Jun 042010
From a 1977 General Dynamics marketing plan comes a single illustration of a “Land-Based Multi-Purpose Naval Aircraft,” equipped with a seemingly excessive eight turboprops on an otherwise conventional “jetliner” configuration. No other information (performance, dimensions, role, etc.) was provided. Anybody knows more, I’d be interested…
7 Responses to “General Dynamics “Big Momma””
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Given the size of the cockpit windows, it doesn’t look all that large – say around 707 size?
Strange approach to a design, unless the idea was that you shut down around four of the engines in cruising flight and the only time they are all cranked up is for takeoff with a _lot_ of fuel or payload aboard.
In that case, a lot of jettisonable JATO bottles sounds like a more rational idea from the drag viewpoint.
Maybe it’s supposed to cruise around on four engines and have a really high sprint speed if it needs to get to a target in a hurry? The wing design makes it look like max speed with all engines running would be around 450-500 mph.
why call it “big momma”? SAC 1966-76 had dc-130 deployed drones. maybe the USN wanted “in” on that action, but didn’t want C-130’s?
I’m guessing there is a rear ramp along the lines of a C-141 hiding in the tail there to send out (and possibly capture?) the drones.
AHA! belay my previous comments!
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=861&dat=19761010&id=rS8PAAAAIBAJ&sjid=k4UDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6970,1688323
“three new developments, including a plane called a “big momma” because it would be big and versatile, could shrink the historic role of the aircraft carrier in the Navy”
I’m betting the carrier guys weren’t too thrilled with this one and that led to the project’s demise…..
The article makes it sound like they are trying to stick too many missions into one aircraft design, like they did with the F-111.
That Backfires were tasked with shooting cruise missiles at US aircraft carriers should have come as no surprise, because their Tu-16 Badger and Tu-22 Blinder predecessors had that as one of their missions also.
Big Momma sounds like the US Navy was looking at the Soviet Bear bomber and thinking it needed something along those lines also, but capable of performing a wider range of missions. The thing must have had a big bomb bay on it considering all the things it was supposed to do.
BTW, the big Soviet cruise missile scare from that time period was the AS-6 “Kingfish”. This was supposed to be a terror-missile that was powered, according to who you read, by a solid-fuel rocket, a ramjet, or a ram-rocket like the SA-6 SAM had.
Whatever it was, all the military authors stressed that even though it looked a lot like a AS-4 “Kitchen”, it was something entirely new, and far more formidable than a AS-4.
In actuality, all it was was a AS-4 scaled down some so that two could be carried by a Tu-16 Badger on its wing pylons.
When the missile carrying Badgers were taken out of service at the end of the Cold War, the AS-6’s were converted into high speed target drones.
The “inferior” AS-4 though remained in service….so much for the super-missile.
[…] or “ekranoplan” configuration. From the same management presentation as the “Big Momma,” here’s the equally minimally described “Advanced Interface Vehicle.” […]
As long as Scott is blowing his own horn about Helen Thomas, I will point out that the newspaper article cited above describes the aircraft as being “about the size of the Boeing 707 transport” and its speed as “could cruise at about 460 miles an hour”
I said it looked like it was “say around 707 size?” and “The wing design makes it look like max speed with all engines running would be around 450-500 mph.”
Split the difference and that comes out as 475 MPH, so I got the speed right to within 15mph, which I don’t think exactly sucks for one basic drawing of the thing. 🙂