McDonnell-Douglas ATS, pre-ATF and ATF studies

flateric · 16 June 2006

Thread to discuss McDonnell Douglas pre-ATF and ATF studies
If you have something to share, please post it here.

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

Some McDonnell-Douglas projects are found in the AFTI Projects thread

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/133

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

McDonnell-Douglas ATF submission.

[Removed low res image - better quality posted later in topic - Administrator]

flateric · 16 June 2006

MDC designs concepts sized for air-to-surface missions. 1977 ATS (Air-To-Surface) studies prior to ATF program.

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

Some definite points of similarity with those designs and the eventual ATF submission.

flateric · 16 June 2006

Yes, delta wing ATS design was one of two total of December 1982 nineteen*hard* ATF submissions.
Canard design with stright wings was submitted as air-to-air concept design.

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

Heres the RFP Air-to-surface submissions

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

More pre-ATF designs

overscan (PaulMM) · 16 June 2006

One more

boxkite · 23 July 2006

A friend (Hi vstol) sent me this artist's impression a few years ago, titled "CTOL Light Attack Aircraft" with Navy insignia and tailhook. Nothing else is known.

Any idea, what could it be?

Gavin · 6 August 2006

By chance, any 3-views or more concept art of the ATF design?

--Gavin.

Skybolt · 7 August 2006

May I play CSI?? ;D
The airplane has a laser designator in the nose (it is illuminating the interior of what seems a hangar or a shelter and the two bombs (seem dispensers) are homing on the reflection). So this indicates a post 1970 date (laser designator were deployed on pods during the '60s). Sice there are no tropical/jungle hints, it must be post-1975. The airplanes are attaching an airfiled with what seem dirt-covered shelters, The scene has a north-african/Middle east look (what's the building near the upper end of the picture? Seems a mosque with a dome but it is out of contest, could be a radar station with a dielectric dome covering the antenna). Aircraft appareances are distincly post-F-117 era. So I'd bet the project is from the middle of the '80s, when Libya was THE villain. Was there some CTOL light-attack program going on in the US in the middle of the '80s? Perhaps a replacement for A-7s?

Sundog · 14 August 2006

1). Here's a three view of the McDonnell-Douglas SF-1302 shown above; It appears to be sized for F404 powerplants.
2&3).An Advanced Strike Aircraft Concept

vstol · 2 December 2006

I've searched my files, but can't find anything. I've searched my brain, but it's empty too.

Upon closer study, I think it is just a notional airplane that was drawn to advertise the weapons. What is most striking (pardon the pun) to me is the laser designator in the nose, with the two glide bombs that seem to be tracking into the hangar. The near aircraft is banking to show the canisters on the bottom of the fuselage. One is missing, which maybe corresponds to an explosion on the bottom left.

Sorry, that's the best I can do. It is definitely not the MDA Quiet Attack Aircraft.

???

Mike.

boxkite · 2 December 2006

Mike,

A few mysteries come to stay, otherwise it would be boring

.

Thomas

vstol · 2 December 2006

Stop the presses! Mystery solved! I found it (without the tailhook):

It was a 1977 McDonnell design as part of their Air-to-Surface (ATS) study, which was one of the studies that eventually led to the start of the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) program.

It was designated Model No. 252-111B with wing tip Air-to-Air missiles and conformal Air-to-Ground weapons underneath.

They must have pitched a version of it to the Navy, too, since McDonnell was a well-established designer of Navy aircraft.

Cheers,
Mike.

Skybolt · 3 December 2006

Thanks Mike! SPF CSI team wins again... ;D

flateric · 12 October 2007

Top-mounted inlet fighter from 1985 MacAir study “Subsonic Diffusers For Highly Survivable Aircraft”

SUBSONIC DIFFUSER DESIGN AND PERFORMANCE FOR ADVANCED FIGHTER AIRCRAFT
C. C. Lee
McDonnell Aircraft Company
McDonnell Douglas Corporation
St. Louis
Chris Eoedicker
Flight Dynamics Laboratory
Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
Wright-Patterson AFB, OH 45433-6553 5433
AIAA-85-3073

flateric · 26 October 2007

1986-1988 MacAir study of Supersonic Persitence Fighter (SSPF) Alrcraft - air-superiority fighter which emphasizes low drag for efficient supercruise and TVC nozzles for agility.

AlAA 1989-2816
Advanced Thrust Vectoring Nozzles for Supercruise Fighter Aircraft
J. Mace, P. Smereczniak and G. Krekeler
McDonnell Aircraft Company, St. Louis, MO
D. Bowers
WPAFB, OH, Wright Research and Development Center
M. MacLean
GE Aircraft Engines
Cincinnati, OH
E. Thayer
Pratt & Whitney Aircraft
West Palm Beach, FL

starviking · 31 March 2008

pometablava said:
Supersonic Fighter Development. Roy Braybrook. Ed Haynes. 1987 ISBN 0-85429-582-8

Anyone can identify the weapons in ths drawing?

Thanks,

Antonio

Well, the under-nacelle weapons seem to be related to the modular missiles in Flateric's earlier post - the only difference is the small canards near the missile nose. http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,399.msg2577.html#msg2577

The general form of the belly missiles - stacked nose-to-tail remind me of the McDonnell-Douglas Model No. 252-111B strike project, as seen in this thread http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,508.0

As for the exact designations - I've only seen these types on McDD projects - so some internal McDD designs perhaps?

Starviking

hesham · 24 October 2008

Hi,

McDonnell Douglas;

1-SF-1107
2-SF-1302

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19890017470_1989017470.pdf

sferrin · 24 October 2008

SF-1302 is one that was shown in model form back in the 80s as an ATF concept. Painted ghost gray as I recall.

donnage99 · 9 November 2008

*better quality painting of the MD ATF proposal*

Anyone notices the striking similarity with the mig wind tunnel testing model for their 1.44/1.42 project (more than the similarity between the test model with the 1.44 prototype itself). Or are they the same thing

? Did anyone confirm that the wind tunnel testbed is actually 1.44? I see these images alot around the net claiming to be 1.44 study model, but no confirmation or reliable source that states so. Anyone more knowledgable can shed some light for me?

KJ_Lesnick · 9 November 2008

That inlet looks a lot like the XB-70's and additionally looks like the inlet used on the McDonnell's Mach 6 Navy Interdictor concept...

overscan (PaulMM) · 10 November 2008

The above picture was originally associated with MFI by Alexei Gretchikhine on his RAP website (http://aeroweb.lucia.it/rap/RAFAQ/MiG1.42.html) back in 1997. In fact he said only

Another wind tunnel, another scale model. Although it has no connection with 1.42, the model displays some rudimentary stealth features. Note that forward fuselage is triangular in crossection. TsAGI.

Yefim Gordon included the same picture in his Red Star on MFI, and claimed it represented the 1.42 intake configuration.

Merv_P · 11 November 2008

donnage99 said:
*better quality painting of the MD ATF proposal*

Anyone notices the striking similarity with the mig wind tunnel testing model for their 1.44/1.42 project

I first saw this painting a few years ago, and that's what struck me, too. The painting and the profile posted by Overscan earlier in this thread are the only pictures I've seen of this design, though someone on this forum (I can't remember who) was able to build a model of it along with models of the other four ATF contenders.

donnage99 · 11 November 2008

Merv_P said:
donnage99 said:

*better quality painting of the MD ATF proposal*

Anyone notices the striking similarity with the mig wind tunnel testing model for their 1.44/1.42 project

Click to expand...

I first saw this painting a few years ago, and that's what struck me, too. The painting and the profile posted by Overscan earlier in this thread are the only pictures I've seen of this design, though someone on this forum (I can't remember who) was able to build a model of it along with models of the other four ATF contenders.

Can you or Overscan direct me to where this guy built his models of the ATF contenders? Thanks alot in advance!

Merv_P · 12 November 2008

donnage99 said:
Can you or Overscan direct me to where this guy built his models of the ATF contenders? Thanks alot in advance!

Yes, I've found it - here:

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1707.msg14300.html#msg14300

In fact it looks like four contenders and three pre-ATF designs.

donnage99 · 12 November 2008

Merv_P (or anyone who knows), do you know which design it is on the far left of the picture; right above the boeing design?

hs1216 · 12 November 2008

I believe its GD's submission

overscan (PaulMM) · 12 November 2008

Yes, its the twin-tail version of the GD submission. GD tried many different tail configurations but were unable to find the right combination of stealth and stability. The final submission used a single tail which must have adversely impacted side-on RCS.

sferrin · 12 November 2008

Also the one with the forward-swept everything is NOT the actual Grumman submission. As I understand it it was the model builder's "best guess" based on some of the other Grumman pre-ATF stuff out there.

donnage99 · 12 November 2008

anyone got a picture of GE early design (The one in the model collection)?

overscan (PaulMM) · 12 November 2008

Grumman's design has never been published to my knowledge. AFAIK, they placed last.

donnage99 · 12 November 2008

overscan said:
Grumman's design has never been published to my knowledge. AFAIK, they placed last.

I meant the early GE one that I had previously asked

overscan (PaulMM) · 12 November 2008

Sorry

I suggest you obtain a copy of Jay Miller's wonderful Aerofax on FA-22, where you will find lots of pictures of ATF related models. Here's small thumbnails of pages 12 and 13...

donnage99 · 5 January 2009

it's said that the proposal was too conservative for air force, can anyone elaborate on this? I only read somewhere that it didn't emphasize on stealth as much as Air Force wanted, but that's all that I know.

hs1216 · 5 January 2009

i remember that Bill Sweatman wrote, MD thought that stealth was just some new fade, and that eventually the airforce would get over it. So their atf was geared to be a cooler f-15.

If i had to guess i think that MD had a aircraft in mind similar to the su-35/37 superflanker series in terms of capability.

sferrin · 5 January 2009

I read a quote once from an air force type in the decision making process regarding the initial 7 companies' entries (Lockheed, Northrop, General Dynamics, Boeing, McDonnell Douglas, Rockwell, and Grumman). He said "we had two really good designs, a couple decent designs, and the rest just didn't get it." (Not his exact words but close.) Lockheed and Northrop of course had their years of stealth experience, General Dynamics (Convair) had stuff going back to the days of Fish/Kingfish and the AGM-129 experience (that's all I know about anyway), not sure where Boeing got it's expertise and then supposedly McDD raided Lockheed for employees. Leaving Rockwell with it's B-1B experience in RCS reduction and Grumman with?

Abraham Gubler · 6 January 2009

Yildirim said:
i remember that Bill Sweatman wrote, MD thought that stealth was just some new fade, and that eventually the airforce would get over it. So their atf was geared to be a cooler f-15.

If i had to guess i think that MD had a aircraft in mind similar to the su-35/37 superflanker series in terms of capability.

That seems more like a throwaway quote from a McAir exec. They spent a lot of effort developing a stealth capability for their Navy ATA bid and for Super Hornet.

McDonnell-Douglas ATS, pre-ATF and ATF studies

ACCESS: USAP

Administrator

Administrator

Attachments

ACCESS: USAP

Attachments

Administrator

ACCESS: USAP

Attachments

Administrator

Attachments

Administrator

Attachments

Administrator

Attachments

ACCESS: Top Secret

Attachments

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: Top Secret

Attachments

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: USAP

Attachments

ACCESS: USAP

Attachments

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: USAP

Attachments

ACCESS: USAP

ACCESS: Top Secret

Attachments

ACCESS: Top Secret

Administrator

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: Top Secret

Attachments

ACCESS: Confidential

Administrator

ACCESS: USAP

ACCESS: Top Secret

Administrator

ACCESS: Top Secret

Administrator

Attachments

ACCESS: Top Secret

ACCESS: Confidential

ACCESS: USAP

ACCESS: Top Secret

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.