htm
Click to expand...

Actually that is a real photo of the Lockheed X-32 ASTOVL / JAST Large Scale Powered Model (LSPM) that was tested at NASA Ames. Now rusting away in Ft. Worth.
Boeing built one and tested it. McDonnell Douglas built one but it wasn't really used to do changes in their configuration.
 

Attachments

  • jsfpstand.jpg
    jsfpstand.jpg
    63 KB · Views: 358
  • Boeing LSPM.jpg
    Boeing LSPM.jpg
    103 KB · Views: 289
  • LSPM.jpg
    LSPM.jpg
    125.2 KB · Views: 310
  • Lockheed ASTOVL test.jpg
    Lockheed ASTOVL test.jpg
    100.4 KB · Views: 294
  • Lockheed ASTOVL test7.jpg
    Lockheed ASTOVL test7.jpg
    65.9 KB · Views: 475
  • Lockheed ASTOVL test5.jpg
    Lockheed ASTOVL test5.jpg
    150.2 KB · Views: 602
  • lm hover test.JPG
    lm hover test.JPG
    331.1 KB · Views: 625
  • lm astovl nasa2.JPG
    lm astovl nasa2.JPG
    181.7 KB · Views: 758
Couple more of it back when it was new.
 

Attachments

  • ASTOVL-LSMP-030001.jpg
    ASTOVL-LSMP-030001.jpg
    825.5 KB · Views: 723
  • ASTOVL-LSMP.jpg
    ASTOVL-LSMP.jpg
    62.5 KB · Views: 743
Also a couple I took of it on a bright sunny day in Ft. Worth years ago....
 

Attachments

  • astovl-front1.jpg
    astovl-front1.jpg
    135 KB · Views: 651
  • astovl-forward.jpg
    astovl-forward.jpg
    66.9 KB · Views: 608
  • astovl-rear1.jpg
    astovl-rear1.jpg
    112.1 KB · Views: 593
Wow, great! Can't wait for the whole story of the ASTOVL X-32/X-35 program's inception to be told!
 
Stargazer2006 said:
Wow, great! Can't wait for the whole story of the ASTOVL X-32/X-35 program's inception to be told!
Click to expand...

already has been (for the most part) - reworking it with an emphasis on propulsion for the Centennial of Naval Aviation Conference in Virginia Beach later this year.
 

Attachments

  • 2000-11-Maddock-From JAST to JSF.pdf
    1.3 MB · Views: 446
So I infer from the above that you are Ian, right? I had not seen this article previously. It is extremely interesting and highly documented, as only an insider could have done it. Congratulations!
 
Excellent paper! Thanks for sharing. :)
I'm presenting at the conference as well, I'll be sure to look up your presentation on the program and attend.
 
10-percent scaled model of Lockheed ASTOVL concept for wind tunnel testing.

In this cooperative program between NASA, Lockheed Corporation, and the Advanced Research and Projects Agency (ARPA), an advanced short takeoff and vertical landing (ASTOVL) model was tested in the 9- by 15-Foot Low-Speed Wind Tunnel at the NASA Lewis Research Center. The 10-percent scaled model was tested over a range of headwind velocities from 25 to 120 kn. This inlet/forebody test was a key part of an important Department of Defense program investigation enabling technologies for future high-performance ASTOVL aircraft.

The Lockheed concept is focused on a shaft-coupled lift fan system centered around Pratt & Whitney's F119 power plant. As envisioned, a conventional takeoff and landing version (CTOL) would replace the U.S. Air Force's F-16's. The ASTOVL version would eventually replace Marine and, possibly, British Harrier aircraft. The ASTOVL and CTOL versions are scheduled to begin their manufacturing development phases in 2000.

The purpose of this test was to acquire data pertinent to the inlet-forebody model. The test was very successful. Both steady-state and dynamic data were obtained. This small-scale testing, which is directed at reducing risks, may greatly reduce the risks on a full-scale aircraft.
Click to expand...

Source:
 

Attachments

  • b2740j.gif
    b2740j.gif
    117.7 KB · Views: 1,035
Interesting paper, Ian.

Just a thought - you make the point that the Marine requirement was "a driving design consideration", but it might be worth adding that it imposed tough dimensional limits.

The first Joint Strike Fighter aircraft are currently scheduled for delivery to the services in 2008.

No comment....
 
LowObservable said:
Interesting paper, Ian.

Just a thought - you make the point that the Marine requirement was "a driving design consideration", but it might be worth adding that it imposed tough dimensional limits.

The first Joint Strike Fighter aircraft are currently scheduled for delivery to the services in 2008.

No comment....
Click to expand...

Yes, well, I wrote that paper more than 10 years ago!
 
enjoy
 

Attachments

  • RIVET.jpg
    RIVET.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 1,501
  • RIVET-2.jpg
    RIVET-2.jpg
    638.6 KB · Views: 1,239
  • RIVET-1.jpg
    RIVET-1.jpg
    413.9 KB · Views: 1,247
two more Raymer designs for ASTOVL fighters while he was at Lockheed at early 90s plus schematics for SDLF, SFIH and RIVET
 

Attachments

  • Lockheed SDLF.jpg
    Lockheed SDLF.jpg
    398.3 KB · Views: 1,197
  • Lockheed SFIH.jpg
    Lockheed SFIH.jpg
    382.2 KB · Views: 705
  • SFIH SDLF RIVET.jpg
    SFIH SDLF RIVET.jpg
    268.1 KB · Views: 530
Are there any diagrams of the lift system on the Lockheed X-32 ASTOVL/JAST large scale powered
model? Was it a 2D thrust vectoring nozzle that could swivel downwards or was another method used?
 
Colonial-Marine said:
Are there any diagrams of the lift system on the Lockheed X-32 ASTOVL/JAST large scale powered
model? Was it a 2D thrust vectoring nozzle that could swivel downwards or was another method used?
Click to expand...

Do you mean the Boeing X-32? The Boeing X-32 used two nozzles at the CG for STOVL. or do you mean the early Lockheed X-35 canard design that was tested as a large model?
 
Sundog said:
Do you mean the Boeing X-32? The Boeing X-32 used two nozzles at the CG for STOVL. or do you mean the early Lockheed X-35 canard design that was tested as a large model?
Click to expand...

I was referring to the Lockheed canard ASTOVL design that was used for that powered test model. According to some here it received the designation of X-32 back before JSF gained momentum.
 
it had shaft-driven lift fan (SDLF) and 2D "lobster tail" with supported divergent flap and pressure balanced convergent flap
"...same nozzle was used for cruise and hover, but the vectoring capability was not used in up-and-away flight"

"lobster tail" diagram can be found in
AIAA 2011-6999
The Quest for Stable Jet Borne Vertical Lift: ASTOVL to F-35 STOVL
AIAA Centennial of Naval Aviation Forum "100 Years of Achievement and Progress"
21 - 22 September 2011, Virginia Beach, VA
written by two SPF members
 
Along the lines of "Google is your friend", wich it is not, I searched for SSF, "Stealth Strike Fighter", "ASTOVL", "JAST", "CALF", all accompanied with variations of "Lockheed" or "McDD", and turned up with no 3-Views of Lockheed's same.

What I found, though, are the attached pictures allegedly taken from Carswell, AFB, Fort-Worth, TX. Apparently singe-engined, F-16 sized and apparently with the cavities for lift-fan apparatus

Are these prior or later iterations of the canard-equipped one?

And, please, can someone take me out of my misery and post a 3-view of this "elusive" subject

Thanks,

Rafa
 

Attachments

  • VTOL Concepts JAST grail Lockheed-CALF.jpg
    VTOL Concepts JAST grail Lockheed-CALF.jpg
    54.8 KB · Views: 486
  • VTOL Concepts JAST grail Lockheed-CALF-Fort-Worth.jpg
    VTOL Concepts JAST grail Lockheed-CALF-Fort-Worth.jpg
    41.7 KB · Views: 441
Rafael said:
Along the lines of "Google is your friend", wich it is not, I searched for SSF, "Stealth Strike Fighter", "ASTOVL", "JAST", "CALF", all accompanied
with variations of "Lockheed" or "McDD", and turned up with no 3-Views of Lockheed's same.
Click to expand...

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,238.msg26964.html#msg26964
 
Grigoriy, did you get the timeline off of one of Ian's AIAA papers? I think you mentioned one recently in another JSF thread. Does it say, or does anyone else for that matter know, why at one point the canard, which was so predominant in CALF, JAST, and ASTOVL, was discarded in favor of the aft tail we are familiar with?
I can think of several reasons, but I would be curious to get a definitive answer rather than just hearsay.
 
This is my understanding:

The LockMart design went from canard to quad-tail shortly before the CDA RFP deadline (which was in 1996). The main reason was that the carrier version was going to need a larger wing than the span-restricted (LH-class parking) CV/STOVL aircraft, and larger control surfaces. Scaling up a delta wing, while keeping its sweep angles constant (LO constraint) is difficult configuration-wise because the increase in root chord - in feet and inches - gets very large... so where do you put the (also larger) canard? A wing with less sweep and taper, and an aft tail likewise, made it easier to accommodate two wing designs on the same body shape.

The LSPM (large scale powered model) in the Google Earth photos was built as a canard, but I suspect that they modded it to get some idea of the difference in suck-down effects.
 
Makes sense. I remembered it having to do with carrier compatibility, but forgot the exact reason. Thanks for the explanation.
 
Lockheed Martin JAST concept releasing bombs from internal weapons bays.

JAST convential takeoff variant designed by Lockheed Martin for the US Air Force.

Source:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/jsf/pics05.shtml
 

Attachments

  • jast_lockheed_06.jpg
    jast_lockheed_06.jpg
    26.3 KB · Views: 1,997
  • jast_lockheed_09.jpg
    jast_lockheed_09.jpg
    67.3 KB · Views: 2,003
Evolution of the Lockheed Martin design for JAST culminating in the X-35
Image courtesy JSF Program Office, 2010
Click to expand...
Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/jsf/pics05.shtml
 

Attachments

  • jast_lockheed_10.jpg
    jast_lockheed_10.jpg
    20.5 KB · Views: 1,889
LowObservable said:
This is my understanding:

The LockMart design went from canard to quad-tail shortly before the CDA RFP deadline (which was in 1996). The main reason was that the carrier version was going to need a larger wing than the span-restricted (LH-class parking) CV/STOVL aircraft, and larger control surfaces. Scaling up a delta wing, while keeping its sweep angles constant (LO constraint) is difficult configuration-wise because the increase in root chord - in feet and inches - gets very large... so where do you put the (also larger) canard? A wing with less sweep and taper, and an aft tail likewise, made it easier to accommodate two wing designs on the same body shape.

The LSPM (large scale powered model) in the Google Earth photos was built as a canard, but I suspect that they modded it to get some idea of the difference in suck-down effects.
Click to expand...


This is broadly confirmed in Code One 1996 Volume 11, Number 3, where Bob Ruzkowski says they had canard-delta USAF/STOVL versions but aft-tail carrier version which resulted in insufficient commonality:


Source:

http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/C1_V11N3_SM_1271449318_7528.pdf

Don't forget CALF had no carrier-specific Navy variant, just USAF and STOVL versions. Adding the Navy carrier version for JSF put the canard-delta design out of contention.
 

Attachments

  • JSFCanard.jpg
    JSFCanard.jpg
    64.9 KB · Views: 1,558
Out of interest - two more drawings of the "Ghosthawk" design from Paul Bevilaqua's presentation. Looks pretty much the same as the Lockheed CALF


index.php


http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2010/03/video-history-of-the-f-35-by-s.html
 

Attachments

  • CommonStrikeFighter1.jpg
    CommonStrikeFighter1.jpg
    145.8 KB · Views: 1,512
  • CommonStrikeFighter2.jpg
    CommonStrikeFighter2.jpg
    122.2 KB · Views: 483
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Out of interest - two more drawings of the "Ghosthawk" design from Paul Bevilaqua's presentation. Looks pretty much the same as the Lockheed CALF
Click to expand...

The model I've seen is slightly different - larger tail, longer nozzle, some details are different - but that's pretty much it.
 
3BSD On Configuration 141B In 1994
The results of that study showed that the 3BSD design was significantly lighter than the SERN nozzle. Moreover, the design also showed superior propulsion performance in all modes. The 3BSD was subsequently included in the ASTOVL Configuration 141 – the original canard delta design of what evolved into the X-35.
Click to expand...
Source: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/article.html?item_id=137
Picture Gallery: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/gallery_slideshow.html?gallery_id=175
 

Attachments

  • 2014_3BSN_20_Config_141B_1267828237_8729.jpg
    2014_3BSN_20_Config_141B_1267828237_8729.jpg
    73.3 KB · Views: 575

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom