Boeing Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) studies

[Sundog]

This is a design I found in a PDF file online about a 1-1/2 ago. I wish I would have downloaded the PDF file, but I just took a screen capture because most of the file wasn't about aircraft. It was either about advanced systems and possibly networking. It was some sort of defense related PDF file and this one page had this design on it. BTW, it was a Boeing PDF document.

I have no idea if this is one of the tailless fighter designs that has supposedly flown at Groom Lake or if it is the YF-24 (There was a report within the past year about a test pilot and in his history one of the planes he supposedly flew first at Groom Lake was the YF-24 prototype, which doesn't tell us anything).

Based on the design and the Boeing/McD-D design history, aka the X-36 and the BOP, I think it's safe to say that looking at the nozzle the aicraft probably uses fluidic thrust vectoring contol in yaw in combination with it's 2D C-D nozzle.

Anyway, I think it's a nice looking plane.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

I can't remember this Lockheed fighter project ?.

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960001960_1996101960.pdf

 

[flateric]

RTFNR (Read This F***ing NASA Report) before posting...

The aircraft investigated during the subject study was a multirole fighter configuration (BMRF) that was designed by the Boeing Military Aircraft Company (fig. 3). Th& aircraft was intended to be a replacement for the F-16

 

[Sundog]

That's a great find. It must be a "generic" Boeing fighter design, because if you check the thread I started awhile back on tailless fighters, you'll see a tailless version of that Boeing MRF design. I've always tried to figure out what the detailed configuration of the inlet was like and that paper you found has a picture of it, which makes it much clearer.

 

[Etoski]

I was wondering the same thing....could this be the YF-24??? Anyway, the air intake looks similar to the Boeing X-32... Ideas, anyone?

 

[quellish]

This is a design I found in a PDF file online about a 1-1/2 ago. I wish I would have downloaded the PDF file, but I just took a screen capture because most of the file wasn't about aircraft. It was either about advanced systems and possibly networking. It was some sort of defense related PDF file and this one page had this design on it. BTW, it was a Boeing PDF document.

I have no idea if this is one of the tailless fighter designs that has supposedly flown at Groom Lake or if it is the YF-24 (There was a report within the past year about a test pilot and in his history one of the planes he supposedly flew first at Groom Lake was the YF-24 prototype, which doesn't tell us anything).

Based on the design and the Boeing/McD-D design history, aka the X-36 and the BOP, I think it's safe to say that looking at the nozzle the aicraft probably uses fluidic thrust vectoring contol in yaw in combination with it's 2D C-D nozzle.

Anyway, I think it's a nice looking plane.

I am pretty sure I have seen the PDF in question, I'll look for it. If I remember right this also had some of the Boeing A-12 like concepts in it.
It does not seem likely that this has flown at Groom. There is not anything new or unique that would justify it as far as I can tell. The tailless configuration seen here was tested to death in both the black and white worlds in the late 1990s, including by Boeing with the X-36.

What interests me is that PW-1442 engine. That's a new one.

 

[Gavin]

A tailless version of this, no?

 

[Mark Nankivil]

That looks like a variation/iteration of Boeing's ATF proposal. Note that it is a twin engine design, The various articles that have shown display or wind tunnel models of the various ATF proposals show the later v-tailed version that was the final proposal variant. Personally, I think this is a pretty decent looking aircraft.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Gavin]

That looks like a variation/iteration of Boeing's ATF proposal. Note that it is a twin engine design.

I'm pretty sure it's single-engine. The exhaust area doesn't look wide enough for two engines. Proportionally, this looks more like a precursor to the JSF rather than the ATF. No?

Either way, it's a beautiful design, in my opinion. Boeing's ATF proposal always struck me as somewhat awkward looking.

 

[Sundog]

Based on what I've seen, in terms of dates on the drawings, these are post JSF designs.

Also, the tailed version of the design I first posted at the top was actually shown in another thread here, but I don't recall which one.

 

[Lampshade111]

I too have read that the YF-24 is actually some sort of prototype. Yet some claim that the F-24 designation was supposed to be the designation for the F-35. According to this story a project manager messed up and said F-35 (since it was developed from the X-35) and they changed the designation as a result.

I believe somebody here said the JSF website said F-24 for a short time before they changed that around, but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

 

[flateric]

interesting that after three years of search, I never found this particular pdf ;(

 

[Sundog]

I actually found it again about six months ago. I know I saved it somewhere, but I don't have access to my external HD's until my new PC is finished. My old one went down about two months ago and with moving, I haven't had time to get the new one squared away. I'll track it down for you then.

Unless it's on my old server PC, which is what I use for the time being. I'll check tonight.

 

[flateric]

machines are against us...

 

[frank]

If DoD had followed their own rules, the F-35 would be F-24. The X-35 = F-35 was a screw-up that went uncorrected.

I too have read that the YF-24 is actually some sort of prototype. Yet some claim that the F-24 designation was supposed to be the designation for the F-35. According to this story a project manager messed up and said F-35 (since it was developed from the X-35) and they changed the designation as a result.

I believe somebody here said the JSF website said F-24 for a short time before they changed that around, but I haven't seen any evidence of that.

 

[Stargazer]

Having said that, how convenient to skip 11 numbers when you want to have secret programs going unnoticed!

 

[hesham]

A tailless version of this, no?

Hi,

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960001960_1996101960.pdf

 

[Matej]

I am still missing the timeframe for the original MRF-24X. Sundog - have you access to that PDF now?

 

[quellish]

I am still missing the timeframe for the original MRF-24X. Sundog - have you access to that PDF now?

Baseline:

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADB212361

 

[Stargazer]

Here is a little "oddity" as far as the designation is concerned. This mid-1990s ATF configuration, developed as part of the INNOVATIVE CONTROL EFFECTORS (ICE) program, is described simply as the Boeing Model-24F. It does appears later in the document as the Model 1798 but that designation only applies to a "0.05 Scale Model of Configuration -24F" (also called "Wind Tunnel Model 1798"). The better-known MRF-24X (falsely described as "F-24") is exactly the same design but without a tail (it is also attached here for reference).

The baseline aircraft chosen for this effort was the Boeing developed advanced tactical aircraft designated the Model-24F, which is a single engine, diamond wing configuration with a conventional empennage designed for both the air-to-air and air-to-ground missions. The wing design is similar to the F-22, with standard control surfaces including ailerons, flaperons, horizontal tail, and rudders. Thrust vectoring (TV) is available on the baseline vehicle, resulting in reduced empennage size to take advantage of this capability. The reduced vertical fin size results in directionally unstable aircraft at supersonic speeds, but stability is augmented by sideslip feedback to the rudders.

Note that a second baseline aircraft was defined to meet the USN carrier suitability requirements.

Source:
INNOVATIVE CONTROL EFFECTORS (ICE)
Boeing Defense and Space Group, March 1996
AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND - WRIGHT LABORATORY WL-TR-96-3074

 

[Sundog]

Here is a little "oddity" as far as the designation is concerned. This mid-1990s ATF configuration, developed as part of the INNOVATIVE CONTROL EFFECTORS (ICE) program, is described simply as the Boeing Model-24F. It does appears later in the document as the Model 1798 but that designation only applies to a "0.05 Scale Model of Configuration -24F" (also called "Wind Tunnel Model 1798"). The better-known MRF-24X (falsely described as "F-24") is exactly the same design but without a tail (it is also attached here for reference).

Source:
INNOVATIVE CONTROL EFFECTORS (ICE)
Boeing Defense and Space Group, March 1996
AIR FORCE MATERIEL COMMAND - WRIGHT LABORATORY WL-TR-96-3074

I believe the same info is already in the thread on the ICE program.

 

[RavenOne]

Also came across this interesting article

Urban Ghosts Media is coming soon

We are doing some work on our site. Please come back later. We'll be up and running in no time.

www.urbanghostsmedia.com

Cheers

 

[flateric]

what is interesting about this one?
'article adapted from Storm Climb', which, meanwhile, just a rewrite of Dave Majumdar piece at DEW Line (who - 3.5 years after - have used SPF as source of his revelations (and wrong conclusions) and forget to mention it)

 

[RavenOne]

Mate,


It was an interesting read for me, anyhow for the year ord David M started at FG after I left as I know Stephen Trimble very well and DAvid M seemed to be inputting more into Stephens Dew Line.


Anyway I thought I was contributing something substantial to this thread as I like to think I have contributed quite substantially over them trying I have been a member here,


Cheers

 

[bobbymike]

This question has probably been asked and answered elsewhere but what platform would be more stealthy a twin tail like the F-22 or a tailless fighter with canards.

 

[Sundog]

This question has probably been asked and answered elsewhere but what platform would be more stealthy a twin tail like the F-22 or a tailless fighter with canards.

A tailless fighter with canards.

 

[quellish]

This question has probably been asked and answered elsewhere but what platform would be more stealthy a twin tail like the F-22 or a tailless fighter with canards.

It depends on too many things to list.

 

[kagemusha]

Is there any picture of wind tunnel model of this Boeing aircraft?

 

[bring_it_on]

New Era of Stealth, Tailless, Vectored Aircraft

https://www.scribd.com/doc/275222414/New-Era-of-Stealth-Tailless-Vectored-Aircraft?secret_password=CtnIOjRENVDugMibi2T8

 

[X-39]

Sorry for the Necro, but recently, there have been ongoing discussions by folks at Dreamlandresort (and ATS "Aircraft Projects"too) in light of the removal of the "YF-24" designation from the biography of former test pilot Joseph Lanni(https://www.dreamlandresort.com/forum/messages/54545.html):

http://web.archive.org/web/20041025033300/https://www.edwards.af.mil/units/bio/lanni-bio.html


Yep, as we can see it's gone (as of 2021): https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Biographies/Display/Article/108050/brigadier-general-joseph-a-lanni/

 

[VTOLicious]

What interests me is that PW-1442 engine. That's a new one.

@quellish Have you ever found out anything about that engine?

 

[quellish]

@quellish Have you ever found out anything about that engine?

Nope

 

[VTOLicious]

Maybe this

Nope

I couldn't find anything about it as well.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It might just be a notional parametric engine.

 

[SteveO]

Hi,

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19960001960_1996101960.pdf

Found a new working link and attached the report for wind tunnel testing of the Boeing Multi-Role Fighter configuration. How the F-32 could have looked without STOVL

Low-speed wind-tunnel investigation of a porous forebody and nose strakes for yaw control of a multirole fighter aircraft - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Low-speed wind-tunnel tests were conducted in the Langley 12-Foot Low-Speed Tunnel on a model of the Boeing Multirole Fighter (BMRF) aircraft. This single-seat, single-engine configuration was intended to be an F-16 replacement that would incorporate many of the design goals and advanced...

ntrs.nasa.gov

 

[flateric]

I actually found it again about six months ago. I know I saved it somewhere, but I don't have access to my external HD's until my new PC is finished. My old one went down about two months ago and with moving, I haven't had time to get the new one squared away. I'll track it down for you then.

Unless it's on my old server PC, which is what I use for the time being. I'll check tonight.

May I ask if you have achivied success?

 

[Sundog]

May I ask if you have achivied success?

I think I was referencing this Boeing FATE study.

 

[quellish]

May I ask if you have achivied success?

I know I have it but I’ve looked a number of times and haven’t found it yet. The paper was about something like advancements aircraft structures

 

[flateric]

I think I was referencing this Boeing FATE study.

Oh, this one was a giant almost 20 years long Gestalt closure. Zillion thanks!!

 

[Scott Kenny]

Found a new working link and attached the report for wind tunnel testing of the Boeing Multi-Role Fighter configuration. How the F-32 could have looked without STOVL

Low-speed wind-tunnel investigation of a porous forebody and nose strakes for yaw control of a multirole fighter aircraft - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

Low-speed wind-tunnel tests were conducted in the Langley 12-Foot Low-Speed Tunnel on a model of the Boeing Multirole Fighter (BMRF) aircraft. This single-seat, single-engine configuration was intended to be an F-16 replacement that would incorporate many of the design goals and advanced...

ntrs.nasa.gov

Doesn't look all that different, just pushed the inlet a lot farther back.

I bet it'd still have the thick wing for lots of fuel, though.