Vought V-1000 International Fighter Aircraft

[Pioneer]

Greetings All -

From the Vought Archives, a drawing of the V-1000B.

Enjoy the day! Mark

Thank you for sharing Mark!

Interesting that in this drawing, that Vought incorporated additional outer hardpoints!

Regards
Pioneer

 

[hesham]

Amazing my dear Mark.

 

[ConradLau]

where can I find one of these models?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

where can I find one of these models?

Original V-1000 desk models come up for sale on Ebay occasionally.

 

[Archibald]

V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).

It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!

Regards
Pioneer

Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.

 

[RAP]

Vought F-8 Crusader V-1000 Phillipine Air Force Topping Precise Model In Box | eBay

<p>Vought F-8 Crusader model, of the proposed V-1000 Phillipine Air Force, made by Topping /Precise. </p><br><p>Condition is New in the original manufacturer box! Comes with the box, which will be packed inside another box for shipping. </p><br><p>Shipped with USPS Priority Mail. Buyer has 2...

www.ebay.com

 

[Pioneer]

V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).

It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!

Regards
Pioneer

Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.

Archibald, more from that damning book Pentagon Paradox...:


Regards
Pioneer

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It's fair to say that this version is disputed. According to Air Force testimony before Congress, the most capable design was the Lockheed CL-1200, not the V-1000, but it was also the most expensive, while the F-5E was last but cheapest and met the overall requirements.

 

[Pioneer]

It's fair to say that this version is disputed. According to Air Force testimony before Congress, the most capable design was the Lockheed CL-1200, not the V-1000, but it was also the most expensive, while the F-5E was last but cheapest and met the overall requirements.

I'd be interested in reading this testimony overscan if you could direct me with a link please.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Archibald]

I would not be surprised... the Crusader airframe had some limits the Starfighter did not had. For example, the "bullet nose" above the intake - not practical to fit larger radar antennas. Although in the IFA / F-5E context it was probably not a major issue.

As far as engine cost go - nothing beat a diminutive and rugged J85. Certainly not the V-1000's J79 or (far worse) the CL-1200 TF30 big complicated and unreliable turbofan.

Also, with F-5A already in the place in very large numbers, (AFAIK) IFA was done deal for the F-5E no ? I can't see foreign customers like South Vietnam or Iran going from F-5A to a whole new, entirely different aircraft with larger and more expensive engines...

 

[Bill S]

Found this picture of a model on a great German site picturing a whole variety of interesting
stuff
http://www.aeroscale.de/pages/p_m_26.htm

It is captioned "Precise Models South Vietnam Crusader".

Anyone know more?

Here are a few more of a similar model that I recently ran across.

 

[Yankee_Aviator]

What I want to know is whether the variable incidence wing was retained or omitted on the V-1000. I've heard it was a structural weakness that limited the F-8's maximum G loading, I would assume that for the sake of reducing weight and complexity and improving performance, the aircraft would not have the VI wing, if anyone knows, please inform me.

 

[Archibald]

That's a very good question !

Since it was to be a rather uncomplicated export fighter and with a shorter and lighter J79... I often assumed (since 2006 !) it was to be deleted but... combing this thread, I'm not sure at all now.

 

[Bill S]

The variable incidence wing was retained still raising 7°. The leading edge cruise droops. both inboard and outboard would increase from 7° to 10°. The major changes to the wings would be replacing magnesium skins of the droops and outer wing panels, deletion of the wing fold system.

 

[Bill S]

Here are some pages from the Technical Proposal that will thrill some and scare others! They show the empty weight derivation of the V-1000 in comparison with the F-8. Through these line items you can see the changes planned to create the V-1000 from the F-8 baseline.

 

[Bill S]

At first blush it looks like the V-1000 was offered up for the International Fighter Competition and a V-1000B version was offered to the USAF, Royal Netherlands Air Force, West German Airforce as well. Most everything is the same with the alternative of an M61A1 cannon in place of the two M39A3 cannons. (not illustrated in the attached V-1000B General Arrangement)

 

[Pioneer]

Here are some pages from the Technical Proposal that will thrill some and scare others! They show the empty weight derivation of the V-1000 in comparison with the F-8. Through these line items you can see the changes planned to create the V-1000 from the F-8 baseline.

Brilliant find thank you Bill S
Alas, a lot of tweeking to derive reduction in weight and complexity.
I'm very surprised that Vought/LTV went to the effort of eliminating the twin fuselage-mounted Sidewinder missile arrangement.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[isayyo2]

"Delete internal plumbing for IFR system"
Sounds like an odd choice for only a nine-pound loss?
Sure the "export" nations wouldn't have tankers on hand, but why would future proofing and interoperability be tossed out?

 

[drejr]

"Remainder of system was useful load" and pointing to a reference implies it was only a partial removal, most likely related to the deleted fuel cells.

The retractable probe is certainly going to weigh much more than nine pounds and it's not mentioned as deleted.

 

[isayyo2]

"Remainder of system was useful load" and pointing to a reference implies it was only a partial removal, most likely related to the deleted fuel cells.

The retractable probe is certainly going to weigh much more than nine pounds and its not mentioned as deleted.

Good point!

 

[Pioneer]

At first blush it looks like the V-1000 was offered up for the International Fighter Competition and a V-1000B version was offered to the USAF, Royal Netherlands Air Force, West German Airforce as well. Most everything is the same with the alternative of an M61A1 cannon in place of the two M39A3 cannons. (not illustrated in the attached V-1000B General Arrangement)

Thank you once again Bill S

This picture makes a lot of sense in relation to the documents you kindly supplied.
Good to see the M39 cannons, although it has me beat why Vought/LTV would have incorporated the modified A-7 Corsair II underfuselage airbrake? Seems a lot of work and complexity when one considers the F-8 already had an airbrake system, which appeared to have work well enough.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Archibald]

A Crusader (last of the gunfighters) with a M61 Vulcan... makes a lot of sense. Would turn MiGs into flaming shards of metal.

 

[Bill S]

Here are some pages from the Technical Proposal that will thrill some and scare others! They show the empty weight derivation of the V-1000 in comparison with the F-8. Through these line items you can see the changes planned to create the V-1000 from the F-8 baseline.

Brilliant find thank you Bill S
Alas, a lot of tweeking to derive reduction in weight and complexity.
I'm very surprised that Vought/LTV went to the effort of eliminating the twin fuselage-mounted Sidewinder missile arrangement.

Regards
Pioneer

Not sure the reason other than drag and simplicity, does anyone know if the original spec was for only two sidewinders? The F-5 did end up with only two.

 

[Bill S]

"Remainder of system was useful load" and pointing to a reference implies it was only a partial removal, most likely related to the deleted fuel cells.

The retractable probe is certainly going to weigh much more than nine pounds and it's not mentioned as deleted.

Useful load considerations were not in what I posted, I will see if I can find those documents. The IFR probe, actuator and fuselage fairing were to be removed/not installed on the V-1000

 

[Bill S]

Here are a couple more images revolving around the fuel system changes from F-8D to V-1000

 

[RAP]

...

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

This is a nice brochure...

 

[Pioneer]

...

'At least 30% better dogfight'

'Its wing is an improvement'.

Interesting!
Thanks RAP

Regards
Pioneer

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

GENERAL SUMMARY.

To enhance the demonstrated combat capability of the F-8 and to provide superior combat maneuverability, the V-1000B will differ from the F-8 in these significant areas.

• The J79-GE-17 engine replaces the J57 engine for an installed weight savings of 952 pounds and an improvement in specific fuel consumption (SFC).
• The two M39A3, 20 mm cannons replace four MK-12 cannons for an installed weight savings of 61 pounds.
• The F-8 avionics suit will be reduced with an installed weight savings of 125 pounds
• A total of 349 gallons of internal fuel will be deleted by removing six fuel cells.
• A three degree increase in leading edge maneuvering droop has provided an increase in maneuvering capability. Use of landing droop at low speeds has further expanded the maneuvering envelope.
• The center of gravity has been shifted aft to 29% M.A.C.

 

[RAP]

VOUGHT V-1000 - MANUFACTURERS MODEL | eBay

Model made of plastic or resin. The condition is excellent.

www.ebay.com

On Ebay now, starting bid $149.00.

 

[Cjc]

V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).

It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!

Regards
Pioneer

Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.

Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).

It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!

Regards
Pioneer

Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.

Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.

Please give an example of how it is "hot garbage".

I am researching the subject of the F-16 and F-18 genesis (LWF/ACF/VFAX/NACF) myself and I have found Pentagon Paradox to be impeccably well sourced from primary documents and interviews.

It is biased towards the Fighter Mafia version of what happened because his major sources were Fighter Mafia members, and you could take issue with his interpretation of events and facts, but "hot garbage" is not how I would describe it.

Orr's book is pretty decent though without proper endnotes, though he does discuss the sources for each chapter. It is very much covering a Navy-centric view of the F/A-18 program.

 

[Pioneer]

V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).

It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!

Regards
Pioneer

Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.

Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.

Please give an example of how it is "hot garbage".

I am researching the subject of the F-16 and F-18 genesis (LWF/ACF/VFAX/NACF) myself and I have found Pentagon Paradox to be impeccably well sourced from primary documents and interviews.

It is biased towards the Fighter Mafia version of what happened because his major sources were Fighter Mafia members, and you could take issue with his interpretation of events and facts, but "hot garbage" is not how I would describe it.

Orr's book is pretty decent though without proper endnotes, though he does discuss the sources for each chapter. It is very much covering a Navy-centric view of the F/A-18 program.

I concur with your analogy overscan!

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Cjc]

Please give an example of how it is "hot garbage".

I am researching the subject of the F-16 and F-18 genesis (LWF/ACF/VFAX/NACF) myself and I have found Pentagon Paradox to be impeccably well sourced from primary documents and interviews.

It is biased towards the Fighter Mafia version of what happened because his major sources were Fighter Mafia members, and you could take issue with his interpretation of events and facts, but "hot garbage" is not how I would describe it.

Orr's book is pretty decent though without proper endnotes, though he does discuss the sources for each chapter. It is very much covering a Navy-centric view of the F/A-18 program.

This isn't really the thread, but quite frankly there is a difference being biased in favor of something and annoying huge parts of your own cited works inorder to fit your narrative.

Besides its the fighter mafia/reform movement, that should emidiatly make one suspect.

 

[Tigershark 30-82]

Got this from Paul Metz's F-20 book (apologies for bad photo)

 

[Pioneer]

Got this from Paul Metz's F-20 book (apologies for bad photo)
View attachment 715059

Thanks Kurnass '86!

Definitely gotta get me that Paul Metz's F-20 book

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Tigershark 30-82]

Thanks Kurnass '86!

Definitely gotta get me that Paul Metz's F-20 book

Regards
Pioneer

Absolutely! It's a treasure-trove of info, a lot of which I never knew or had seen before