Rockwell pre-ATF and ATF studies

[apparition13]

Well, according to Dan Raymer, who worked on Rockwell's ATF and worked a HIMAT-based baseline and a new design by Dan, the HIMAT design was only good at transonic speed and was no good for supersonic manoeuvrability or supercruise compared to Dan's new ATF design.

I prefer the look of the Grumman designs, but I wouldn't object to a supercruise fly off between the two.

 

[SCAT-15F]

Yes, HiMAT was particularly good in the transonic range: .8 to 1.2 mach. I have no idea how good it was beyond that speed. Still, it would kick butt on the F-35 or anything current.
Now, the F-14 with the wing glove vanes was capable of pulling 7G at mach 2+. Of course the Navy deleted them for the B and D. Ignorant, short sighted thinking to say the least.
Of course, the US military decided that supersonic combat was irrelevant in the late 80's to the present. They decided that electronics were more important than anything else. Ignorance is bliss.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Yes, HiMAT was particularly good in the transonic range: .8 to 1.2 mach. I have no idea how good it was beyond that speed. Still, it would kick butt on the F-35 or anything current.
Now, the F-14 with the wing glove vanes was capable of pulling 7G at mach 2+. Of course the Navy deleted them for the B and D. Ignorant, short sighted thinking to say the least.
Of course, the US military decided that supersonic combat was irrelevant in the late 80's to the present. They decided that electronics were more important than anything else. Ignorance is bliss.

I'm still not sure how much supersonic combat will happen. Supersonic cruise to get from Point A to Point B? absolutely, the B-1s flying in Afghanistan proved that was a good idea. But you have maybe 2 hard turns, 6+ gees, before you are transonic at best.

 

[hesham]

I don't remember the source ?.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

That's from Dan Raymer's book Living in the Future.