Improve That Design: How Aircraft Could Have Been Made Better (Cold-War Edition)

[swampyankee]

Here's my entry; a delta-winged F-104.

Very nice, even though it looks like a Mirage

 

[XBe02Drvr]

don't know about this engine stalling due to some turbulence from the island. If there was a particular problem, I think they would have made some aerodynamic changes to the island. I don't think they did.

It was a double whammy, the obstruction turbulence of the island and the thermal convection turbulence of the stack gasses, made worse the faster the ship was going. It wasn't so much flameouts, which did occur once in a while, as momentary compressor stalls which would cause a brief reduction in thrust and a settle below glide slope into ramp strike territory. The antidote was a brief burst of power perfectly timed to coincide with the anticipated burble.
Cheers,
Wes

 

[Zipper730]

It was a double whammy, the obstruction turbulence of the island and the thermal convection turbulence of the stack gasses, made worse the faster the ship was going. It wasn't so much flameouts, which did occur once in a while, as momentary compressor stalls which would cause a brief reduction in thrust and a settle below glide slope into ramp strike territory. The antidote was a brief burst of power perfectly timed to coincide with the anticipated burble.

You know, I would have thought it was just to set up a potential go-around in the event of a failed approach. I guess you learn something new every day.

 

[jmcalli2]

It's an intellectual exercise, revolving around how aircraft could have been made better with technology available at the time.

1. The existing specification: Basically, the idea would be working within the existing specification, but you could modify or change anything within the boundary of it.
2. A different winner: Sometimes the problem wasn't the design so much as the winner to the contender
3. A more realistic/practical specification: Basically the specifications are made more realistic to allow a practical design to be developed.

I would assume that the changes could include differences in aerodynamics, in installation of existing equipment, in propulsion system where applicable and allowable. I guess conceptual designs that didn't fly could also be included.

I would say that other developments like gun/cannon and missile design would also be discussable to a point.

F-84 Delta; would it fly?

It's an intellectual exercise, revolving around how aircraft could have been made better with technology available at the time.

1. The existing specification: Basically, the idea would be working within the existing specification, but you could modify or change anything within the boundary of it.
2. A different winner: Sometimes the problem wasn't the design so much as the winner to the contender
3. A more realistic/practical specification: Basically the specifications are made more realistic to allow a practical design to be developed.

I would assume that the changes could include differences in aerodynamics, in installation of existing equipment, in propulsion system where applicable and allowable. I guess conceptual designs that didn't fly could also be included.

I would say that other developments like gun/cannon and missile design would also be discussable to a point.

It's an intellectual exercise, revolving around how aircraft could have been made better with technology available at the time.

1. The existing specification: Basically, the idea would be working within the existing specification, but you could modify or change anything within the boundary of it.
2. A different winner: Sometimes the problem wasn't the design so much as the winner to the contender
3. A more realistic/practical specification: Basically the specifications are made more realistic to allow a practical design to be developed.

I would assume that the changes could include differences in aerodynamics, in installation of existing equipment, in propulsion system where applicable and allowable. I guess conceptual designs that didn't fly could also be included.

I would say that other developments like gun/cannon and missile design would also be discussable to a point.

It's an intellectual exercise, revolving around how aircraft could have been made better with technology available at the time.

1. The existing specification: Basically, the idea would be working within the existing specification, but you could modify or change anything within the boundary of it.
2. A different winner: Sometimes the problem wasn't the design so much as the winner to the contender
3. A more realistic/practical specification: Basically the specifications are made more realistic to allow a practical design to be developed.

I would assume that the changes could include differences in aerodynamics, in installation of existing equipment, in propulsion system where applicable and allowable. I guess conceptual designs that didn't fly could also be included.

I would say that other developments like gun/cannon and missile design would also be discussable to a point.

One more; An improved P6M;

 

[XBe02Drvr]

F-84 Delta; would it fly?

Looks like a Republic (in other words, overweight and underpowered) take on the XF92.

 

[Zipper730]

Looks like a Republic (in other words, overweight and underpowered) take on the XF92.

That is interesting how Republic had such a tendency to do this...

 

[XBe02Drvr]

That is interesting how Republic had such a tendency to do this...

Call it "the Thunderbolt legacy". Almost as if they were trying to rival their next door neighbors, the "Grumman iron works", except they overdid it when they didn't have access to powerplants that could handle the beef. Not 'til the mighty Thud did they get it together.

 

[The Basket]

There are a lot of British post war jets which are worthy of many book on this subject.

All the Supermarines basically!

Always liked the look of the Mirage F.1. it just looks like a jet should. A very basic looking no frills jet.

 

[swampyankee]

There are a lot of British post war jets which are worthy of many book on this subject.

All the Supermarines basically!

Always liked the look of the Mirage F.1. it just looks like a jet should. A very basic looking no frills jet.

When you compare the delta Mirages to the swept wing Mirage F.1, one wonders why the F.1didn't do much better in the marketplace.

 

[jmcalli2]

When you compare the delta Mirages to the swept wing Mirage F.1, one wonders why the F.1didn't do much better in the marketplace.

My guess is short range.

 

[jmcalli2]

Improved P6M

 

[jmcalli2]

Improved F-105

 

[jmcalli2]

Very nice, even though it looks like a Mirage

I always wondered if the F-104 would perform better as a delta winged fighter.

 

[jmcalli2]

J93 powered F-104

 

[swampyankee]

My guess is short range.

From what I've read, the F.1 had a longer range, better runway requirements, and improved agility. It may have been more expensive, though, or Dassault may have found the delta-winged Mirages much more profitable and pushed sales of the aircraft harder.

 

[jmcalli2]

F-100 Super Dart

 

[swampyankee]

I think the two improvements that had the best chance of success were the Lockheed Lancer and the Northrop F-5G.

I find the F-16XL very interesting (this one is being operated by NASA, who have been known to do weird things to their aircraft, but the F-16XL was originally funded by the USAF)

(Picture source: F-16XL Ship #2 Supersonic Laminar Flow Control experiment)

 

[The Basket]

From what I read the F.1 is better pretty much in all respects to the Mirage III so odd the French moved back to the delta with 2000 and Rafale.

I remember reading the story of the test pilot on the Gloster Javelin. He was basically told to shut up. The Javelin was not a fantastic design but the RAF were buying them so any handling problem was the RAF issue now

 

[swampyankee]

Ejection seats would have been nice in the A3D and F3D, especially since landing and takeoff are the most likely times for accidents.

The F3H Demon was under-powered; it looks like the J-57 would fit and provide more power.

 

[XBe02Drvr]

So the problems had to do with jet-aircraft in particular (the inability to take turbulent airflow into the compressor), as well as the fact that they were flying with a slight crosswind.

Actually, they weren't flying into a crosswind. Drill was (is) to steer the ship a few degrees off the wind to put the airflow as close as possible to right down the angle. This eliminates most of the crab angle the aircraft has to hold, but doesn't change the fact the airstrip is constantly sliding to starboard of a lined-up approach, necessitating a slight crab to the right. This is what nugget aviators hitting the boat for the first time after days and days of FCLP (Field Carrier Landing Practice) have the most difficulty adjusting to. Seen from the PLAT screen, the nugget lines up centered in the cross hairs (or not) and drifts inexorably toward the right edge of the screen, ultimately either taking a waveoff or making a last minute correction that has the LSOs diving for the catwalk.
Cheers,
Wes