blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi! SCAT18 report.
Same topic is here.
Same topic is here.
Attachments
Last edited:
US Supersonic Transport (SST) Program 1960-1971
- Thread starter Orionblamblam
- Start date
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi!
The Evolution of the High-Speed Civil Transport. No information about Republic proposal.
Also Convair 1961 SST information is here.
The Evolution of the High-Speed Civil Transport. No information about Republic proposal.
Also Convair 1961 SST information is here.
Attachments
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Is this a Convair SST? I can't see any windows for passengers.
Attachments
Last edited:
- Joined
- 26 May 2006
- Messages
- 33,906
- Reaction score
- 14,285
Yes,and I sent it before.
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi!
NAA company showing their 1963-64 proposals.
And NAC2000 SST.
elpoderdelasgalaxias.wordpress.com
www.alamy.com
NAA company showing their 1963-64 proposals.
And NAC2000 SST.
North American Aviation SST’s: Men and their toys (IV).
In the 1960s the arrival of the supersonic transport (SST) was seen as a logical conclusion. That urge concretized in the development and construction of two supersonic airliners: the Anglo-French …
elpoderdelasgalaxias.wordpress.com
Supersonic Transport (SST) North American Aviation NAC 2000 aircraft, artistic rendering, 1960s Stock Photo - Alamy
Download this stock image: Supersonic Transport (SST) North American Aviation NAC 2000 aircraft, artistic rendering, 1960s - TDR1DE from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, illustrations and vectors.
www.alamy.com
Attachments
Last edited:
Here is an interesting 1974 NASA report on testing a T-Tailed 733-290 like configuration, which I find even nicer than the 733-290. I believe it’s the same model as this one :
here is the model scale plan extracted from the report:
As noted by Skybolt before in post #224, T-tail was tested for the 733 before, being rejected because of deep-stall problem, But this was re-investigated later after the end of SST program to see if CCV would solve the problem , here an interesting extract:
The present study is part of an overall effort by the NASA to provide the technology base for the development of advanced supersonic vehicles. The configuration concept which is the subject of this paper is a derivative of one studied in the National SST (supersonic transport) program (references 1 and 2) and traces its ancestry to the SCAT 16 configuration of the SCAT
(supersonic commercial air transport) studies (reference 3). As studied in the SST program, the concept exhibited one of the highest ratios of payload to gross weight of all those submitted for evaluation.
The dominant feature of the configuration is its non-integrated, variable-sweep wing. The variable-sweep feature was utilized to provide high
levels of low-speed lift, good subsonic flight efficiency, and good supersonic
cruise efficiency with a relatively small, highly loaded wing which would
involve less structural design uncertainty than would the lightly loaded, large wings of competing concepts.
The primary reason for abandoning the non-integrated, variable-sweep concept during its development was a conflict between longitudinal stability
criteria of that time, and effects of the engine exhaust on the horizontal tail. Placement of the horizontal tail in a high, or T-tail, position would have eliminated adverse thermal and acoustic effects of the jet on the tail and would have prevented a venturi-like suck-down of the horizontal tail as the exhaust jet streamed between it and the ground during takeoff rotation, both of which were problems for a low-tail configuration.
However, a T-tail was generally known to produce a deep-stall problem as the tail dropped into the wake of the stalled wing and became ineffective. Because "stick pusher"
or attitude-limiting systems, which are dependent upon attitude and pitch- rate sensing, were not then considered permissible in commercial aircraft, the contractor conducting the SST study ultimately took the alternate route of integrating the wing and horizontal tail, and suspending the engine nacelles from the latter, before abandoning the variable-sweep approach altogether. Since that time, developments in stability criteria and in aero- electronic technology and an increased emphasis on CCV (control-configured vehicles) have opened the path to serious study of a T-tail solution of the problems of the variable-sweep SST.
here is the model scale plan extracted from the report:
As noted by Skybolt before in post #224, T-tail was tested for the 733 before, being rejected because of deep-stall problem, But this was re-investigated later after the end of SST program to see if CCV would solve the problem , here an interesting extract:
The present study is part of an overall effort by the NASA to provide the technology base for the development of advanced supersonic vehicles. The configuration concept which is the subject of this paper is a derivative of one studied in the National SST (supersonic transport) program (references 1 and 2) and traces its ancestry to the SCAT 16 configuration of the SCAT
(supersonic commercial air transport) studies (reference 3). As studied in the SST program, the concept exhibited one of the highest ratios of payload to gross weight of all those submitted for evaluation.
The dominant feature of the configuration is its non-integrated, variable-sweep wing. The variable-sweep feature was utilized to provide high
levels of low-speed lift, good subsonic flight efficiency, and good supersonic
cruise efficiency with a relatively small, highly loaded wing which would
involve less structural design uncertainty than would the lightly loaded, large wings of competing concepts.
The primary reason for abandoning the non-integrated, variable-sweep concept during its development was a conflict between longitudinal stability
criteria of that time, and effects of the engine exhaust on the horizontal tail. Placement of the horizontal tail in a high, or T-tail, position would have eliminated adverse thermal and acoustic effects of the jet on the tail and would have prevented a venturi-like suck-down of the horizontal tail as the exhaust jet streamed between it and the ground during takeoff rotation, both of which were problems for a low-tail configuration.
However, a T-tail was generally known to produce a deep-stall problem as the tail dropped into the wake of the stalled wing and became ineffective. Because "stick pusher"
or attitude-limiting systems, which are dependent upon attitude and pitch- rate sensing, were not then considered permissible in commercial aircraft, the contractor conducting the SST study ultimately took the alternate route of integrating the wing and horizontal tail, and suspending the engine nacelles from the latter, before abandoning the variable-sweep approach altogether. Since that time, developments in stability criteria and in aero- electronic technology and an increased emphasis on CCV (control-configured vehicles) have opened the path to serious study of a T-tail solution of the problems of the variable-sweep SST.
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi!
And 733-290 test model images.
secure.boeingimages.com
And 733-290 test model images.
Boeing Images - SST Wind Tunnel Model Testing
Welcome to The Boeing Company's official source for licensed aerospace photography, illustrations and videos.
Attachments
Last edited:
"[B]Chris Sloan[/B] @[B]airchive[/B] Original Boeing 2707 SST model in the 1964-68 AstroJet livery on display at the American Airlines Annual Leadership Conference Expo courtesy of the C.R. Smith Museum."
Btw, I (we
) keep posting stuff in this monster thread, but if modos find it inapropriate i'll stop. For sure the thread is a wealth of infos on the SST, excellent reference, but it's also getting difficult to follow due to size and images posted 2 or even 3 times in the thread (my bad too...).
Btw, I (we
) keep posting stuff in this monster thread, but if modos find it inapropriate i'll stop. For sure the thread is a wealth of infos on the SST, excellent reference, but it's also getting difficult to follow due to size and images posted 2 or even 3 times in the thread (my bad too...).
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
galgot-san!
How about Douglas 2229 official models?
There are three models, each models have little different shape?
How about Douglas 2229 official models?
There are three models, each models have little different shape?
Douglas Model 2229 SST - DA.C
Have managed to recently acquire three Douglas model 2229 SST models, one is of a shorter length in subsonic configuration, whereas the other two are
www.diecastaircraftforum.com
Attachments
Last edited:
I think its the same design. Only , one model shows it in cruise supersonic configuration ( wing tips moved down like XB-70, and windshield in up position), while the others are in lower speed configuration.
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Left side model's cockpit upper fuselage is rounded and canard seems to be small. And fuselage each side windows are 71 where other two windows are 84/85.
Left side model is short. It's a long range version same as L2000-7A?
Left side model is short. It's a long range version same as L2000-7A?
Attachments
Last edited:
Ah yes ! didn't noticed that. Would be nice to know what is writen of the coper plates on the stands... if they have something different from each other.
EDIT : seems its all writen "Douglas SST" ...
Btw, never really checked Douglas 2229 history. Wikipedia page is quite detailled :
"...After studying the design, Douglas concluded that the SST would not work economically, and declined to enter the Model 2229 in the National Supersonic Transport (NST) program in 1963."
Wise guys
...
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Indeed.
If I was in charge, I never stopped.
The last picture shows SCAT-16?
www.rawpixel.com
If I was in charge, I never stopped.
The last picture shows SCAT-16?
SCAT-16; Variable Sweep Model in 40x80 Wind T.. | Free public domain photo - 441673
Download free image of SCAT-16; Variable Sweep Model in 40x80 Wind Tunnel at NASA Ames. 3/4 view of model in cruise configuration with 25 deg. Sweep
Attachments
Last edited:
taildragger
You can count on me - I won a contest
- Joined
- 2 November 2008
- Messages
- 395
- Reaction score
- 483
Btw, never really checked Douglas 2229 history. Wikipedia page is quite detailled :
"...After studying the design, Douglas concluded that the SST would not work economically, and declined to enter the Model 2229 in the National Supersonic Transport (NST) program in 1963."
Wise guys...
[/QUOTE]
R.E.G Davies, who worked in marketing at Douglas, based a book on why SSTs would never make sense.
"...After studying the design, Douglas concluded that the SST would not work economically, and declined to enter the Model 2229 in the National Supersonic Transport (NST) program in 1963."
Wise guys
...[/QUOTE]
R.E.G Davies, who worked in marketing at Douglas, based a book on why SSTs would never make sense.
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
A renowned Japanese scholar said: “Stupid people and engineers want to make fast and big things.”
Engineers are really hard work.
First he needs to have enough talent.
If he doesn't show his originality, he can't satisfy his customers.
His proposal is the best of all proposals and must be feasible.
Careful attention is required so as not to make mistakes.
He must study every day to get the latest information.
His work is really sober(Planning, Calculation, Development, Integration, Simulation, trade off study and make Fabrication/testing sequence), and he has to work hard until late at night.
Sometimes he has to sacrifice his weekend fun.
If something happens, he first thinks it is his responsibility.
Engineers are really hard work.
First he needs to have enough talent.
If he doesn't show his originality, he can't satisfy his customers.
His proposal is the best of all proposals and must be feasible.
Careful attention is required so as not to make mistakes.
He must study every day to get the latest information.
His work is really sober(Planning, Calculation, Development, Integration, Simulation, trade off study and make Fabrication/testing sequence), and he has to work hard until late at night.
Sometimes he has to sacrifice his weekend fun.
If something happens, he first thinks it is his responsibility.
Last edited:
I’m looking for infos about the wing fixed part leading edge of model 733-197.
On the plan sold at:
One can see this :
and also on this image :
from this document:
My question is , how can the leading edge go from sharp edge to "bulbous".
I don’t understand how the section can go from sharp to round…
Only found this illustration of something a bit similar (changing the LE section) , some complicated Krueger flaps ?
I don’t even understand exactly how these work, as the skin lay flat when closed, then its curved when opened…
Could it be this kind of thing on the 733-197 wing ?
Edit:
Ok, the example above show 747 Krueger flaps, here better image :
Patent here :
Still, don't think it would work on the -197 drawing, as it would have to bend the surface much more.
Plus it looks completely closed on the underside on the -197 drawing.
So maybe something like that :
On the plan sold at:
One can see this :
and also on this image :
from this document:
My question is , how can the leading edge go from sharp edge to "bulbous".
I don’t understand how the section can go from sharp to round…
Only found this illustration of something a bit similar (changing the LE section) , some complicated Krueger flaps ?
I don’t even understand exactly how these work, as the skin lay flat when closed, then its curved when opened…
Could it be this kind of thing on the 733-197 wing ?
Edit:
Ok, the example above show 747 Krueger flaps, here better image :
Patent here :
Still, don't think it would work on the -197 drawing, as it would have to bend the surface much more.
Plus it looks completely closed on the underside on the -197 drawing.
So maybe something like that :
Last edited:
Look at section f-f (LERX) and think at the sweep angle of blended section. The extended part is just hidden inside the outer shape and deployed to increase alpha tolerence before flow separation.
On the mig, the flap is rotated from a tangent recessed position. Nothing prevent you to carve a volume on the underside to have that flap tip bulbous.
On the mig, the flap is rotated from a tangent recessed position. Nothing prevent you to carve a volume on the underside to have that flap tip bulbous.
Last edited:
While googling , the search engine presented me a small image preview included in this document :
25 $ to download !
anyway here is the small image :
Think is 733-636. Funny, I thought all arrow wings models would be numbered 969-xxx.
Looks like a -300 with delta wing swapped to a arrow wing.
25 $ to download !
anyway here is the small image :
Think is 733-636. Funny, I thought all arrow wings models would be numbered 969-xxx.
Looks like a -300 with delta wing swapped to a arrow wing.
Johnbr
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 6 May 2007
- Messages
- 753
- Reaction score
- 315
Fast airplanes also have to fly well at low speeds to take off and land. Here, a technician is installing the nose landing gear on a proposed High-Speed Civil Transport model to prepare it for high-angle-of-attack tests in the 14- by 22-Foot Tunnel. The test section walls were in their closed position for these tests.
Aie !! My hears ! No shouting please ...
This one is from after 1971, not sure if it's Boeing or MDD.
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi!
Wing is very large. Perfectly different dimension.
Wing is very large. Perfectly different dimension.
1:400 Boeing 2707-300 SST - DA.C
After closing down production last year, JR Lacerda,(my business partner), is now tweaking the MKII version of this model. It will be on a very
www.diecastaircraftforum.com
Attachments
Attachments
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi!
I compare Boeing B2707-300 prototype and operational.
Operational model is about 3.5m longer than prototype model.Wing front view slightly changed. Horizontal tail stabilizer moved higher position.
Outboard aileron area enlarged.
Operatinal model fuselage shape looks like L2000-7B.
Prototype model range : 3575nm, Operational model range : 3530nm
Source : Aireview magazine and...
I compare Boeing B2707-300 prototype and operational.
Operational model is about 3.5m longer than prototype model.Wing front view slightly changed. Horizontal tail stabilizer moved higher position.
Outboard aileron area enlarged.
Operatinal model fuselage shape looks like L2000-7B.
Prototype model range : 3575nm, Operational model range : 3530nm
Source : Aireview magazine and...
Boeing 2707-300 - DA.C
Come on Avation200, Gemini, Herpa, Hogan, RS/SM if you Build it we will buy. Please feel free to add and comment.
www.diecastaircraftforum.com
Attachments
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
This drawing shows prototype.
And attached drawing shows operational model.
And attached drawing shows operational model.
Attachments
Last edited:
Hi Blackkite San,
Sorry , i think this one shows the -300 as intented as in late 1968 / early 1969, not specifically the prototype.
See configurations released by Boeing to the press at the period, and published with the very detailled cutaway plan in several magazines at these times, namely Interavia, AviationMagazine,
Flight International and Japanese AirReview (i think...).
Then in Late 1969 another configuration is released, with a new tailplane geometry. One short 280 ft production model, then a 286 ft prototype and a 298 ft Production model.
See the following montage, I love SST ornithology :
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Ummm..........very difficult.
Horizontal tail stabilizer shape!!
Boeing planned domestic version and intercontinental version same as Lockheed L2000-7A and 7B?(Same as Douglas 2229?)
Horizontal tail stabilizer shape!!
Boeing planned domestic version and intercontinental version same as Lockheed L2000-7A and 7B?(Same as Douglas 2229?)
Last edited:
Ummm..........very difficult.
Horizontal tail stabilizer shape!!
Boeing planned domestic version and intercontinental version same as Lockheed L2000-7A and 7B?(Same as Douglas 2229?)
I don't know for the 2707-300, but back on the 733-290 yes, I saw two versions intended mentioned on the same Boeing 733-290 presentation.
One domestic and one intercontinental. Same dimensions but different weight (fuel and pax capacity I suppose).
Edit : got the infos , here you go,
planned was 733-290 "Intercontinental" with
230 pax
500000 lbs Max ramp weight
219900 lbs operating empty weight
320000 lbs Max Ldg weight
264180 lbs Fuel capacity
16-40" main gear tires size
And 733-291 "transcontinental" (domestic) with
209 pax
425000 lbs Max ramp weight
205900 lbs operating empty weight
302000 lbs Max Ldg weight
204100 lbs Fuel capacity
16-38" main gear tires size
Both same external dimensions/shape and same GE4 engines.
Last edited:
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Hi! Boeing 733-290 larger image and 3D model.
www.renderhub.com
I have never seen 733-390 large drawing.
Amazon.com: Vintage photo of the boeing 733 aircrafft: Entertainment Collectibles
Amazon.com: Vintage photo of the boeing 733 aircrafft: Entertainment Collectibles
www.amazon.com
Boeing 733 SST American Air Lines - 3D Model by Dreamscape Studios
This model is built very near to scale within a few inches of actual general dimensions and is fully textured. This model has animateable flaps, ailerons, landing gear, landing gear doors, elevators, and rudder. It is available in multiple airline liveries.
www.renderhub.com
I have never seen 733-390 large drawing.
Attachments
Last edited:
![Les_Ailes___journal_hebdomadaire_[...]_bpt6k3201019g_3.jpeg](/data/attachments/154/154511-2c7728d772d7cb8081870a6956046438.jpg)
Hi! Boeing 733-290 larger image and 3D model.
Amazon.com: Vintage photo of the boeing 733 aircrafft: Entertainment Collectibles
Amazon.com: Vintage photo of the boeing 733 aircrafft: Entertainment Collectibleswww.amazon.comBoeing 733 SST American Air Lines - 3D Model by Dreamscape Studios
This model is built very near to scale within a few inches of actual general dimensions and is fully textured. This model has animateable flaps, ailerons, landing gear, landing gear doors, elevators, and rudder. It is available in multiple airline liveries.
I have never seen 733-390 large drawing.
thanks, I didn't had that 733-290 image at that size
The 3d model is not correct, I wouldn't put 10 $ for it. For the -290 the nose wasn't suppose to drop like that and MLG is not like that. Also very simplified wing and all.
blackkite
Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
- Joined
- 31 May 2007
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 7,044
Similar threads
-
FLIGHTS OF FANTASY: The Lockheed L-2000 SST in airline service- Started by Sentinel Chicken
- Replies: 9
-
Could the US have built an SST?- Started by uk 75
- Replies: 35
-
-
Lockheed VLST Very Large Subsonic Transports aircraft- Started by hesham
- Replies: 19
-