Rockwell NR-356 Sea Control Ship (SCS) V/STOL fighter (XFV-12A)

[sferrin]

A worthy project - it might not have succeeded but its an interesting bit of aviation heritage.

For years as a kid it's image stuck in my head as the wave of the future.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

in old magazine,I remember that I saw an artist drawing to a project
developed from XFV-12,but with inverted wing position,the canard
wing was high and the rear one was low.

Can anybody find this drawing?,I remember that,it from my papers,
but where ?.

 

[flateric]

http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oce/appel/ask-academy/issues/volume4/ata_4-8_maciej_zborowski.html

October 28, 2011 — Vol. 4, Issue 8
ASK Magazine
Young Professional Brief

Maciej “Mac” Zborowski is restoring the fuselage of a XFV-12A plane found in the middle of a vacant field so he can share its story with the public.


Mac Zborowski, 33, is an industrial design contractor at Glenn Research Center, who has worked on various projects since 2003. He moved to Ohio in 1986 from Warsaw, Poland. His background in industrial design and engineering has afforded him the opportunity to do everything from working on planes, developing fuel-cell powered cars, to working as a photographer in Chicago. Currently he is working at Glenn’s Power Systems Facility on a power beaming project. In his spare time, he has been dusting off a bit of history and share the story.

ASK The Academy: You’ve been volunteering your time with a cadre of others on a restoration project with the fuselage of a XFV-12A. What is it and how did you get started on it?

Maciej Zborowski: The XFV-12A is an aircraft that was developed here in Ohio by Rockwell International to take off vertically and fly at supersonic speeds. It was developed off a U.S. Navy contract in the '70s and early '80s. It was cancelled in '81 and somehow, part of the fuselage—the cockpit—was found by a friend of mine in the middle of a field at Plum Brook Station in Sandusky, Ohio, which is part of NASA Glenn Research Center. My buddy was working out there and he sent me a text message with a picture of this mysterious thing. Within two days we figured out that there was only one of these in the world and we have it. The director out at Plum Brook Station, General David L. Stringer, signed it over from scrap status into artifact status. So we got our Indiana Jones whips and hats, and we've been restoring it so we can show off Ohio’s cool aviation research history.

Even though the XFV-12A was not a successful program, it shows you that just because you fail does not mean that you're failing at research. If you want to paraphrase Edison, it's not that you've failed 2000 times at making a light bulb, but you were successful at finding out that there's 2,000 ways of how not to make a light bulb, and just one to make one work!

It's a pretty neat little artifact to have in your portfolio, whether it's Ohio or the United States or NASA. The restoration is a great project. Sometimes research can be very nebulous to nontechnical people. It's one way of introducing someone to what research is and how it works.

ATA: Where is the plane fuselage now?


Zborowski: Right now it is in the old carpenter shop, basically in a small shack out in the middle of a field at Plum Brook Station. We've been ripping stuff out of it and making it kid friendly—removing sharp objects and sprucing it up. I’ve been taking a scrub brush to it and cleaning it. As soon as it gets painted, it will be sent to a museum or to other facility as an interactive exhibit. We're all doing this on a volunteer basis. To kids and people with some imagination, it's going to be the best thing they’ve ever sat in.

ATA: Your portfolio of experience is broad. As a practiced problem solver, how do you typically approach a new challenge or experience?

Zborowski: With a sketchbook! One of my favorite things to do is draw. When you get down to it, drawing to me is imaging the problem. Imaging the solution is fine, but remembering that solution or putting that solution into some kind of coordinate system, whether it is on a piece of paper or on a computer, that is where the magic happens. So I start out with a sketchbook, pencil, paper and lots of tea or coffee. When I have a new challenge given to me, I try to learn from it as much as possible to gain as much knowledge and experiences as I can.

Throughout the process of working on the XFV-12A I’ve learned a lot about different types of paints and surface treatments, and how different metals age. I’ve also learned that you shouldn’t put your face next to a hydraulic hose that potentially has hydraulic fluid still in it from thirty years ago!

I've also talked to some of the guys who were involved with the testing of the plane at Langley Research Center. Some of the modeling and dynamics research was done here at Glenn, and then they shipped the XFV-12A off to Langley to test it on a big A-frame to see if it would hover. They also studied the dynamics of the Coandă effect.

ATA: What is the Coandă effect?

Zborowski: Pretend that you are in a car and you stick your hand out the window with all of your fingers pointing towards the front of the car, like an airplane kind of waving your hand up and down out the window. Just like an airplane wing, but with your fingertips pointing towards the front of the car. The air rushing over the top of your hand naturally creates a low-pressure area above. If you start pointing your fingertips up, so that they're perpendicular to the road, there are eddies that come off your fingertips, and basically your hand stalls. It's the same thing that happens to an airplane if it stalls.

In the Coandă effect, the air going over the top of your hand would stick to your hand, essentially pulling it upwards. So no matter what angle you position your hand, it would not stall.

This was what made the XFV-12A special. It used moveable flaps in the wings and canard, to direct engine exhaust though the flaps and thereby causing the surrounding air to be directed in a different direction, all the while not separating or stalling from the surface of the flap. This thing looks like something from Battlestar Galactica. It does not look like a regular airplane you’ve seen. There's no vertical surface. It's a pretty weird looking airplane, especially for the 1970's. Fast-forward to today, the F-35 Lighting II is an airplane being developed by Lockheed Martin for the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. Marines, and the U.S. Navy. One of the F-35 models will take off vertically and also be supersonic. Imagine the fact that they were trying to do this in the '70s. They were barking up the right tree, they just didn't know of the ducting losses and airflow issues they would encounter. We're just getting around to solving that problem.

ATA: Why is it important to restore something like the XFV-12A?


Zborowski: I think that it’s a prerequisite for working at NASA. Not only are we the best of the best, but we should take every opportunity that’s sensible for us to interact with the public. If there’s an opportunity that presents itself, we should be cognizant of that, run with it, and see where it goes.

When I found out about this fuselage being out in the middle of a field, waiting to be scrapped, and finding out that it’s a prototype that is basically the definition of research, that’s when a couple of us grabbed it by the horns and decided to go do something with it.

I will admit that it’s been hard work. Plum Brook Station is about an hour away from Glenn. During the summer it was like an oven in the shop and certain parts are hard to come by. It’s been tough work, but I think the end goal is pretty well worth it.

Image courtesy of Maciej Zborowski

 

[The Coanda Project]

Update:

The Coanda Project Student Kickoff took place this past Thursday with 38 students and instructors from EHOVE (Erie Huron Ottawa Vocational Education) in Milan, Ohio, USA.

We have also located cockpit hardware and instruments which is a big plus.

I will update with links in the coming days.

 

[James]

It would have been one hell of a machine.

 

[Stargazer]

This topic has been moved from the "Postwar Aircraft Projects" to the "Aerospace" section since the project reached the prototype stage. And although the aircraft was never flown, it was extensively tested and did take off in tethered mode.

Other SCS-related topics:

• VFA: V/STOL Fighters for Sea Control Ships (XFV-12 rivals) here. (topic devoted to the whole program, not specific designs)
• Convair (G.D.) Models 200, 201 and 218 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighters here.
• Grumman G-607 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here.
• Vought (LTV) V-517 and V-520 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighters here.
• Fairchild-Republic FR-150 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here.
• Boeing Model 908-535 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here and here.
• Bell « Seakat » Sea Control Ship (SCS) sensor carrier proposal here.
• Sea Control Ship (SCS) and VSTOL Support Ship (VSS) here.

Also see the Advanced Harrier Projects topic here for the Hawker Siddeley/McDonnell Douglas AV-16 contender.

Please post your future contributions regarding the VFA / Sea Control Ship programs in the appropriate topic. Thanks!

 

[Rafael]

Hi,

in old magazine,I remember that I saw an artist drawing to a project
developed from XFV-12,but with inverted wing position,the canard
wing was high and the rear one was low.

Can anybody find this drawing?,I remember that,it from my papers,
but where ?.

I believe is this one:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,6564.msg151897.html#msg151897

Rafa

 

[taildragger]

Though, if it's a scaling issue, couldn't it be tested with a large rig in a wind tunnel? Why build a whole aircraft?

I can imagine that full-scale wind-tunnel testing of something like this would be difficult and of limited value:
- the fundamental question of whether the principle worked when scaled up could be answered in still air - no need for a wind tunnel. If it worked in still air, it was likely to work in transition.
- the walls of any reasonably-sized wind tunnel would affect the airflow around the full-size rig in the VTOL & transition modes, reducing the results' value
- I'd imagine that operating a full-scale jet-lift rig inside a wind tunnel would threaten the structural integrity of the wind tunnel in unpredictable ways.
Also, remember that the aircraft as built wasn't much more than a test rig. The only major sections designed from scratch were the wing, canard and aft fuselage (ie - the lift system). The center and forward fuselage as well as landing gear were salvaged from other aircraft.

 

[Stargazer]

The center and aft fuselage as well as landing gear were salvaged from other aircraft.

Really?!? I didn't know that! And what aircraft types would that be?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

*Forward* fuselage and landing gear of an A-4 Skyhawk, also the wing box, air intakes, and fuel tanks of an F-4 Phantom II.


Another source:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1979/1979%20-%200177.html

When the programme got under way in 1973, Rockwell designers decided to use the existing A-4 cockpit and landing gear and modified F-4 wing spars and intakes. New propulsion controls were designed, the engine was borrowed from the F-14 Tomcat programme

 

[Stargazer]

From THRUST AUGMENTING EJECTORS, published by the ARL in June 1975:

 

[Johnbr]

Found this on the net.

 

[Stargazer]

Found this on the net.

Splendid! Thanks John.

 

[hesham]

Hi,


The Rockwell report NA-86-0015 contains a Propulsive Wing/Canard concept
in the STOL fighter configuration,who can ID it?;

Low speed wind tunnel test of a propulsive wing/canard concept in the STOL configuration. Volume 1: Test description and discussion of results

Low speed wind tunnel test of a propulsive wing/canard concept in the STOL configuration. Volume 1: Test description and discussion of results - NASA Technical Reports Server (NTRS)

A propulsive wing/canard model was tested at STOL operating conditions in the NASA Langley Research Center 4 x 7 meter wind tunnel. Longitudinal and lateral/directional aerodynamic characteristics were measured for various flap deflections, angles of attack and sideslip, and blowing...

ntrs.nasa.gov

[updated link - Admin'

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Its a generic fighter model testing an XFV-12 style augmenter wing concept.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Paul.

 

[Stargazer]

A small picture, but not seen before in this topic (a slightly different angle appeared in the first page but in black and white only):

 

[Graham1973]

From Pages 174 & 175 of the 1974 editon of "The Observers Book of Aircraft"

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All -

I am scanning a number of XFV-12A photos from the Gerald Balzer collection. Here's a few to tease you a bit...

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Triton]

Thank you, Mark! B)

 

[Stargazer]

Keep' em comin', Mark. This is beautiful!

 

[Jemiba]

The first time, I see a FV-12 with arrestor hook and catapult gear ! What's that in aid of ?
To allow for take-off with extreme loads and to bring it back onto the deck again ? As an
emergency measure ?
For a VSTOL/STOVL design it still seems to be a waste of weight.
Nevertheless, many thanks for posting !

 

[Triton]

The first time, I see a FV-12 with arrestor hook and catapult gear ! What's that in aid of ?
To allow for take-off with extreme loads and to bring it back onto the deck again ? As an
emergency measure ?
For a VSTOL/STOVL design it still seems to be a waste of weight.
Nevertheless, many thanks for posting !

Could it have been a CTOL variant of the FV-12A design? We have seen a CTOL variant of the Convair 200 VSTOL in the Convair 201.

 

[Sundog]

The first time, I see a FV-12 with arrestor hook and catapult gear ! What's that in aid of ?
To allow for take-off with extreme loads and to bring it back onto the deck again ? As an
emergency measure ?
For a VSTOL/STOVL design it still seems to be a waste of weight.
Nevertheless, many thanks for posting !

It looks like it is still using a "STOL" aspect of the VTOL system, so my guess is they are showing it recovering with more weight than it would be able to in pure VTOL mode.

 

[Jemiba]

The most heavily armed FV-12 variant I've seen, was the (twin engined) one shown
by circle 5 (#59, 60). This one here looks more or less unarmed, but of course, maybe
it's landing with full tanks. Don't think, that this picture should be taken that seriously,
apart from the fact, that the FV-12A was intended to be CTOL capable. And exactly that's
something, I still don't understand. Cross deck operations between conventional and VSTOL-
carriers ?

 

[The Artist]

Or was that picture done to give the Aviators a reason to get excited about the plane? See, it will land on a carrier.

 

[Grey Havoc]

The most heavily armed FV-12 variant I've seen, was the (twin engined) one shown
by circle 5 (#59, 60). This one here looks more or less unarmed, but of course, maybe
it's landing with full tanks. Don't think, that this picture should be taken that seriously,
apart from the fact, that the FV-12A was intended to be CTOL capable. And exactly that's
something, I still don't understand. Cross deck operations between conventional and VSTOL-
carriers ?

Apart from cross-decking, long range ferrying would have likely been a consideration.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day!

A few photos of the mock up under construction for your viewing pleasure...

Photos courtesy of the Gerald Balzer Collection.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

...and a few more plus some odds and ends. The A-4 cockpit was used for the mock up and the flight article as were F-4 Phantom II intakes. You can see the "organ donors" in the background of a few of the images.

I'll post more later after some more scanning.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

...and a few more from today's scans...

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[circle-5]

Thank you Mark -- good photos!

 

[BlackBat242]

Other SCS-related topics:

• VFA: V/STOL Fighters for Sea Control Ships (XFV-12 rivals) here. (topic devoted to the whole program, not specific designs)
• Convair (G.D.) Models 200, 201 and 218 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighters here.
• Grumman G-607 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here.
• Vought (LTV) V-517 and V-520 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighters here.
• Fairchild-Republic FR-150 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here.
• Boeing Model 908-535 Sea Control Ship (SCS) fighter here and here.
• Bell « Seakat » Sea Control Ship (SCS) sensor carrier proposal here.
• Sea Control Ship (SCS) and VSTOL Support Ship (VSS) here.

Also see the Advanced Harrier Projects topic here for the Hawker Siddeley/McDonnell Douglas AV-16 contender.

Don't the fairly successful Canadair CL-84 tilt-wing.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,10291.0.html
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4267.0.html

 

[hesham]

Hi,


here is a report about Rockwell XFV-12.


http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a108354.pdf

 

[hesham]

Hi,


here is a report from DTIC,shows the aircraft modification for rectangular augmenters,
and a comparison with anther designs.


http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a124264.pdf

 

[fightingirish]

Here an article about the Rockwell XFV-12A published in the German magazine Flug-Revue.
Some of the pictures might have been posted already in this topic or in other topics.
Source: FLUG REVUE Ausgabe 10/2014: Senkrechtstarter-Prototyp Rockwell XFV-12A

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

A conventional takeoff derivative of XFV-12 was created for VFAX requirement.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Sweet! I like that variant!

 

[Pioneer]

Sweet! I like that variant!

But after the debacle that was the XFV-12, would the US Navy really have considered a conventional take-off derivative of XFV-12 for its VFAX requirement?
The whole sad thing is, if the US Navy had of selected either the Vought V-536 or the Convair Model 200, then a conventional take-off and landing derivative of either of these designs would have probably have made VFAX both feasible, and do I dare say it - cost effective!
A Sad sad lost opportunity and capability for the USN and USMC :-[

Regards
Pioneer

 

[AeroFranz]

Reading the Code One article on the three bearing swiveling nozzle, the author asserts that the XFV-12 was possibly chosen BECAUSE it was the least likely to succeed and would have resulted in the demise of the unpopular Sea Control Ship and V/STOL aircraft

 

[Motocar]

Very Good