C-2 Greyhound Replacements: N-G Greyhound 21, Fokker F.28, MDD C-9 and others

[ChuckAnderson]

Hi Everyone!

Presented here is information on the Northrop Grumman C-2 Greyhound 21, a proposed jet-engined version of the standard C-2 Greyhound.

My source for this is Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1990-1991, and they describe the Greyhound 21 as a multi-mission carrier-based aircraft.

Jane's further describes the Greyhound 21:

"Fitted with turbofan engines in place of the Allison T56 turboprops, it could be used for anti-submarine/anti-surface vessel warfare, electronic surveillance, carrier onboard delivery and aerial refuelling missions. In the COD rold, the Greyhound 21 will be able to airlift a 4536 kg (10,000 lb) cargo payload; for other roles, the hold area will contain specialised mission equipment and system operators."

Chuck

 

[elmayerle]

As I've asked elsewhere, does Jane's say what the proposed engines were? I've got my ideas, but I'd like to see what was really spec'd out.

 

[TinWing]

Hi Everyone!

Presented here is information on the Northrop Grumman C-2 Greyhound 21, a proposed jet-engined version of the standard C-2 Greyhound.

My source for this is Jane's All the World's Aircraft 1990-1991, and they describe the Greyhound 21 as a multi-mission carrier-based aircraft.

Jane's further describes the Greyhound 21:

"Fitted with turbofan engines in place of the Allison T56 turboprops, it could be used for anti-submarine/anti-surface vessel warfare, electronic surveillance, carrier onboard delivery and aerial refuelling missions. In the COD rold, the Greyhound 21 will be able to airlift a 4536 kg (10,000 lb) cargo payload; for other roles, the hold area will contain specialised mission equipment and system operators."

Chuck

The same proposal appeared - again - in the 1999-2000 edition of Jane's All The World's Aircraft. I would assume that the proposal was revive as a CSA entry?

 

[rotorheadtx]

Hey gang, sorry to be a pest, but I'm trying to find some info on the Fokker F28 variant that was put forth as an entry in the USN's MMVX proposal. I have a single color painting in Bill Gunston's Warplanes of the Future, and am hoping that there might have been a 3-view published in a magazine or Janes at some point.

My idea is to convert a Revell Fokker 100 kit to something like the MMVX configuration, so any help would be greatly appreciated.

TIA
Tony

 

[F14]

Hi There,

There is a Fokker F28 COD brochure for sale on EBay, which includes a 3-view. You could try contacting the seller and requesting a scan of the 3-view:
http://cgi.ebay.com/FOKKER-F28-COD-CARRIER-DELIVERY-AIRCRAFT-LEAFLET-RARE_W0QQitemZ330119949518QQihZ014QQcategoryZ40051QQcmdZViewItem

There is already a scale model of this aircraft:
http://www.triple-f.eu/database/displayimage.php?album=lastup&cat=0&pos=24

If you want more info, this is what I have found on other websites:
- F28 COD was a Mk. 5000 with slatted wings.
- Carrier operation required a much stronger undercarriage and fuselage.
- Increased ailerons and spoilers
- RR Tay or GE F404 engines
- Intended for use as tanker or COD with 65 passengers and/or appropriate payload. EW or AEW was also considered possible.
- Fokker cooperated with Lockeed Aircraft Services when making its proposal to the U.S. Navy, but in the end an improved version of the Greyhound was selected.
- The flight tests in September 1983 were terminated.
- Costs of the program would have been approx. US $ 500 million.

 

[rotorheadtx]

D'Oh!! I didn't even think of checking EBAY............thanks for the info, it's got me going in the right direction now!

Cheers!
Tony

 

[CammNut]

Found this product card in my files. It's dated 3/98. Engines are almost certainly CF34-class. The interesting design feature is the undercarriage retracting into the engine nacelles. Not sure I've seen that anywhere else.

I dug this up as I was searching for info on Gulfstream's COD proposal combining the Fokker 100 fuselage with the GIV wing. I know I didn't imagine it - anyone have any info? It was offered in the competition that led to the C-2 being put back into production.

 

[elmayerle]

It looks like they left the turbofan's gas generator where the present turboprop's one is and adjusted the nacelle configuration to duct the fan exhaust around it. A fairly straightforward approach to improving the performance of the basic airframe without tremendous redesign.

 

[LowObservable]

CammNut

Don't recall a Gulfstream-Fokker proposal, but I do remember Fokker USA promoting the idea of an F28 Mk 4000 derivative for COD. Any documention is buried deep, deep in my basement. Very early 1980s, and even they admitted that they didn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of seeing it built.

 

[frank]

I've read of a DC-9 COD version as well. Don't recall any drawings or concepts.

CammNut

Don't recall a Gulfstream-Fokker proposal, but I do remember Fokker USA promoting the idea of an F28 Mk 4000 derivative for COD. Any documention is buried deep, deep in my basement. Very early 1980s, and even they admitted that they didn't have a snowflake's chance in hell of seeing it built.

 

[Sentinel Chicken]

There is art work of the F28 COD proposal in "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston and Terry Waddington's book on the DC-9 (Great Airliners Series) has a drawing of the DC-9 COD.

It had folding wings, deleted thrust reversers, refueling probe and the nose wheel was moved back and was extendable to improve AoA at takeoff. It was based on the Series 10 DC-9.

If I get a chance I'll try to get some low-res scans of both this weekend.

 

[hesham]

There is art work of the F28 COD proposal in "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston and Terry Waddington's book on the DC-9 (Great Airliners Series) has a drawing of the DC-9 COD.

It had folding wings, deleted thrust reversers, refueling probe and the nose wheel was moved back and was extendable to improve AoA at takeoff. It was based on the Series 10 DC-9.

If I get a chance I'll try to get some low-res scans of both this weekend.

The F-28COD;
http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1981/1981%20-%203133.pdf

 

[Pioneer]

There is art work of the F28 COD proposal in "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston and Terry Waddington's book on the DC-9 (Great Airliners Series) has a drawing of the DC-9 COD.

It had folding wings, deleted thrust reversers, refueling probe and the nose wheel was moved back and was extendable to improve AoA at takeoff. It was based on the Series 10 DC-9.

If I get a chance I'll try to get some low-res scans of both this weekend.

Any luck with finding that drawing of the DC-9 COD??

I think its in that "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston, that you mention - says that the F.28 DOD/Tanker was proposed with GE F404 engines - which make sense with onboard carrier compatibility with the F/A-18A/B/C/D series.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Mike OTDP]

I recall Pax River doing tests of an F28 in the early 1980s to evaluate the concept.

 

[The Artist]

There is art work of the F28 COD proposal in "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston and Terry Waddington's book on the DC-9 (Great Airliners Series) has a drawing of the DC-9 COD.

It had folding wings, deleted thrust reversers, refueling probe and the nose wheel was moved back and was extendable to improve AoA at takeoff. It was based on the Series 10 DC-9.

If I get a chance I'll try to get some low-res scans of both this weekend.

Any luck with finding that drawing of the DC-9 COD??

I think its in that "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston, that you mention - says that the F.28 DOD/Tanker was proposed with GE F404 engines - which make sense with onboard carrier compatibility with the F/A-18A/B/C/D series.

Regards
Pioneer

I've looked at my copy of the Great Airliners DC-9 book and I can see that there may be a copyright issue with posting that image (and another one) here.

The drawings of the C-9 COD and the ATEWS - Advanced Tactical Electronic Warfare System - are both clearly tagged with a copyright notice. The copyright holder's name is Victor Archer.

A description of the C-9 is as follows. Nose gear moved 12.5 feet aft. Nose gear strut capable of extending to give the aircraft a 6-degree nose up attitude for takeoff. Local strengthening for the arresting hook which was positioned on the underside (externally) under the engine location. A large tail bumper added on the underside roughly in line with the exhaust end of the engine. Wing folding was explored with the fold being at either of two locations. On one, the folded span would be 58.5 foot. On the other the folded span would have been 47 foot. In flight refueling probe extending from the lower left fuselage angling up then leveling again ahead of the nose at a level roughly that of the lower edge of the windscreen. Pylon attach points about 12 foot inboard of each wing tip. These pylons could have held the "buddy" refueling system. Thrust reversers omitted and replaced with simple exhaust cones. Air-stairs omitted. --- Paraphrased from Great Airliners Volume 4: McDonnell Douglas DC-9, Terry Waddington, 1998. Pgs. 81-82.

I hope this description is helpful.

Mike

 

[frank]

Thanks for the info. As has been mentioned before, whether or not a drawing, pic, etc., has the copyright actually on it, it belongs to whomever drew it, wrote it, took the pic, etc. Essentially, if it's not yours or your creation, it's copyrighted by someone else whether it actually states it or not.

There is art work of the F28 COD proposal in "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston and Terry Waddington's book on the DC-9 (Great Airliners Series) has a drawing of the DC-9 COD.

It had folding wings, deleted thrust reversers, refueling probe and the nose wheel was moved back and was extendable to improve AoA at takeoff. It was based on the Series 10 DC-9.

If I get a chance I'll try to get some low-res scans of both this weekend.

Any luck with finding that drawing of the DC-9 COD??

I think its in that "Warplanes of the Future" by Bill Gunston, that you mention - says that the F.28 DOD/Tanker was proposed with GE F404 engines - which make sense with onboard carrier compatibility with the F/A-18A/B/C/D series.

Regards
Pioneer

I've looked at my copy of the Great Airliners DC-9 book and I can see that there may be a copyright issue with posting that image (and another one) here.

The drawings of the C-9 COD and the ATEWS - Advanced Tactical Electronic Warfare System - are both clearly tagged with a copyright notice. The copyright holder's name is Victor Archer.

A description of the C-9 is as follows. Nose gear moved 12.5 feet aft. Nose gear strut capable of extending to give the aircraft a 6-degree nose up attitude for takeoff. Local strengthening for the arresting hook which was positioned on the underside (externally) under the engine location. A large tail bumper added on the underside roughly in line with the exhaust end of the engine. Wing folding was explored with the fold being at either of two locations. On one, the folded span would be 58.5 foot. On the other the folded span would have been 47 foot. In flight refueling probe extending from the lower left fuselage angling up then leveling again ahead of the nose at a level roughly that of the lower edge of the windscreen. Pylon attach points about 12 foot inboard of each wing tip. These pylons could have held the "buddy" refueling system. Thrust reversers omitted and replaced with simple exhaust cones. Air-stairs omitted. --- Paraphrased from Great Airliners Volume 4: McDonnell Douglas DC-9, Terry Waddington, 1998. Pgs. 81-82.

I hope this description is helpful.

Mike

 

[The Artist]

Thanks for the info. As has been mentioned before, whether or not a drawing, pic, etc., has the copyright actually on it, it belongs to whomever drew it, wrote it, took the pic, etc. Essentially, if it's not yours or your creation, it's copyrighted by someone else whether it actually states it or not.

I understand that. What I was trying to say is that these drawings are not project drawings from the company, these are drawings done by a third party who has incorporated the copyright notice into the signature within the drawing - and that clearly makes them unsuitable for posting here.

Mike

 

[aim9xray]

Perhaps these will help...

 

[The Artist]

Perhaps these will help...

Yes. Thanks.

The illustration in the book is just a left profile drawing.

A note on the placement of the nose gear. The nose gear strut is directly below the "U" of the word United in the profile drawing.

Mike

 

[alanqua]

Hi everybody,

Here is a scan of the picture of the Fokker F28 COD. It was proposed for the MMVX program. Does the C-9 COD was proposed for the same competition, or is it totally independant?
Does anybody has more materials on this F28 COD to share? I'm desperately seekink documentation on that. I remember Fokker published some slides...

Thanks, regards.
Alain

 

[TinWing]

Deleted

 

[hesham]

We discussed that before,here;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,662.msg25681/highlight,1981+3133.html#msg25681

 

[northerndancer2000]

Several years ago, there was a Fokker F.28 COD brochure on EBAY. There are also two articles in Flight International from 1981 as well:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1981/1981%20-%203133.html

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1981/1981%20-%202386.html

One of the Flight articles mentions a DHC proposal for a DHC-5 Buffalo which was not taken up as the wings would not fold. Does anyone have any details of the DHC proposal?

 

[Hobbes]

I recently bought a Fokker F.28 COD brochure on eBay, I'll try and get it scanned this week. It consists of copies from a set of overhead projection sheets, so there's less information than I hoped for. It does have a nice 3-view.
They offered the F-28 for these roles: COD/tanker (these could be combined in the same aircraft), ELINT and AEW. Engines either larger Speys (it says Rolls 183-03, haven't been able to find specs of that variant) or F-404. The standard F-28 had about 44 kN of thrust per engine, I haven't worked out yet what the COD proposal would have but it could be as much as 50% more.

 

[Hobbes]

Here's a summary of the brochure:

• Tanker-2 cycle (4.0 hrs) productivity 1.27 to 1.

• AEW-planar antenna, 2 operators, spare RIOs. 6.7 hrs on station @ 300 n.m. From zz

• elint/comint - five stations, 2 spare operators. 5.1 hrs on station @ 500 n.m. From zz

• COD/land based support. 10,000 lbs 2300 n.m. Sea/land based. Can be combined with tanker

Study conclusions

• it is feasible to incorporate the capability to catapult and arrest aboard CVA class 59 and superior carriers. WOD with one engine inoperative on a tropical day: (90°f): catapult 17 kts, arrest 4 kts
  
• study takeoff weight 86,000 lb with 10,000 lb payload.
  
• Low speed flying qualities expected to be suitable with modest increase in roll rate.
  
• Derivative design should be able to meet all mil spec requirements stipulated by navairsyscom or necessary for a cod aircraft design.
  
• Nose landing gear which is extendable 45 inches to p erform dual function of providing adequate wing angle of attack for catapulting, as well as to allow the tail to clear hangar door, will pose a difficult design task and is a risk to cost and schedule commitments.
  
• Can successfully operate from class 59 or superior carriers.

Carrier suit configuration changes:

• nose gear
  
• wing fold
  
• beef up to 21 fps sink rate
  
• re-engine ge-404 or rolls 183-03
  
• arresting hook
  
• Full leading edge slats
  
• Tanker: wingtip reel pods and fuselage drogue. No fuel tanks on cargo deck

The brochure goes into cargo/fuel capacity and time on station (lots of diagrams)
deck spotting compared to E-2 and A-3: 1ft in both dimensions more than E-2.
takeoff and landing (positive rate of climb with one engine out unlike the C-2), good approach characteristics thanks to tail air brake
Program cost $700M for 20 aircraft, compared to $1.2B for the C-2

I've attached the full brochure (39 pages, 4 Mb).

 

[Hobbes]

Another image I came across, this is artwork Fokker commissioned for a magazine ad.
The same image appears in the brochure, unfortunately it's a crappy b/w photocopy.

This version I found at http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2011/05/carrier-onboard-delivery.html

 

[Stargazer]

Beautiful! Thanks for sharing.

 

[Hobbes]

I've started building a model of the F-28 COD, a build report is over here: http://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php/topic,35270.0.html

 

[Pioneer]

I've just come across Zebedee's post titled 'British Aerospace Type 849 NGMR' on this means!
If you click on the link he has posted you will see that Hawker-Siddeley/British Aerospace proposed a COD variant of its Type 748 to the U.S Navy in 1972 + a neat profile drawing!!! (unfortunately I can't work out how to post the drawing on hear )
It's probably more suitable to the comp, which derived the actual Grumman C-2 Greyhound, rather than its replacement, but all the same I though you might be interested!!

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Hobbes]

re-engine ge-404 or rolls 183-03

I just found out the RR 183-03 is the RR Tay. The Tay variant used on the Fokker 70 and 100 produces 62 kN, up from the 44 kN of the F-28 Speys. So they wer looking at a significant upgrade.

 

[blackstar]

Another image I came across, this is artwork Fokker commissioned for a magazine ad.
The same image appears in the brochure, unfortunately it's a crappy b/w photocopy.

This version I found at http://thanlont.blogspot.com/2011/05/carrier-onboard-delivery.html

I missed that when you posted it earlier in May. Much earlier in the thread you'll see that I mentioned how I remembered this artwork but could not find it. I went looking through old copies of Proceedings, but couldn't locate it. The plane looked too big for a carrier, but other posts here show that it was not all that large compared to other planes like the F-14.

Thanks for posting it.

 

[Hobbes]

I bought one of those brochures, see http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,662.msg153060.html#msg153060


(mods: maybe merge the topics?)

 

[Antonio]

merged

 

[Triton]

1.72 scale resin Fokker F.28 COD proposal model by IMC.

Source:
http://www.triple-f.eu/database/displayimage.php?album=5&pos=61

 

[Triton]

Photo of Boeing 727 Carrier Support concept circa 1965 found on ebay.

Source:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/1965-Boeing-727-Press-Photo-/200794131566?pt=Art_Photo_Images&hash=item2ec0434c6e

 

[Triton]

Would the Boeing 727 be too big for carrier resupply operations?

 

[Jemiba]

Span is less, than that of a Herk, which proofed to be "carrier capable", weight maybe somewhat higher,
but I don't think, that the 727 has the same STOL capabilities, as the Herk. And probably even the
Fokker F-28 COD has a shorter take-off distance.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

Since nobody has come up with an answer, I will speculate. This might have been a Boeing proposition to the Navy for a small fleet of airplanes to provide high-speed transport of time-critical spares and technicians to airports around the world, from which the hardware and people would be delivered to aircraft carriers at sea via the conventional COD. Range would be important; cargo bay size would not. That suggests the 727 freighter as a cost-effective transport for the mission.

For what it's worth Boeing did propose its 737 as a true COD.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

Note that the Navy operates Gulfstream C-20Gs in this high-speed world-wide logistics role that Boeing might have proposed the 727 for. The Air Force does (or did) operate a few 727s as the C-22.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

here is the DC-9 COD and DC-9 ATEWS;from McDonnell Douglas DC-9 by Terry Waddington,book.