Unknown VSTOL - Yet another mystery to solve!

[allysonca]

OK pundits... here is a good one for you. I am scratching my head on the maker and the model. In looking at the construction of the model and the paint it is reminiscent of a Rick Southwick who did a lot of work for Convair, but that is just speculation at best. Canopy looks kinda Lockheed-ish but open to thoughts? All I know is I WANT it!

 

[Stargazer]

OK pundits... here is a good one for you. I am scratching my head on the maker and the model. In looking at the construction of the model and the paint it is reminiscent of a Rick Southwick who did a lot of work for Convair, but that is just speculation at best. Canopy looks kinda Lockheed-ish but open to thoughts? All I know is I WANT it!

Wow... My first thought on seeing the model was "Convair", but it was just a hunch, nothing solid to back it up. On closer look, I find that the shape of the tail reminds me of North American (the XA2J-1 Super Savage). The way the cockpit is painted also makes me think of some North American models I've seen before (though that particular technique is probably related to the model maker and not the aircraft manufacturer).

This is obviously a short take-off type, and I suspect it used the Allison T40 just like the "Pogo" and "Salmon" did... but I can't see what Air Force competition or requirement this could have been submitted to. It's pretty much unlike anything I've seen this far.

 

[allysonca]

You know.... now that you mention it Rick Southwick DID do models for NAA (and Lockheed) as well. I've had the Super Savage and a plethora of variants in the collection but he never did the canopies this way in all I've had, so who knows. But all that being said, the maker style is so close to Southwick this is my best guess so far. Let's see if anyone else has some ideas or perhaps drawings.

 

[litzj]

probably the family of this famous vtol project

 

[TomcatViP]

A STOL version of this VTOL aircraft?

 

[hesham]

Hi,

there is nothing the two books about Lockheed Convoy neither Convair Convoy book,also no drawing
is in AAHS ?.

 

[aim9xray]

I'd like to offer the possibility that this is a the Fairchild M-171 "Fighter Bomber" or M-171A "Advanced Base Fighter". The connection is tenuous but based on:

1) While we know what everyone else's T40-based fighter concepts look like, we don't know what Fairchild's looked like.

2) This is not a tail-sitter, but looks like a deflected thrust wing (multiple flap segments) which is very consistent with Fairchild's research thrust.

3) The blue shading/wash technique used to highlight the canopy and more importantly the control surfaces does look like that applied on other period Fairchild in-house models.

Again, this is rather speculative, but may be worth discussion.

 

[Stargazer]

I'd like to offer the possibility that this is a the Fairchild M-171 "Fighter Bomber" or M-171A "Advanced Base Fighter".

I have never heard of these projects before. Do you have access to a complete list of Fairchild M- projects, by chance?
An M-171 proposal would be dated circa 1952, which is consistent with the design, I think.
However, I find it hard to imagine this type as a bomber... The fuselage it too narrow for it to carry bombs, and racks below the wings would kind of negate the STOL effect, wouldn't it? So a fighter, yes, why not?

 

[hesham]

Hi,

I suspected in Fairchild at first,but I afraid no one will be going to believe me,anyway,it
needs a good search.

 

[Grey Havoc]

With regards as to the M-171, if I recall an article I came across years ago correctly, it was intended to carry a single lightweight atomic weapon for tactical use. As to the model, I think that it is indeed the M-171 or M-171A (I'm leaning towards the latter at the moment).

 

[Orionblamblam]

With regards as to the M-171, if I recall an article I came across years ago correctly, it was intended to carry a single lightweight atomic weapon for tactical use.

Jeez, I would *not* want to go into a combat zone carrying a nuke while flying a slow-ass STOL turboprop.

 

[Jeb]

You're the guidance package!

 

[Orionblamblam]

You're the guidance package!

I've always had a disdain for kamikaze attacks, but realistically expending one life to set off a nuke properly is very likely good math. Still, I wouldn't want it to be *my* life, and thus I'd want to fly in an aircraft where the air speed indicator isn't measured in weeks.

 

[TomS]

With regards as to the M-171, if I recall an article I came across years ago correctly, it was intended to carry a single lightweight atomic weapon for tactical use.

Jeez, I would *not* want to go into a combat zone carrying a nuke while flying a slow-ass STOL turboprop.

If it was anything like the XFY-1 and XFV-1, which had the same engine and about the same size, it would be anything but slow. Those were around 480-500 knots. A STOL wing would slow it down some but not that much. Certainly it would be faster than the A1D, which did a turn as a nuke delivery platform as well.

 

[allysonca]

Ok kids.... have some more pictures. Hope to perhaps get it and add to the collection, but if not I can now carve one. Any more thoughts - anyone? I LOVE mysteries. Tony may be right with the Fairchild association, but the paint fade on the flying surfaces has been used by many model makers.

 

[LowObservable]

You're the guidance package!

I've always had a disdain for kamikaze attacks, but realistically expending one life to set off a nuke properly is very likely good math. Still, I wouldn't want it to be *my* life, and thus I'd want to fly in an aircraft where the air speed indicator isn't measured in weeks.

Off-topic, I know, but I wouldn't mind betting that the all-time speed record for any propeller-driven aircraft was set on October 30, 1961.

 

[sferrin]

LOL ;D

 

[Orionblamblam]

Does not look like much in the way of internal payload. Just aft of the nose gear bay is an engine inlet (which is offset to port, with the starboard half of the fuselage taken up by what looks like more of the nose gear), then panel lines (on top and bottom) that probably indicate where the turboshaft engine sits. The wingtip pods probably would have packed guns, maybe rockets.

Assuming that the props are the same as from the Pogo, rough diagrams can be made of the craft and scale determined. If it carried nukes or other payload, it must've done so externally. But there don't seem to be any attachment points, so the model, at least, likely never had ordnance. This *may* indicate that the design was an experimental craft, not an operational one.

 

[Dynoman]

The design reminds me more of the Douglas A2D Skyshark than the others mentioned. The limited internal space for payload may indicate that the loads were externally carried as mentioned before. The canopy design suggests one crewmember and its STOL configuration may lend itself more to a forward deployed CAS or counter-insurgency role (circa early-1950's) more in the category of an AD-1 Skyraider or A2D Skyshark with emphasis on STOL capabilities. Also, it looks like a conformal inlet on the bottom with panel lines for engine access towards the rear of the 'inlet.' Exhaust 'ports' on either side of the fuselage under the horizontal stabilizer appears small (painted dark grey).

 

[allysonca]

OK Pundits - here is another good one to speculate on that I had posted earlier. I just picked this up and added to my collection and as I stated in that earlier post, the maker and mission is unknown, so let's see if we can once and for all figure out what the heck this is and the who the heck made it stuff. Kind of neet and unique to be sure. I was hoping it would be larger as I prefer the big is better model formula. It's 10 inches front to back and a wing span of 7.24. It's made of a hard wood with a high quality and top level skill of fit and finish, the model maker style is reminiscent of RV Southwick (but higher skills of carving) in that it looks to be perhaps Convairish in style of finish paint and flying surface details, now that I have my hot little hands on it, but your guess is as good as mine. No holes for a stand and it sits on the landing gear for display.
Look forward to thoughts..........

 

[simmie]

On initial look at the photos, I am assuming that this is a deflected thrust type of V/STOL aircraft. Probably to be powered by an Allison XT-40. The tip tanks being used to prevent airflow from spilling out at the tips. The over sized horizontal tail so as to retail control at low airspeed. Convair does seem like it might be a logical choice of manufacturer, but that's only a guess.

 

[allysonca]

Oh how we all love the sweet mysteries of these things, no?