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
|
|||
|
|||
XF-103 Thunderwarrior
Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out
there" when compared to the technology of the time: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103.jpg XF-103 Cut-Away: http://www.testpilot.ru/usa/republic...ges/xf103v.gif XF-103 Colors: http://www.alpha-net.ne.jp/users2/ku...st103color.jpg XF-103 Model: http://www.collectaire.com/modelpages/xf103/xf103.html The modeling page is all color with all views. Truly ahead of its time, but only ranked 8th out of 9 design proposals that led to the F-102. Rob |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: | | XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103.jpg | XF-103 Cut-Away: http://www.testpilot.ru/usa/republic...ges/xf103v.gif | XF-103 Colors: http://www.alpha-net.ne.jp/users2/ku...st103color.jpg | XF-103 Model: http://www.collectaire.com/modelpages/xf103/xf103.html | | The modeling page is all color with all views. Truly ahead of its | time, but only ranked 8th out of 9 design proposals that led to the | F-102. | | Rob Would certainly keep the runways clean. Cheers Dave Kearton |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Dave Kearton" wrote in message ...
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"robert arndt" wrote in message om... "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Nope. Wrong, again. It's: http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm (Or, if you like it short and sweet, it is: http://tinyurl.com/25ktk . Cheers. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
(B2431) wrote in message ...
From: (robert arndt) Date: 2/14/2004 10:53 AM Central "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Try http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired Hopefully, a better link... http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/airdef/f-103-1.jpg Rob |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"B2431" wrote in message ... From: (robert arndt) Date: 2/14/2004 10:53 AM Central "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Try http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm Thanks. Looking at it, the aircraft would likely have had the same sort of performance shortfall that the F102 prototype had because of lack of area ruling. During that period, transonic aerodynamics were very poorly understood and engine development failed a lot. The J-67 was one of those failures IIRC. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Paul F Austin" wrote:
"B2431" wrote in message ... From: (robert arndt) Date: 2/14/2004 10:53 AM Central "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Try http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm Thanks. Looking at it, the aircraft would likely have had the same sort of performance shortfall that the F102 prototype had because of lack of area ruling. During that period, transonic aerodynamics were very poorly understood and engine development failed a lot. The J-67 was one of those failures IIRC. The XJ67 was a US license built Bristol Olympus engine and was also proposed as an F-102 powerplant. Versions of the Bristol Olympus powered the Vulcan, the TSR-2 and it was the basis of the Rolls-Royce/SNECMA Olympus that developed almost 40,000 lb at sea level installed in the Concorde. What was supposed to give the XF-103 mach 3+ performance was the XRJ55 afterburner/ramjet. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:26:45 -0500, "Paul F Austin"
wrote: "B2431" wrote in message ... From: (robert arndt) Date: 2/14/2004 10:53 AM Central "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Try http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm Thanks. Looking at it, the aircraft would likely have had the same sort of performance shortfall that the F102 prototype had because of lack of area ruling. During that period, transonic aerodynamics were very poorly understood and engine development failed a lot. The J-67 was one of those failures IIRC. AFAIK the "coke bottle" fuselage shape is only an indicator of area ruling. There are many high speed aircraft over the years that didn't have a coke bottle shape to the fuselage. Area ruling takes in the whole package, not just the fuselage. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message ... On Sat, 14 Feb 2004 22:26:45 -0500, "Paul F Austin" wrote: "B2431" wrote in message ... From: (robert arndt) Date: 2/14/2004 10:53 AM Central "Dave Kearton" wrote in message ... "robert arndt" wrote in message om... | Check out one of the F-102's competitors. This aircraft is truly "out | there" when compared to the technology of the time: Correct link to Mock-up: XF-103 Mock-Up: http://wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/fighter/f103-1.jpg Rob Try http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/resea...ghter/f103.htm Thanks. Looking at it, the aircraft would likely have had the same sort of performance shortfall that the F102 prototype had because of lack of area ruling. During that period, transonic aerodynamics were very poorly understood and engine development failed a lot. The J-67 was one of those failures IIRC. AFAIK the "coke bottle" fuselage shape is only an indicator of area ruling. There are many high speed aircraft over the years that didn't have a coke bottle shape to the fuselage. Area ruling takes in the whole package, not just the fuselage. Yep but doing an eyeball-analysis of the F103 picture makes it look like the cross section graph would have multiple humps and jumps starting at the inlet with a ramp starting at the begining of the wing root, a sharp drop at the aft extent of the wing, then another ramp with bumps for the tail.. "Coke-bottling" was the first-generation effort and applying the area rule but the people designing the F102 and F103 certainly weren't beyond that first generation. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|