May 182011
The Bell X-14C was described in an article in Aerospace Projects Review, issue V1N3 (still available, by the way). Here is a piece of artwork from the Ira G. Ross Aerospace Museum archives in Niagara Falls, NY, depicting the three-engined VTOL X-14C in flight. Derived from both the X-14 and the T-37, the X-14C was to be an operational ground attack/troop support plane. Payload, range and speed would be limited when compared to something like a contemporary Fast Mover, but it would’ve been notable faster than something like a Cobra attack helicopter.
Hey, if’n ya like this sort of thing, why not wander over HERE and show your appreciation…
12 Responses to “Bell X-14C Artwork”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Clickover to PayPal does not work (at least for me).
Revised.
Take off the tail and wings and that thing is the Spinner — the flying car à la mode Blade Runner that everyone’s been dreaming about since the 1940s.
I’m concerned about their title — “X-14C – The Airplane” as opposed to what, “X-14C – The Snack Food?” “X-14C – The Novel?”
Without being bothered to check the other computer for the scans I made just last month, I believe this was to contrast against “X-14C – the potential payloads.”
Still looks like a Cessna T-37 trainer to me.
The slipper tanks on the leading edge of the wings are odd, as you would think that the last thing you would want to do on a aircraft using this V/STOL concept is move the CG even slightly backwards or forwards during a mission.
The main landing gear has to go *somewhere.*
You are going to put the main gear _ahead_ of the CG? Is it supposed to be a tailgear design?
Also it looks like the bomb pylon attaches to the bottom of the tank, or whatever it is.
I found your article with a front view of it, and the landing gear folds inwards, not up into the pod: http://up-ship.com/blog/blog/?p=2807
> the landing gear folds inwards
You are correct.
> You are going to put the main gear _ahead_ of the CG?
*I* am not. And neither was Bell: the X-14C was *very* nose heavy. Note where the three engines exhaust… way up front. The mains only have to be aft of that.
That would’ve looked good in close support ops markings. Put it in camo next to an operational VZ-12?
It might have been fairly effective in that role; it looks like it would have pretty good maneuverability even if weapons weight wouldn’t have been very high, sort of like a cross between a Huey Cobra and a A-37 Dragonfly
The A-37 worked okay in the light attack role from what I’ve heard, although it could carry more than this design looks capable of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cessna_A-37_Dragonfly
The three engine layout mean that you could get decent range with the two outer ones shut down for horizontal flight, but it seems like in a lot of jet VTOL aircraft of this period, you then end up carrying around extra jet jet engines that you don’t use except at the beginning and end of the flight.