XF-34A Dreamstar---------------------RETRACTABLE TAILS

[XP67_Moonbat]

I'm doing an AUTOCAD drawing of the fictional "XF-34A Dreamstar", as described in Dale Brown's "Day Of The Cheetah". This is supposed to be an FSW fighter prototype meant for combat at high alpha.

No problem except that the description in the book of this beast describes an upper and lower set of tails that retract into the fuselage as need for different speed and alpha regimes.

And you see, this is the show stopper, right here. The only real examples of this sort of thing I can think of are some PGM's with flip-out tails. But that doesnt seem very practical for a fighter.

I had originally disregarded this fact and put a set of YF23-ish tails. But I now I'm rethinking this as I would like to keep true to the book. What do you think, guys?

I open this discussion to all including the pros. Here's the Dreamstar with YF23-style tails

Moonbat

PS- Another example I can think of is the F-14's glove vanes.

 

[frank]

Again, not tails, but the Tu-144's retractable canards, too. Maybe more like miniature swing wings as opposed to purely retractable?

I'm doing an AUTOCAD drawing of the fictional "XF-34A Dreamstar", as described in Dale Brown's "Day Of The Cheetah". This is supposed to be an FSW fighter prototype meant for combat at high alpha.

No problem except that the description in the book of this beast describes an upper and lower set of tails that retract into the fuselage as need for different speed and alpha regimes.

And you see, this is the show stopper, right here. The only real examples of this sort of thing I can think of are some PGM's with flip-out tails. But that doesnt seem very graceful or functional for fighter now does it?

I had originally disregarded this fact and put a set of YF23-ish tails. But I now I'm rethinking this as I would like to keep true to the book. What do you think, guys?

I open this discussion to all including the pros.

Moonbat

PS- Another example I can think of is the F-14's glove vanes. Not quite a tail, but it's fuselage retractable.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

The problem is, I don't have much interior fuselage space to work with here. As far as Dreamstar goes, we're talking something on the the order of an F-16. There won't be much room in the fuselage to stow the upper and lower stabilzers, plus the actuctors for retraction and deployment.

Im thinking maybe some kind of unit on outside fuselage. But hw to do that without being all gawky and ruining the aerodynamics.

And thats why this particular problem has me stumped so far.

 

[Orionblamblam]

No problem except that the description in the book of this beast describes an upper and lower set of tails that retract into the fuselage as need for different speed and alpha regimes.

Is the description clear on this point? Or coudl they simply fold flush with the fuselage (hinge line running fore/aft line the B-70 wingtips)

 

[Matej]

What about something like NextGen morphing wing used as the all moving tail surface?

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

To quote Dale Brown,"DreamStar had two sets of rudders, one pair on top and one on the bottom, which extended and retracted into the fuselage as needed; the lower stabilizers were to assure directional comtrol at very high angles-of-attack (when the nose would pointed high above the flight path of the aircraft) and low speed when the upper stablizers would be ineffective"

One- I could just forget all this trouble and keep the YF23-style tails I already have on the design.
or
Two-If I were to keep true to the book's description, the closest real-world example i could think of is the tail assembly on a Paveway. Another one that comes to mind is the lower fins on the Storm Shadow cruise missile. But I'm not even sure how this type of tail would work on a high-performance fighter. If at all.

Now as for the rest of the plane, it almost seems as if Dale Brown was describing a SaberBat. So the easiest part is already done. It's just these pesky tails that are killing me.

I

 

[frank]

Now that I see what Brown wrote, I understand better. When you wrote 'tails', for some reason I was thinking horizontal. Now that we're talking verticals, how about not so much 'retractable as 'folding'. They could fold flush with the fuselage, much like a sideways folding speedbrake or MiG-23 /27 or YF-12 fin. Or a landing gear door, for that matter.

To quote Dale Brown,"DreamStar had two sets of rudders, one pair on top and one on the bottom, which extended and retracted into the fuselage as needed; the lower stabilizers were to assure directional comtrol at very high angles-of-attack (when the nose would pointed high above the flight path of the aircraft) and low speed when the upper stablizers would be ineffective"

One- I could just forget all this trouble and keep the YF23-style tails I already have on the design.
or
Two-If I were to keep true to the book's description, the closest real-world example i could think of is the tail assembly on a Paveway. But I'm not even sure how that type of tail would work on a fighter. If at all.

Now as for the rest of the plane, it almost seems as if Dale Brown was describing a SaberBat. So the easiest part is already done. It's just these pesky tails that are killing me.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

One of my original ideas was to

A) have an upper and lower set of YF23-style tails , able to elevate from completely flat to flight postion. Picture the airfoils on a Star Wars X-Wing.

or

B)Keep a 23-style on the upper body, but have a set of Paveway-esque auxilliary fins on the bootm half.


However I'm still not sure if that would actually be practical or not. Which has brought me to the impasse I'm at now. Here's what i have so far. Its DreamStar with the Paveway-ish tail. Check it out

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

This is all still work in progress.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Third and I believe final version. Enjoy!

Moonbat

 

[Matej]

Cool stuff but too thin I think, especially in the front section as seen on the side view.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Haha! Back to the drawing board!

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Rev. 3

Moonbat