Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 62
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

This idea of mothership and fighter concept was proposed for the deep penetration fighter project run by the USA AF for use of bomber going to China over the Pacfic. It seems that this project was terminated years ago.

Edited by TrustMe
Posted

Project Tip Tow

Tip-Bud-960_640.jpg

That's a Culver Q-14 or PQ-14 Cadet.

EB-29B-44-62093-EF-84D-wingtip-coupling.

B-36-wingtip-coupling-640x427.jpg

zEqM7mTyBrVzTbN6TKt4yydpmedboNCaKhX1qoZf

The GRB-36 and RF-84K combination actually saw limited service.

The 40s thru early 60s were a weird and wonderful time...

ngcb1

ngcb1

Lockheed XFV-1 Salmon

Convair did it better with the XFY-1 Pogo:

Ground handling was interesting...

convair-xfy-pogo-50506-741x475.png

convair-xfy-hangar-34754-741x475.png

1280px-Convair_XFY-1_in_flight.jpg

Then there was the later Ryan Vertijet:

Ryan-X13-Vertijet-Flight-Rendering.jpg

Trust the French to push the boundaries of weird, with the Snecma C.450:

Beetle-C450-1.1419969614.jpeg?quality=90

The Army tried to get in the game with the Piasecki Airgeep:

axtplirveas01.jpg

Doug

 

Posted

The Grumman XF5F probably warrants a mention for the unfortunate nose/wing placement.

deliveryService?id=NASM-NASM.XXXX.0356-M

Lengthening the forward end of the fuselage into a proboscis and changing the name to XP-50 didn't particularly improve the aesthetics.

XP-50-1.jpg

Doug

Posted
2 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

The Grumman XF5F probably warrants a mention for the unfortunate nose/wing placement.

deliveryService?id=NASM-NASM.XXXX.0356-M

Lengthening the forward end of the fuselage into a proboscis and changing the name to XP-50 didn't particularly improve the aesthetics.

XP-50-1.jpg

Doug

Indeed.  The Navy version did turn in some pretty impressive performance, though.

Posted

Regarding parasites, the Soviets also tried some ideas in the '30s and the '50s.

Posted
13 hours ago, TrustMe said:

This idea of mothership and fighter concept was proposed for the deep penetration fighter project run by the USA AF for use of bomber going to China over the Pacfic. It seems that this project was terminated years ago.

On at least one occasion the aircraft refused to hook back up, and they had to belly land it if I recall correctly. That the aircraft were wholly inferior to the fighters they would have to fight meant it was a very short lived experiment.

 

8 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

The Grumman XF5F probably warrants a mention for the unfortunate nose/wing placement.

deliveryService?id=NASM-NASM.XXXX.0356-M

Lengthening the forward end of the fuselage into a proboscis and changing the name to XP-50 didn't particularly improve the aesthetics.

XP-50-1.jpg

Doug

Perhaps, but I suspect you can draw a line from the Xp-50 to tigercat.

 

Posted
4 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

On at least one occasion the aircraft refused to hook back up, and they had to belly land it if I recall correctly. That the aircraft were wholly inferior to the fighters they would have to fight meant it was a very short lived experiment.

 

Perhaps, but I suspect you can draw a line from the Xp-50 to tigercat.

 

Yes, I recall one video that made that connection.

Posted
13 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

zEqM7mTyBrVzTbN6TKt4yydpmedboNCaKhX1qoZf

 

Viewed from this angle, the F-84 looks like it oughta reach about Mach 3. That is one sleek profile!

 

Posted (edited)

Disagree: no area rule, and engine outlet way too small.

There was a thing flight attendants used to say about the earlier Airbus A340s: those planes had hairdryers instead of engines.

F-GLZL_A340_Air_Madagascar_(8023478348).

Edited by sunday
Posted (edited)

Thrust, I think.

They need a lot of runway when taking off at load.

Edited by sunday
Posted

Area rule is for trans-sonic drag reduction.

Republic could build some good-looking aircraft:

Republic_XF-12_Rainbow_In_photo_is_the_R

XR-12 Rainbow (competition for the Hughes XF-11) with the odd-looking but functional RC-3 Seabee.  Apparently LS-swapping the RC-3 is not uncommon.

Of course, there was the XF-91 Thunderceptor that combined turbojet and rocket power, reverse taper wings, outward folding bogie wheel main landing gear, and a variable incidence wing.

Republic_XF-91_banking_away_in_flight.jp

Although she looks pretty good from some angles:

Republic_XF-91.jpg

A V-tail was also tried, for the pilot that flew Bonanzas on the weekend:

1280px-XF91-22republic.jpg

The XF-84H Thunderscreech was a pretty bird, in my opinion the best looking of the F-84 family, if also the most flawed:

republic-xf-84h-thunderscreech-2-59247-7

As far as hybrids go, the XF-88B Voodoo wasn't terrible looking, although the One-Oh-Wonder has better proportions:

McDonnell_XF-88B_(SN_46-525)_turboprop_l

Middle River Stump Jumper--XB-26H bicycle landing gear testbed is a bit odd:

060711-F-1234S-006.JPG

The Gilbert XF-120 adopted the landing gear layout, but is a looker, if a bit weird with the engine placement.  The Martin XB-51 pioneered the rotary bomb bay door later adapted to the US B-57 Canberra variants.

USAF-XB-51-Featured-Image-610x435.jpg

PhotoRoom_20230416_133321.jpg
 

WRT the XF-85 Goblin, I remember seeing the Monogram Flapjack kit as a kid and I assumed there was an inspirational link:

Doug

Posted
11 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

Area rule is for trans-sonic drag reduction.

Yes, so no way that F-84 is going Mach 3.

Posted

That Seabee is a classic example of form following function.  One ugly little bird, but it worked remarkably well.  I read a pilot review of one long ago, and a main point was how remarkable spaciousness of the cabin.

Posted
42 minutes ago, shep854 said:

That Seabee is a classic example of form following function.  One ugly little bird, but it worked remarkably well.  I read a pilot review of one long ago, and a main point was how remarkable spaciousness of the cabin.

I often wondered what it was. The same type also turned up in the original film of 'The Wicker man.'

 

Posted

53ae49f2-4a06-4869-98fd-2b960f8b976d.jpg

 

Airborne FLIP ship?

If that's not goofy enough for you, try this:

gyrodyne-ron-rotorcycle-helicopter-fitte

gyrodyne-ron-rotorcycle-helicopter-fitte

 

Doug

Posted
13 hours ago, Ol Paint said:

53ae49f2-4a06-4869-98fd-2b960f8b976d.jpg

 

Airborne FLIP ship?

If that's not goofy enough for you, try this:

gyrodyne-ron-rotorcycle-helicopter-fitte

gyrodyne-ron-rotorcycle-helicopter-fitte

 

Doug

Yeah, that's goofy.  I'd like to see the Mariner fly with that rig...

  • 2 weeks later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...