![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 19:46:27 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote: On that note, anyone got any idea of how much did the A7s long long legs reduce by when fitted with the bigger blower ? The A-7F, Corasair III, Strikefighter, etc. all included an airframe stretch and extra fuel in addition to an F100 or F110. Interesting, I didnt know about the F110 being considered for it. The airframe stretch was to allow the a/c to be supersonic (Mach 1.4 level IIRR), and the extra fuel was to keep the range/endurance in the same ballpark. Any idea of the peformance improvement on the 'lo' part of an attack mission with the F110/F100 ? For instance, here's the proposed Corsair III changes, which was designed to use rebuilt A-7A/A-7B airframes from the Boneyard, although A-7D/Es would be easier to convert: An F110-GE-100, 16,700 lb. mil and 27,600 lb. A/B; A constant-section plug of 29.5" to extend the fuselage around the wing root area; another plug of 7.5" to the aft fuselage to tailor the airframe to the F110 and its remote accessory gearbox. Rear fuselage canted upwards 5 degrees to provide ground clearance for the longer tailpipe. A more sharply-pointed nose cone (see F-8); the original was made blunter to reduce length on carriers. Internal configuration changed to increase fuel capacity. Did the USN have any interest in looking at a turbocharged E model ? greg -- $ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@' The Following is a true story..... Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 19:46:27 GMT, Guy Alcala wrote: snip The airframe stretch was to allow the a/c to be supersonic (Mach 1.4 level IIRR), and the extra fuel was to keep the range/endurance in the same ballpark. Any idea of the peformance improvement on the 'lo' part of an attack mission with the F110/F100 ? No. It might describe this in one of the AI articles, but I'd have to go digging through 10 years or so of mags to find the right one, and I'm just feeling too lazy. For instance, here's the proposed Corsair III changes, which was designed to use rebuilt A-7A/A-7B airframes from the Boneyard, although A-7D/Es would be easier to convert: An F110-GE-100, 16,700 lb. mil and 27,600 lb. A/B; A constant-section plug of 29.5" to extend the fuselage around the wing root area; another plug of 7.5" to the aft fuselage to tailor the airframe to the F110 and its remote accessory gearbox. Rear fuselage canted upwards 5 degrees to provide ground clearance for the longer tailpipe. A more sharply-pointed nose cone (see F-8); the original was made blunter to reduce length on carriers. Internal configuration changed to increase fuel capacity. Did the USN have any interest in looking at a turbocharged E model ? No, they had the F-18. The stretches were mainly aimed at the ANG and (they hoped) possible foreign customers. Guy |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 18:02:17 GMT, Guy Alcala
wrote: No. It might describe this in one of the AI articles, but I'd have to go digging through 10 years or so of mags to find the right one, and I'm just feeling too lazy. No worries :-), I was just curious. Did the USN have any interest in looking at a turbocharged E model ? No, they had the F-18. True, but something with 2 maybe 3 times the unrefuelled range carrying the same a2g load. The stretches were mainly aimed at the ANG and (they hoped) possible foreign customers. Neither the greeks or the portuguese took them up on that. greg -- $ReplyAddress =~ s#\@.*$##; # Delete everything after the '@' The Following is a true story..... Only the names have been changed to protect the guilty. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
GPT (Gulfport MS) ILS 14 question | A Lieberman | Instrument Flight Rules | 18 | January 30th 05 04:51 PM |
VOR/DME Approach Question | Chip Jones | Instrument Flight Rules | 47 | August 29th 04 05:03 AM |
A question on Airworthiness Inspection | Dave S | Home Built | 1 | August 10th 04 05:07 AM |
Tecumseh Engine Mounting Question | jlauer | Home Built | 7 | November 16th 03 01:51 AM |
Question about Question 4488 | [email protected] | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | October 27th 03 01:26 AM |