Vought (LTV) A-7 Corsair II Projects

[Creative]

I'm curious. Was there any thought of putting the Sidewinder rails at the wing tips instead of the fuselage?

 

[TinWing]

I'm curious. Was there any thought of putting the Sidewinder rails at the wing tips instead of the fuselage?

Wing tip missile rails and swept wings can be aerodynamically problematic.

 

[F-14D]

I know I promised back in May to revisit this topic and provide more information about the A-7F, and I really mean to do that, eventually. In the interim, as a teaser, here's a drawing of the modifications that would have been done to turn an A-7D into a full-blown, production -7F, had the Air Force proceeded with the program

 

[r16]

ı have just noticed the Speicher case explained by F-14D and thank him for this and while it is quite offtopic ı guess this is the place ı should put it .ı would still believe that it was a SA-6 that got Speicher and despite the original claims that the Mig had actually destroyed a VF-103 F-14 , ı think Iraqis failed to score air to air in 1991 .

 

[F-14D]

ı have just noticed the Speicher case explained by F-14D and thank him for this and while it is quite offtopic ı guess this is the place ı should put it .ı would still believe that it was a SA-6 that got Speicher and despite the original claims that the Mig had actually destroyed a VF-103 F-14 , ı think Iraqis failed to score air to air in 1991 .

The original official explanation was that he had been hit by a SAM, but there were reports from the fleet that said that the crews who were there didn't buy that. For one thing, US intelligence was reporting no SAMs in the area, before or after, particularly of the type that could hit Speicher @ 30,000 ft. For another, evidence shows that he ejected. This would be problematic if shot down by the large warhead of a SAM, but more likely with a smaller AAM warhead. Also, there were detections of Iraqi fighters closing the strike group, but not of SAMs in that area. The MiG-25, after escaping the other F/A-18 that couldn't get permission to fire, was observed heading towards the area where LCDR Speicher's jet was knocked down soon thereafter.

One thing that is also overlooked is that there were also reports that the wreckage of a MiG-25 was also in that genreal area. Maybe they got each other, or it's also possible that neither shot the other, but might have collided.

 

[r16]

one of the aspects of observing from outside is that you may be proven wrong or least mistaken as ı have been here in claiming the SAM . Once again thanks for the information .

 

[F-14D]

one of the aspects of observing from outside is that you may be proven wrong or least mistaken as ı have been here in claiming the SAM . Once again thanks for the information .

We're getting a bit off topic here, but on Jan 21 1991 one F-14B from VF 103 on a recon run was lost, one crewmember was rescued the other taken prisoner. The official reason given for the loss was a mobile or shoulder launched SAM. However some credit it to a trap technique the Iraqiis had been observed to use in the past. A Mirage F1 would light up the target, while a MiG (in this case a -25) would be in the area, radar silent, possibly using terrain for masking. The target would turn to either engage or evade, and would be concentrating on the Mirage. If position was good, the MiG would quickly light up and fire, before the target could react to the new threat. Some have said this is what happened to the VF 103 bird, but I have no certain knowledge of it.

I'll be posting some more Corsair stuff

 

[Rosdivan]

I thought that Tomcat was said to be lost to an SA-2?

 

[F-14D]

I thought that Tomcat was said to be lost to an SA-2?

An SA-2 is not mobile, and the location of all of those would be known to a TARPS F-14. The official explanation was, I believe, a mobile SAM or shoulder launched weapon. r16 was talking about an F-14 loss to a MiG-25 and that tracks nicely with the alternate explanation of the Tomcat's loss to a trap. Again, I can't speak to the veracity of this, as there hasn't been as much reexamination of this loss as there was of LCDR Speicher.

To keep this on topic, here's a drawing of the standard panel proposed for the production A-7F/Strikefighter. What would have actually gone into the bird, if USAF has allowed it to be built, would be up to USAF. The displays could have been all monochrome, there might have been less glass, or it could have been even more digital, or it could have just kept he steam guages of the A-7D. This drawing, though, is representative of the probable configuration

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All!

Here's a few more gems from the visit to the Vought Archives a few weeks ago. Thanks to PhotoGator giving me a heads up, I had the chance to peruse some study/proposal files on the A-7 that included these two along with some tanker studies. I'll post the tanker study drawings later.

The RA-7 is a "cheeky" conversion of the A-7 to perform recon duties.

The profile comparison is for a Spey with afterburner equipped A-7 - I did not find any info on the A-7+16 and A-7+48 profiles noted.

The supersonic A-7 obviously makes use of the F8U-3 development effort motivated by a Spey with afterburner.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Bill S]

Nice scans Mark. You made something good out of those blue prints.

bill

 

[r16]

any chance of specifications on the supersonic Sluf ?

 

[hs1216]

it looks like some of the f-8u3 experience made it into the supersonic a-7

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Yeah, it does look like the XF8U-3...

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1964-US-Navy-Concept-Photo-A7A-Light-Attack-Aircraft_W0QQitemZ350214563874QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLH_DefaultDomain_0?hash=item518a6a2822&_trksid=p3286.m63.l1177

Added from “Found on Ebay” thread

 

[Lampshade111]

Was there any real advantage over the F/A-18 in the role they were pitching this twin engined Corsair for?

 

[norseman]

I don't know the precise source but it is an italian mag from 1986.

A-7 CAS/BAI (Close Air Support/Battlefield Air Interdiction)

Interim solution for the USAF consisting in reengining the 337 Air National Air Guard A-7 fleet with a new afterburning engine (no more details :- ???), updated avionics and structural modifications.

Was this not related to the RR/Allison project offering a 17,500lb Spey/TF41 to a number of airforces (also a 17,500/27,000 Reheat) version. I vaguely remember this engine being offered for the F-14 and F-111 as well. Would certainly have been interesting in the RAF Phantoms. I think this engine was actually built for testing and wasn't just a paper product. I can imagine this engine would have interested the Chinese with their JH7A and it's lack of thrust. If anyone has further info about these Spey/TF41 versions it would be interesting as I lost all the PDF's I had about them years ago in a hard drive crash. :0(

 

[F-14D]

Was there any real advantage over the F/A-18 in the role they were pitching this twin engined Corsair for?

That was one of the proposals mooted for A-7X. The main advantages were range/payload/endurance, less R&D expense and time and sooner availability, along with lower procurement cost. Part of this was due to the fact that there was no attempt to perform the air-to-air portion of the F/A-18's mission, that being met by additional F-14s.

 

[Bill S]

Proposed A-7E upgrade to add Harpoon missile capability
From Vought Archives

 

[Steve Pace]

Coming full circle. Amazing how the supersonic F-8 Crusader morphed to subsonic A-7 Corsair II and the supersonic YA-7F nearly created a reborn F-8 Crusader.

 

[Bill S]

Proposed two seat A-7E upgrade with TRAM, LST, TARPS, and
a 912-B32K engine upgrade (TF-41-A-2 with RR Spey afterburner)
From Vought Archives

 

[elmayerle]

Was there any real advantage over the F/A-18 in the role they were pitching this twin engined Corsair for?

That was one of the proposals mooted for A-7X. The main advantages were range/payload/endurance, less R&D expense and time and sooner availability, along with lower procurement cost. Part of this was due to the fact that there was no attempt to perform the air-to-air portion of the F/A-18's mission, that being met by additional F-14s.

that the F404 was built in Teddy Kennedy's home state and"Tip"O'Neill's district was considered something of an advantage to selling the idea to Congress.

 

[TinWing]

Proposed two seat A-7E upgrade with TRAM, LST, TARPS, and
a 912-B32K engine upgrade (TF-41-A-2 with RR Spey afterburner)

Are there any details on the engine itself?

 

[Bill S]

Are there any details on the engine itself?

Here is what I have. From Vought Archives

 

[MIRAGE 4000]

Vough proposed an A-7E "French Navy" (A-7E Export) with French carrier suitability (catapult, nose gear tow)

It was proposed with Aerospatiale in 1972.

I have some details, if you want.

 

[Stargazer]

Vough proposed an A-7E "French Navy" (A-7E Export) with French carrier suitability (catapult, nose gear tow)

It was proposed with Aerospatiale in 1972.

I have some details, if you want.

Of course we do! What are you waiting for? ;D ;D ;D

 

[elmayerle]

I don't know the precise source but it is an italian mag from 1986.

A-7 CAS/BAI (Close Air Support/Battlefield Air Interdiction)

Interim solution for the USAF consisting in reengining the 337 Air National Air Guard A-7 fleet with a new afterburning engine (no more details :- ???), updated avionics and structural modifications.

Was this not related to the RR/Allison project offering a 17,500lb Spey/TF41 to a number of airforces (also a 17,500/27,000 Reheat) version. I vaguely remember this engine being offered for the F-14 and F-111 as well. Would certainly have been interesting in the RAF Phantoms. I think this engine was actually built for testing and wasn't just a paper product. I can imagine this engine would have interested the Chinese with their JH7A and it's lack of thrust. If anyone has further info about these Spey/TF41 versions it would be interesting as I lost all the PDF's I had about them years ago in a hard drive crash. :0(

The Afterburning TF41 was tested in the late 1960's; I used to have copies of an article from AW&ST from 1967 on the testing Allison/RR did at AEDC where they wre getting 26,000 lbt. in full afterburner. If someone has access toAviation Week from that year, I'd appreciate a scan of that article.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Of course we do! What are you waiting for? ;D ;D ;D

Hear, hear.

This would be as a competitor for the Super Etendard as a Jaguar M replacement?

 

[Bill S]

Vough proposed an A-7E "French Navy" (A-7E Export) with French carrier suitability (catapult, nose gear tow)

It was proposed with Aerospatiale in 1972.

I have some details, if you want.

Yes sir! Count me among the interested.

 

[TomS]

Of course we do! What are you waiting for? ;D ;D ;D

Hear, hear.

This would be as a competitor for the Super Etendard as a Jaguar M replacement?

That's an odd way to put it. It seems more accurate to say that Jaguar M and Super Etendard (and the A-7) were both proposed replacements for the original Etendard IV.

 

[TinWing]

[edit - deleted post - Admin]

Now that is interesting. Does this suggest a noseleg catapult attachment point, as in the A4D-6? Why would M-D suggest such an extensive modification of the A-4M?

 

[Abraham Gubler]

That's an odd way to put it. It seems more accurate to say that Jaguar M and Super Etendard (and the A-7) were both proposed replacements for the original Etendard IV.

The French Navy was originally committed to a carrier capable Jaguar as the replacement for the Entendard as part of the formation of SPECAT and the Jaguar program in the 1960s. As the Jaguar progressed into the early 1970s, including carrier trials for the first Jaguar M, the French Navy abandoned it for a range of reasons.

They then sought a replacement with Dassault offering the Super Entendard, Mirage F1 and it would now appear Vought offering a new French version of the A-7 (as opposed to a standard A-7E) and McAir with the A-4T. Of course Dassault won (it helped that they had brought out the French competition in Breguet who were the French side of SPECAT) and the Super Entendard was ordered in 1973.

So it’s not an ‘odd’ way to put it but rather chronologically decision cycle correct way to put it.

For a good source on the Aeronaval check out:

http://frenchnavy.free.fr/projects/jaguar/jaguar_fr.htm

Including data on the 45,000 tonne carrier Verdun that was to carry navalised Mirage IVs in the nuclear strike role…

 

[TomS]

The chronology is not entirely clear to me. If the A-7 was offered in 1972, as stated, that was before the formal abandonment of Jaguar M in 1973. IN any case, since Jag M never reached service, I would not say it was being replaced.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Its pretty obvious - the Jaguar-M was in trouble before its cancellation. Thoughts as to what might replace it started before the formal end of the program.

 

[Bill S]

V-514 A-7D baseline with F-100-PW-100 Engine
Vought Archives

 

[Bill S]

V-515 A-7E baseline with F-401-PW-400 Engine
Vought Archives

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Been busy in the files eh?! Interesting finds - thanks for posting them.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Steve Pace]

What's out there on the YA-7Fs? V-number, drawings, etc.

 

[Bill S]

What's out there on the YA-7Fs? V-number, drawings, etc.

Have you looked at page 1 and 2 of this topic, lots of good info on YA-7F there.

 

[Bill S]

Been busy in the files eh?! Interesting finds - thanks for posting them.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

Actually these were scanned when I did the V-382 drawings.
I had forgotten about them until you posted the 382 stuff.