Remaining US Model number mysteries

Allow me to recapitulate in this one topic the main project mysteries that remain in some of the main US manufacturers' (only those which have a consistent numbering system and a limited number of "holes" are listed here:

BELL : Model 31 (not allocated?)
BEECHCRAFT: Models 21, 22, 27, 29-32, 37, 39, 41-43, 47-49, 51-54, 57, 59, 61-64, 66-69, 71, 72, 74, 75, 82, 83, 86, 91-94, 96-98 (no evidence that all of these existed at all)
CONSOLIDATED : Models 13 (skipped? or possible candidate XN3Y-1?), 19
CONSOLIDATED-VULTEE (CONVAIR) : 113-114
CONVAIR (1950s): Models 13-14, 21, 26, 28, 29, 32-37, 39-47, 50-54, 56, 57, 59, 63-68
CURTISS-WRIGHT : CW-13 (apparently skipped), CW-34 to -39
EMSCO : B-6 (could be their large 32-passenger, four-engine transport project)
GRUMMAN : G-28 (no record)
LOCKHEED (NOT Vega): Models 6 (could have been inhouse designator for Detroit DL-1 series), 13 (skipped), 17, 25, 28, 34, 36, 38, 39, 40-42 (IF different from Vega Models), 46-48, 53-59, 63-74, 76-79 (records for all these are said to be "lost"...), 95-98
MARTIN : 1-56 (many types were built before Model 57 but Model numbers are said to have been unassigned), 58, 59, 61, 62, 78 (all said to have been unassigned), 86-114 (said to have been unassigned to aircraft)
NORTH AMERICAN : NA-80 (canceled project, no details)
PIPER : P-3, PA-13 (apparently skipped)
PITCAIRN : PA-9, PA-10, PA-12 to PA-15 (possibly inhouse designators for PCA- and PAA- autogyros)
SIKORSKY: S-77, S-79, S-81 to -91 (existed?)
STEARMAN : X110
VULTEE: Models 2-10, 13-19 (existed?), 21-31, 34, 36, 53, 59, 60, 64-68, 71, 73, 81, 82, 87

Obvious omissions here are Boeing (tackled in a topic of its own) and Douglas (too many gaps!)
I'm currently working on McDonnell, Republic, Fairchild and a few more...

Thanks to anyone who could solve part of these mysteries!!!

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Hi,

for CW-28,please see;
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1643.0/highlight,cw+28.html

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Thanks, Hesham! Wonder how could have missed that info from that topic, which I even posted in!
There remains the mystery of Models 34 to 39 too... but that's post-war so I did not include them here.

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Wasn't the NA-136 the predecessor of the NA-140 (XP-86) as a proposed USAF variation on the unswept NA-134 (XFJ-1 Fury)?

[Edit: Nope. According to Steve Pace, the NA-136 was a cancelled TP-51 order.
-- https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/north-american-aviation-na-nr-series.665/#post-171934 ]

No clue on the NA-80 or NA-86. I Googled and they popped up on the Smithsonian NASM SIRIS. Has anyone else ever used this 'Thesauri' without finding themselves in a pointless, informationless loop?

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

You bet! These thesaurii are just pointless, they just keep refering you to pages that in turn refer to the original pages! I guess you'd have to be in their library to make full use of those listings...

Interesting assumption concerning NA-136. Don't think I even SAW that intermediary proposal you're talking about... Do you have anything on that? Or at least refer me to some source on the subject? Thanks!

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Stargazer: thanks for the Smithsonian NASM thesaurii confirmation. Very annoying!

Sorry, I have no details or anything novel about the NA-136. I've read that the three XP-86 prototypes (45-59597/59599) were first ordered (May 1945) with straight wings. The first prototype was completed with swept wings after NAA got a grant (RD 1369) to experiment with such wings.

In Developing the XP-86: Straight Wing XP-86 by Larry Davis there is a description of this straight winged Sabre. Davis doesn't mention the NA-136 per se, he just calls it the XP-86.

"The XP-86 differed considerably from its Navy cousin, now designated the XFJ-1. North American refined the fuselage shape and deleted many of the things designed to aid in low speed performance that were required for aircraft carrier landings. The XP-86 wing had the same planform as the XFJ-1, but the airfoil was much thinner. On both the upper and lower wing seurfaces were the dive brakes, borrowed directly from the A-36A version of the Mustang. The fuselage had a much higher fineness ratio than the XFJ-1, and the intake was oval in shape. Power was the same for both aircraft - the GE TG 180 (J35). The TG 180 had an eleven stage, axial flow compressor, and offered 4,000 lbs of thrust."

For a fully description of the design, see Sabre Jet Classics Volume 4 Number 1 Winter 1996:
http://sabre-pilots.org/classics/v41develop.htm

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Very interesting, thanks!
Indeed there is no indication that this might have been designation, although this clearly makes it a most likely candidate for it...

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Found NA-135 (792 Fairchild C-82N to be produced at North American lines at Kansas City) and NA-137 (1000 Lockheed P-80N to be produced at North American lines at Kansas City). Both orders cancelled with the end of WWII. NA-138 corresponded to a cancelled order of 629 P-51D for the USAF.

No clues about NA-136 but I think it not necessary had to match an unbuilt aircraft design...just a thought.


Source: NA Aircraft 1934-1998 Volume 1. Norm Avery

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Thanks. The annoying thing is that North American charge numbers are pretty well-documented, and I have a complete list from NA-15 (the very first NAA model) to 407 except for 6 missing numbers: 80, 86, 136, 250, 355, 368, all of which have stubbornly resisted years of investigations through tons of books, magazines and websites...
Being a completist at heart, I just cannot rest until the gaps are filled... Is my condition serious, Dr. Pometablava? LOL

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Our completist condition is serious Stargazer ;D

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Just found the answer to the Convair 115 mystery... This was assigned to the XP-92 (MX-813), the initial version of the XF-92. (source: http://jpcolliat.free.fr/xf92/xf92-1.htm — a great site if you don't know it already!)

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

A longshot on the Emsco B-6. Does anyone have a copy of Aviation Quarterly Vol1 No2 1974?

http://www.angelfire.com/ks2/janowski/other_aircraft/Aviation_Quarterly.txt
According to this site on Jaroslaw Janowski's designs, Walt Boyne penned an article for AQ entitled Rocheville: Imagineer Emeritus. Might be worth a look.

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Cool... My dad's got them right from #2 onwards! Next time I visit him I'll take a look. Thanks!
Which reminds me... is there somewhere a general index of all Air Enthusiast articles? That would be pretty useful!

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Air Enthusiast contents:

http://www.aeroflight.co.uk/mags/uk/air_enthusiast.htm

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Hi Stargazer2006!

Curtiss Model 65---Hawk II, export version of the XF11C-2

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F11C_Goshawk

Northrop Model 13---The process of welding
Northrop Model 17---XP-61E, long range day fighter/bomber escort

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Thanks Nugo!
I would find the Model 65 a convincing piece of information if the Putnam book and other sources didn't say otherwise. Needs some more exploration...

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

A webpage seems to confirm that the missing NA-136 designation was allocated to the initial straight-wing version of the XP-86, of which the USAF apparently ordered three examples until it was decided to go for the swept-wings and pick the NA-140 design instead.

Here's the page: http://www.hyperscale.com/2009/features/sabremk648ho_1.htm

I'd like to find other sources to be sure, but it seems to be a good start.

EDIT: I've added the superb illustration of the NA-136 by Tim Large, taken from this document:
http://www.thebigbookofwar.50megs.com/DOX/Aircraft/Fighters/North%20American%20NA-140.doc

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Also it seems that the Lockheed Models 41 and 42 corresponded to Vega-built targets (the latter being the V-114). These are given as Vega Models, not Lockheed, so I'm not sure. Did Vega actually have a separate Model system besides their V-designs?

Here are the correspondances I found so far:
Vega V-127 -- Model 21 Ventura (project)
Vega V-??? -- Model 22 Starliner (obviously conflicts with Lockheed's Model 22 Lightning)
Vega V-133 -- Model 23 Ventura (B-34) (conflicts with Lockheed's Model 23 = 522 = L-106 = XP-49)
Vega V-146 -- Model 26 Neptune
Vega V-305 -- Model 33 Little Dipper (generally considered a Lockheed Model)
Vega V-306 -- Model 34 Big Dipper (generally considered a Lockheed Model)
Vega V-125 -- Model 35 (Vega 35, developed from North American NA-35 trainer)
Vega V-??? -- Model 37 Ventura
Vega V-??? -- Model 41 target plane
Vega V-114 -- Model 42 target plane

Apart from Models 22 and 23, the other model numbers fit in pretty nicely in the Lockheed basic model numbers list. Does anyone have a complete list of Lockheed basic model numbers somewhere? This would clarify whether Vega had a separate model number list or not? Thanks!

I have modified the title of the topic and updated the initial post to include post-war mysteries as well. Thanks to anyone who can contribute!

Re: Remaining US Model number mysteries (pre-1945)

Stargazer2006 said:

A webpage seems to confirm that the missing NA-136 designation was allocated to the initial straight-wing version of the XP-86, of which the USAF apparently ordered three examples until it was decided to go for the swept-wings and pick the NA-140 design instead.

Here's the page: http://www.hyperscale.com/2009/features/sabremk648ho_1.htm

I'd like to find other sources to be sure, but it seems to be a good start.

Click to expand...

Apparently the designation NA-136 did NOT apply to the straight-wing XP-86 project as previously suggested.

Forum member Steve Pace reveals the allocation of that designation here:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,665.msg171934.html#msg171934

I have edited my posts and apologize for the wrong assumption.