A fighter design that will likely turn up in a future issue of US Fighter Projects…
May 192020
Apr 302020
I’m terrible at posting updates on the latest rewards, but I do get every rewards package out on time. That said, APR Patrons and Monthly Historical Documents Program subscribers have just been sent the rewards for April, 202. This package includes:
1) “Flying Carpet Feasibility Study Submarine Carrier,” a full scan of the 1958 Boeing report on a series of submarines design to carrying Mach3+ VTOL strike fighters
2) “F10F Descriptive Data,” a full scan of a 1953 Lockheed document describing this competitors design
3) Diagram 35-17610, B-52 airdrop carrier aircraft for the Model 844-2050 X-20 Dyna Soar
4) A CAD diagram of a two-stage Rockwell Trans Atmospheric Vehicle using a ground effect machine first stage
If this sort of thing is of interest and you’d like to get in on it and make sure you don’t miss any of the forthcoming releases, sign up either for the APR Patreon or the APR Monthly Historical Documents Program.
All prior “back issues” are available for purchase by subscribers.
Apr 302020
The Dyna Soar would, had it been completed, have been the first manned reusable lifting spacecraft. But, sadly, after waaaaay too much money was spent on it, in late 1963 that genius for the ages SecDef Robert McNamara cancelled it and on the same day announced the Manned Orbiting Laboratory… which, after spending waaaay too much money, was also cancelled.
Anyway…
The Dyna Soar was not a “vehicle” like the X-30 National Aerospace Plane which would have its own built-in fully functional propulsion system; nor even like the Space Shuttle Orbiter, which carries the SSME’s and the OMS system. The Dyna Soar was much more akin to the Soviet Buran or the current X-37 in that it was effectively purely a payload, reliant upon the Titan IIIC for launch into orbit, the Titan Transstage for on-orbit propulsion, and a Thiokol solid rocket motor for a de-orbit burn. All it had for its own propulsion was a series of hydrogen peroxide monoprop thrusters for reaction control. It did have a hydrogen/oxygen fuel cell, but it was, more or less, a largely inert chunk of metal. So you might not think that abort would be a big issue, apart from getting out of Dodge if the booster goes high order.
Still, from the beginning of the program and for several years it was planned that the Dyna soar would have not just an ejector seat, but an abort capsule. The entire forward portion of the vehicle would be able to jettison, serving as a re-entry capable “lifeboat” for the lone pilot. By the end of the program the concept had evaporated, being replaced with an ejector seat, and for a good reason: someone finally ran the numbers and realized that an abort capsule added *ridiculous* amounts of weight and complexity to a vehicle already overburdened with weight and complexity. After the Challenger disaster NASA and Rockwell looked at modifying the Space Shuttle with the same sort of jettisonable forward fuselage, and came to the same conclusion that, in essence, “that weighs too much, and astronauts are prepared to take risks.”
The page below from a 1959 report presents artwork depicting the then-current Dyna Soar configuration deploying the escape capsule. It bears a striking resemblance to the McDonnell ASSET test vehicle. This is not accidental, as the ASSET was roughly modeled after the forward fuselage of the Dyna Soar.
Apr 232020
In 1974 Messerschmitt-Bolkow-Blohm studied a twin-engine derivative of the F-104 Starfighter, largely because West Germany had themselves some F-104’s that were showing their age. At first glance the design looks pretty much like a stock F-104, but from above it’s clear that it has two engines.
This illustration came from a 1983 paper about the development of the TKF/J-90, an early competitor for what would become the Eurofighter.
The paper that the above illustrations came from has been scanned and made available to above-$10 APR subscribers and Patrons.
Apr 222020
Turns out I have a diagram of the Hiller quad-lift-duct “flying crane” that I posted artwork of a while back. Not much more data than just the diagram, however.
Apr 212020
Published in the German “Der Flieger” magazine in 1967, this diagram depicts a strategic bomber seemingly of the AMSA variety. But the minimal text accompanying the diagram gives no indication *who* designed it. Boeing? Lockheed? Tupolev? Volkswagen? If anyone recognizes it, I’d appreciate any info.
Apr 182020
Sold on ebay a while back, a piece of NASA color art depicting a Shuttle orbiter dropping off a satellite (more likely a deep-space probe given the bizarrely-located RTGs). The orbiter, however, does not seem to be closely based on an actual design. It has some similarity to a North American Rockwell concept, but I’d wager that it’s mostly artistic license.
Apr 162020
Every few years people rediscover the Zeppelin and decide that it’s the future of aviation. And then… not much happens. Shown below is a mid-1970’s piece of NASA artwork depicting a heavy lift cargo dirigible that uses four CH-54 Skycranes for added lift and control. It’s shown here transporting an M-60 main battle tank to or from a cargo ship. Such an arrangement *could* work and has been tried, though it was hardly an unqualified success.
The full-rez scan of this cutaway has been made available to all $4 and up APR Patreons and Monthly Historical Document Program subscribers. It was uploaded to the 2019-12 APR Extras folder on Dropbox for Patreons and subscribers. If interested in this piece or if you are interested in helping to fund the preservation of this sort of thing, please consider becoming a patron, either through the APR Patreon or the Monthly Historical Document Program.
Apr 142020
A concept circa 1968 for a Sikorsky “Advancing Blade Concept” troop transport. The ABC rotor system theoretically permits notably higher forward speed than is normal for helicopter, since the lift generator at high forward speeds is balanced (not the case for conventional choppers). The ABC rotor system was tested extensively in the 70’s with the Sikorsky S-69, but the design and materials of the time were not quite up to the challenge and the craft suffered from excessive vibration. In recent years the tech seems to have been more or less perfected with the S-97 Raider, which hopefully will go into production and finally fulfill the promise of the ABC rotor system.
Apr 122020
NASA does not seem to have thought highly of the Boeing proposal for the Lunar Gateway…
Source Selection Statement for the Gateway Logistics Services Contract
Particularly within the Technical Approach subfactor (the most important within the Mission Suitability factor), Boeing’s proposal was the lowest rated of the four offers, with the inadequacy of its cargo stowage design identified as a significant weakness. I further note that Boeing took several exceptions to the RFP and predicated its fixed price on several key assumptions/exceptions. This made it impossible for the SEB to determine whether Boeing’s offered price was reasonable. From a Past Performance standpoint, Boeing did very well, having earned a High Level of Confidence rating (along with NGIS and SpaceX). However, Boeing’s High rating cannot overcome its Mission Suitability ratings and the significant issues present in its Price proposal. That is, since Boeing’s proposal was the highest priced and the lowest rated under the Mission Suitability factor, while additionally providing a conditional fixed price, I have decided to eliminate Boeing from further award consideration. This offeror’s evaluation results and my assessment thereof, combined with the relative order of importance of the RFP’s evaluation factors, have led me to conclude that Boeing is not competitive for award.
It’s Not Boeing And They Ain’t Going.
Gone are the days when Boeing was run by engineers and ruled the world.