Boeing Bird of Prey Demonstrator

[flateric]

If someone can help with BoP 3-view, I'd be very obliged. Seems to have been in Flight International. Thanks!

 

[Orionblamblam]

As released by Boeing.

 

[flateric]

Thanks, Scott. I always wanna to look at these little gremlins from PR Dept. who're retouching drawings to make them as little common with actual engineering drawings as possible))) I have this factsheet...no one happy to have this FI article?

 

[Matej]

Another one from L+K 25-26/2002, but I am not sure about its accuracy. It contains also small vertical stabilisator under the fuselage that was soon after beginning of flight tests removed.

 

[flateric]

Thank you, Mato!

 

[flateric]

...

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Spasiba!

Moonbat

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All -

The BoP is hanging in the Air Force Museum - I took a few pics of it back on 12-17-03 (100th Anniversary of the Wright Brother's 1st powered flight!) and though that a few of them might help visualize the shape. A tough place to shoot photos, especially if you are looking upwards

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

One more... Mark

 

[Steve Pace]

I'm trying to find out the exact dates of the Bird of Prey's first and last flights...

 

[flateric]

maiden flight Sept. 11, 1996
last flight 1999 exact date unknown

 

[quellish]

I'm trying to find out the exact dates of the Bird of Prey's first and last flights...

I've asked around for the final flight's date, but no luck so far, sorry.

 

[Triton]

From theworacle via YouTube:

The McDonnell Douglas (later Boeing) Phantom Works built the Bird of Prey to demonstrate stealth technology. The single aircraft flew 40 times between 1996 and 1999 and is now in the USAF museum in Dayton, Ohio

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBgV_6L__zA

 

[Demon Lord Razgriz]

Question, has there been any word on it's stealth in comparison to say the F-117 or F-22?

 

[quellish]

Question, has there been any word on it's stealth in comparison to say the F-117 or F-22?

There has been nothing definitive published, of course.
But it can be reasonably inferred that the signature is significantly lower. According to people familiar with the program, the visual signature became dominant - it could be seen with the eyeball before it could be seen using radar. The visual signature was then reduced by several means, and this was one of the primary goals of the project.

 

[Triton]

Boeing Bird of Prey

Source:

Bird of Prey - An Innovative Technology Demonstration

I Could Tell You But Then You Would Have to be Destroyed by Me: The Pentagon’s Black World , page 1

I Could Tell You But Then You Would Have to be Destroyed by Me: The Pentagon’s Black World , page 1

www.abovetopsecret.com

 

[Triton]

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji9oTAONTdI

 

[Empire]

Hi All,
Anybody have any info on a fully operational version of the BOP. Looking for pictures or statistics. I know Boeing used the data from the BOP on the X-45 program. They must have had a paper study done on a operatonal version for the DOD in case they ordered some.
thanks,
Empire

 

[chuck4]

Was there any military operational consideration incorporated into the configuration design? Was it solely an academic exercise to fly the least observable platform, or was some actual military role envisoned?

 

[Triton]

Fact Sheet from National Museum of the USAF:

The Bird of Prey is a single-seat stealth technology demonstrator used to test "low-observable" stealth techniques and new methods of aircraft design and construction. The secret Bird of Prey project ran from 1992 to 1999, and the aircraft first flew in the fall of 1996. The Bird of Prey was named for its resemblance to the Klingon spacecraft from the science fiction series Star Trek.

In its 38 flights, the Bird of Prey tested ways to make aircraft less observable to the eye and to radar. It also validated new ways to design and build aircraft using large single-piece composite structures, "virtual reality" computerized design and assembly, and disposable tooling. The Bird of Prey was revealed in 2002 because its design techniques had become standard practice -- Boeing used them in its X-32 Joint Strike Fighter demonstrators and later in its X-45A Unmanned Combat Air Vehicle prototype.

The aircraft demonstrates advanced stealth concepts, notably its "gapless" control surfaces that blend smoothly into the wings to reduce radar visibility, and an engine intake completely shielded from the front. The Bird of Prey, however, used some "off the shelf" technology to reduce costs and speed production. Its control system is all-manual with no computer assists, and the landing gear is adapted from Beech King Air and Queen Air aircraft.

Boeing donated the Bird of Prey to the museum in 2002.

TECHNICAL NOTES:
Engine: One Pratt & Whitney JT15D-5C turbofan of 3,190 lbs. thrust
Maximum speed: 300 mph
Ceiling: 20,000 ft.

Source:

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=348

 

[quellish]

Was there any military operational consideration incorporated into the configuration design? Was it solely an academic exercise to fly the least observable platform, or was some actual military role envisoned?

It was purely a technology demonstrator. Some of the things it demonstrated are public knowledge, some not so much. But there was never to be an operational derivative.

 

[Whisperstream]

Lots of good information about it here:

www.dreamlandresort.com/black_projects/bird_of_prey.html

 

[Empire]

Hi All,
A little though experiment!! I know we have a ton of aviation and air frame experts in this forum. Its 1999 the BOP's flight test program has just ended and the DOD wants a manned F-117 replacement. What would need to be done to the BOP design to make a operational fighter bomber. I'm talking air frame changes, engine used, radar, etc.
thanks
Empire

 

[TomS]

Simple -- start from scratch.

Read the links; the BoP configuration made for a nasty aircraft to fly. Any attempt to "operationalize" it would probably have started with an entirely new aerodynamic arrangement. At that point, you're developing an entirely new aircraft.

 

[aliensporebomb]

Yeah, what a beautiful and unusual bird but I hear she was really a handful to actually fly.

 

[sublight_]

Yeah, what a beautiful and unusual bird but I hear she was really a handful to actually fly.

That is an understatement. The primary test pilot Fred Madenwald, resigned because he didn't want to die....

 

[Empire]

Ya but the flight control system was manual add a fly by wire system and it becomes more stable. Remember they built it this way to save money. I think the design would have become more like a X-45 wing and body plan form. what do you all think?

 

[quellish]

Ya but the flight control system was manual add a fly by wire system and it becomes more stable. Remember they built it this way to save money. I think the design would have become more like a X-45 wing and body plan form. what do you all think?

X-45 was a direct application of lessons learned from Bird of Prey, so that would be a reasonable conclusion.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Hi All,
A little though experiment!! I know we have a ton of aviation and air frame experts in this forum. Its 1999 the BOP's flight test program has just ended and the DOD wants a manned F-117 replacement. What would need to be done to the BOP design to make a operational fighter bomber. I'm talking air frame changes, engine used, radar, etc.
thanks
Empire

I suppose you could use the design without major changes as the basis for a light battlefield interdiction/rear area harassment type. A 21st Century 'Bedcheck Charlie' in other words. With regards as to weaponry, you could, for example, design a conformal dispenser especially for the BOP that could deploy weapons such as the BLU-108/B or even ERAM (BLU-101/B & BLU-102/B(?)) and other airdroppable mines. Other possibilities could have included a HAVE SLICK derived weapon such as Rockwell's LOCATM.

 

[Empire]

I find it strange that no pictures or plans of a manned full fledged fighter bomber design of BOP ever leaked out from McAir or Boeing. For gods sack they where trying to prove their stealth building abilities to the Government you'd think they would have all kinds of pictures or plans ready for government viewing. Some of them should have leaked.

 

[Orionblamblam]

An attempt at creating an accurate 3-view of the Bird Of Prey. High rez (and DXF) available over HERE, at least for the next week or two.

 

[bring_it_on]

Boeing Lifts the Veil on Stealthy Bird of Prey (From 2002)

 

[flateric]

McDonnell Douglas Bird of Prey model. From Phantom Works. Real Deal! | #1859380679

Small scale model of the McDonnell Douglas Bird of Prey. The predecessor of the UCAV combat drone. 1st flown by Rudy Haug. (That took some balls). This was not a Boeing plane . They just took over the

www.worthpoint.com

sold at ePay in Feb

Small scale model of the McDonnell Douglas Bird of Prey. The predecessor of the UCAV combat drone. 1st flown by Rudy Haug. (That took some balls). This was not a Boeing plane . They just took over the company. I worked Phantom Works and this is the real deal, not something made in the Phillipines. These were a limited edition and handed out to the few that had their hands on this project. Made from 3-D printer, hand finished and painted in Phantom Works by the ppl that built this craft. Comes on a Koa wood stand. It has a very small chip on the tip of the wing and a paint scratch on the bottom. I did not want to take away the original paint that was a two part mix, to keep it original. I have had my fill with the aircraft industry and am ready to part with it.Small scale model of the McDonnell Douglas Bird of Prey. The predecessor of the UCAV combat drone. 1st flown by Rudy Haug. (That took some balls). This was not a Boeing plane . They just took over the company. I worked Phantom Works and this is the real deal, not something made in the Phillipines. These were a limited edition and handed out to the few that had their hands on this project. Made from 3-D printer, hand finished and painted in Phantom Works by the ppl that built this craft. Comes on a Koa wood stand. It has a very small chip on the tip of the wing and a paint scratch on the bottom. I did not want to take away the original paint that was a two part mix, to keep it original. I have had my fill with the aircraft industry and am ready to part with it.

 

[Empire]

Nice!! How much did it sell for anyone know??

 

[Dreamfighter]

Few pics from an article about BoP in 'Aviation Design (Magazine)' N° 20, januari 2003
Nothing special but I thought I might add them here anyway...

 

[X-39]

Hi.
An interesting video with an analysis on some notable peculiarities of this aircraft's life:

 

[flateric]

from USAFM FB

 

[Dynoman]

Are there any cockpit photos that include the instrument panel? I've yet to see one despite its declassified nature and it hanging in the US Air Force Museum.

 

[joewee]

A gull wing configuration for tailless aircraft stability & control was patented by Grumman-Bethpage in 1996, filed in 1993*.
Grumman had been shopping around an unclassified flight demonstrator concept using an X-29A to NASA, AF and DARPA, to no avail.
[*Rich Nastasi conceived of the idea in 1987 or 1988 in a classified environment; I know firsthand.]
-------
Grumman didn't file for the patent until a year after McDonnell Douglas-St Louis 'reportedly' began work on Bird of Prey.
Guess#1 is that Rich's concept was wind tunnel tested in 1988 or 1989, and the results made their way into the sanitized technology-leveling library administered by the LO/CLO EXCOM. McAir, AF and/or NASA became aware, and adopted it.
Guess#2 is that McAir cooked up the gull-wing control effector configuration themselves -- nothing new under the sun, as they say.
I lean to Guess#1, owing to some technology transfer shenanigans I'm aware of with the nozzle design on Bird of Prey and the near-concurrent X-36.

 

[Hydroman]

They did BOP on a tight budget and with the gull-wing configuration, the aircraft had mechanical flight control system, no hydraulic fly-by-wire/artificial stability, would have cost a lot more. Even with the gull-wing configuration, it could be a hand full for the pilot in certain flight regimes. But BOP demonstrated and proved out what they wanted to accomplished so it was a successful program.

The gull-wing shape could have compromised LO possibly but LO is not my area of expertise.

As an example, there was no way Tacit Blue could have flown without a FBW flight control system, it would be the Tacit Tumbler, not good, same goes for the YF-23, plus from what I was told, Tacit Blue was unstable in all 3 axis. You can add F-16 and F-117 to the list as well which could not fly with a pure mechanical control system even with hydromechanical assist.