VFA: V/STOL Fighters for Sea Control Ships (XFV-12 rivals)

[overscan (PaulMM)]

July 1973, VSTOL and Sea Control Ships

 

[Pioneer]

I think it a great pity that the likes of the Grumman Model 607A or the Convair Model 200 designs were not picked to be developed further, instead of the more risky Rockwell XFV-12A design.
The greatest loser of all this of cause was the USN/USMC, and possibly the RN and RAF, who could have had (either the Grumman or Convair designs) in front-line service, as AV-8C / GR.3 Harrier replacement decades ago.
Yes a great pity indeed!

Regards
Pioneer

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

We've discussed this program elsewhere but I wanted to bring all posts into one topic start again with information from "The Pentagon Paradox" added to information presented previously.

11 designs submitted.
Convair Model 200 F100 engine, paired XJ99 liftjets ejecting through the bottom of the fuselage (1st ranked design)
Fairchild FR-150, F100 engine, rotating XJ99 lift engines, 27,000lbs (STO) and 21,000lbs (VTO) (2nd ranked design)
LTV V-517 19,950lb, TF30 engine, paired XJ99 liftjets ejecting through the bottom of the fuselage (3rd ranked design)
Rockwell NR-356: Mach 2.7: "not recommended" but idea merited further research
Boeing 908-535 Twin YJ101 tailsitter/VATOL, 17,000lbs, Mach 2.6-2.8 (also known as D-180)
San Diego Aircraft Engineering (Sandaire) "Stinger", 17,377lb. Lightest design.
Grumman Model 607: 37,353lb, Mach 2.0, F401 engine, 2 XJ99 liftjets ducted to rotating nozzles, no vertical takeoff.
Lockheed 24,000lb turboprop-powered tail sitter derived from XFV-1, Allison T56 engine. Perhaps CL-1290??
VFW Fokker VAK.191 Mk.3 (A VAK 191B derivative, bigger and more powerful)
McDonnell Douglas Advanced Harrier AV-16
McDonnell Douglas Model 258-52
de Havilland Canada DHC P-71-30 lift augmentation design

(Note there are 12 designs listed here, not 11. Most sources agree on most candidates but not all)

A second informal competition was held in 1972, the next year. Vought moved from V-517 to V-520 (?) while McDonnell-Douglas had Model 262 (AV-8C), Grumman 607A.


American Secret Projects has illustrations of 909-535, Model 200, G-607A, V-517, V-520, NR-356.

 

[Jemiba]

From Aviation Week 3/1972 the following designs:
1) Boeing tailsitter
2) General Dynamics
3) Grumman
4) Lockheed (turboprop)
5) North American
6) Fairchild Republic
7) LTV
8) McDonnel Douglas

Sorry for the bad quality, but the original picture was quite faint ... :-[

 

[AeroFranz]

i don't think i've seen these posted yet, so...
they are from an AIAA paper called "The North American Rockwell XFV-12A - Reflections and some lessons"

these were the competing designs for use on the sea control ships. I apologize for the low-quality. The company names should be readable or deducible.

edit: maybe it's not as readable as i thought...the fighter designs are, reading clockwise from the top center:

Fighters:

Republic (looks like swiveling lift jets)
LTV V-X1X (unreadable number)
DeHavilland (looks amost like the E-7 ejector augmentor)
Grumman (lift plus lift/cruise)
LTV V320 or 520, looks like some sort of RALS
unreadable, looks like another lift plus lift/cruise
VFW Fokker - looks like a VAK 191 or similar
N.A. with the XFV-12
Harrier
Convair lift plus lift/cruise
in the middle there is a Boeing concept for a 'perched' fighter a la X-13 Vertijet, with hinged cockpit

Sensor carrier:

Unreadable (maybe Bell?)
NA derived from Bronco, with ejector augmentor
Lockheed compound helo
Kaman (seasprite?)
Dupont? is it that monstruosity?
Boeing Vertol something something
Piasecki pathfinder-like helo
General aviation? looks like a tiltwing

in the middle:
unreadable, looks like a tandem wing with a mid-mounted rotor- possibly like the Rotodyne
Lockheed-General dynamics CL-84 look-alike


funny that i see no XV-5-like lift fan configurations...

 

[Stargazer]

LTV V-X1X (unreadable number)

That's LTV V-517.

LTV V320 or 520, looks like some sort of RALS

That's LTV V-520.

Boeing Vertol something something

That's "Boeing Vertol / Grumman / Bell / Westland".

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I can id all the designs in the top picture, most have been posted here elsewhere. Will do so tonight.

 

[AeroFranz]

Good eyes, Stephane! Or more likely you already knew these.

 

[Jemiba]

I think, we had several of the fighter designs here:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,559.15.html
I had the picture from Aviation Week, March 1972 cut into pieces then, here it is
in all again, with the caption. Perhaps it rings a bell for someone.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Labelled correctly. I've gathered as many of the designs into this topic as possible.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

VAK.191 Mk 3 here: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,391.0.html.

Sandair Stinger and the DHC P-71-30 are new illustrations to me.

 

[Pioneer]

I'm somewhat curious as to the Boeing design submission to VFA, as on this forum and in books I've seen the Boeing design as a very different aircraft aka - http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,15461.0.html

Regards
Pioneer

 

[hesham]

I think, we had several of the fighter designs here:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,559.15.html
I had the picture from Aviation Week, March 1972 cut into pieces then, here it is
in all again, with the caption. Perhaps it rings a bell for someone.

My dear Jemiba,


the same artist drawing from FlygapenNytt 4-1972

 

[hesham]

From AW;

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19720327/7/2

 

[Pioneer]

Going through some of my old 'paper' documentation and found the following in information sent to me many moons ago (2005) from Vought Archives - re the LTV V-517 design submission:

2.2 PROGRAM GROUND RULES

- Two prototype airplanes to be produced
- Budgetary quality cost estimates
- Assumed contract go-ahead - mid-February 1972
- Engineering Design 95% complete - March 1973
- First flight - June 1974
- All Navy/contractor flight testing to be performed at VAC facility - No off-site operations
- Navy production decision - February 1975
- Minimum cost and minimum time approaches are essential - prototype to be oriented towards technology rather than full compliance with the many requirements essential to a full engineering development
- No engineering required for mock-ups

Well its not much, but its something

Regards
Pioneer

 

[hesham]

Nice Info my dear Pioneer.

 

[Pioneer]

Nice to contribute hesham

Regards
Pioneer

 

[ZacYates]

Please forgive my ignorance/laziness: what's the deal with the AV-16 Advanced Harrier? What makes it different to the AV-8?

 

[TomS]

Please forgive my ignorance/laziness: what's the deal with the AV-16 Advanced Harrier? What makes it different to the AV-8?

Here's a good starting place.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,184.msg211092.html#msg211092

The link above is only one of a bunch of different designs that were considered under AV-16 (AV-16S was even supersonic, and thus very different). The Advanced Harrier thread has a bunch of designs, some called AV-16, others under different names.

 

[hesham]

From L+K 21/1974.

 

[Grey Havoc]

VFW Fokker VAK.191 Mk.3 (A VAK 191B derivative, bigger and more powerful)

With regards as to the VAK-191B Mk. 3:

(h/t: Barrington Bond)

 

[Glynstantinople]

A model of the VAK 191B was even built. The Dutch Air Force had intentions of replacing their F104s with the VFW/VAK 191Bs.

the De Gooi- en Eemlander newspaper article