Quote from: loupgarou on February 02, 2023, 01:03:03 PM

Quote from: PR19_Kit on February 02, 2023, 12:58:39 PMHmmmm, I'm thinking on something X-13 Vertijet based...................

Oh,yes, I can Imagine it. An X-13 with U-2 wings....

Longer prop blades

Quote from: loupgarou on February 02, 2023, 01:03:03 PMOh,yes, I can Imagine it. An X-13 with U-2 wings....

Hehehehe, I wasn't actually thinking like that, but now that you mention it............   

Quote from: Zero-Sen on February 02, 2023, 08:23:33 AMI may have an idea for this GB...

Quote from: Zero-Sen on March 01, 2018, 02:26:08 PM...
French licence built F-102F as a replacement for the lightweight interceptor program?
Details to notice :

• shorter, slightly larger intakes
• shorter weapons bay for two 'clipped wing' variant of the R530
• two 30mm DEFA in the remaining space
• wings with notched leading edges (stall fences removed)
• two SEPR rockets fitted in the tail fairings

...

Remember that the F-102's weapons bay was divided into three lengthways sections with six doors, each section holding two Falcons nose-to-tail. Getting a couple of R530s in there, clipped or not, would require considerable re-engineering. Not impossible, just needs a good coat of thinking about.

It would definitely be a replacement for a lightweight fighter.  

It would also be a lot slower, max. Mach 1.25 versus Mach 2.2 for the Mirage.

F-102:
Length: 20.83 m (68 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 11.61 m (38 ft 1 in)
Height: 6.464 m (21 ft 2.5 in)
Empty weight: 8,777 kg (19,350 lb)
Gross weight: 11,110 kg (24,494 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 14,288 kg (31,500 lb)

Mirage III:
Length: 15.03 m (49 ft 4 in)
Wingspan: 8.22 m (27 ft 0 in)
Height: 4.5 m (14 ft 9 in)
Empty weight: 7,050 kg (15,543 lb)
Gross weight: 9,600 kg (21,164 lb)
Max takeoff weight: 13,700 kg (30,203 lb)

Oof:

Mirage:
MTOW - Empty weight = 14,600lb
SNECMA Atar 09C:  9,440lb thrust dry, 13,240lb with afterburner

F-102:
MTOW - Empty weight = 12,150lb
P&W J57-P-25: 11,700lb thrust dry, 17,000lb with afterburner

So with 2,260lb less dry thrust and 3760lb less afterburning thrust, the Mirage managed to carry 2,500lb more fuel & weapons and have a top speed 76% faster...

I wonder if that F-102 max TO weight was the real limit of the airframe+engine or whether it was constrained by available capacity/pylons/bay payload? That is to say, if you could fill the bays with lead ballast weights instead of low-density missiles and uprate the pylons to carry bigger tanks, could it have taken off at higher weights?

The beauty of this GB is that as well as shiny fast "futuristic" stuff one can also consider WW2 vintage equipment remaining in service into the decade.

And the cars were fantastic.

An Imperial 2 door?   

A '55 300.   

Just done a bit of research.  Work on the Pegasus and what would become the Harrier began in 1957 while the first flight of the Mirage IV was 1959.
Spitfires remained in RAF service until IIRC 1954 (i'm sure Lee will correct me if i'm wrong).
MiG 21 introduced 1959.
M60 entered service 1959
T54 & T55 served through the fifties.

Quote from: zenrat on February 03, 2023, 04:05:17 AMA '55 300.   

Just done a bit of research.  Work on the Pegasus and what would become the Harrier began in 1957 while the first flight of the Mirage IV was 1959.
Spitfires remained in RAF service until IIRC 1954 (i'm sure Lee will correct me if i'm wrong).
MiG 21 introduced 1959.,
M60 entered service 1959
T54 & T55 served through the fifties.

Nearly everything from WW2 was still in use in the fifties, here or there...
Think only of Spain, and all the german planes they continued to use, and even tanks,as they managed to sell Pz IV to Syria, that fought in 1956...
And Italy sold fighters to Egypt.
Not to speak of South America,where WW2 aircraft were the newest in service.
Tons of amusing ideas in this GB.

Quote from: zenrat on February 03, 2023, 04:05:17 AMT54 & T55 served through the fifties.

T-44 was essentially a T-34/85 turret on a T-54 hull and saw some service.

A very large portion of my whiffworld is focused in the 50's, although it's a slightly alternate 50's to what actually happened...

The storyline is all over the place, and in my head only as I keep telling myself to write it down but for one reason or another I just don't get around to it, if I can piece enough of the story together to base at least one model on, and more importantly build that model I may just enter this GB.

Quintessentially 1950s concepts/hardware:

Interceptor fighters with huge batteries of unguided rockets.

Rocket-powered/boosted interceptors.

Subsonic, high-flying intercontinental jet bombers.

Huge intercontinental cruise missiles with nuclear warheads.

First generation, purpose-built, fully tracked APCs.

Fully enclosed, sometimes turreted, self-propelled artillery.

Converted cruisers with cumbersome first-generation SAM systems.

Wartime destroyers convered to fast frigates/destroyer-escorts to combat the new fast submarines.

New airliners with pre-war style sleeper cabins, lounges and bars.

Mass-produced piston-engined helicopters.

Thank you gentlemen,  , I now have an idea for this GB 

Well I had an idea for an aircraft but thanks to this discussion I have decided what to do with it and who it will be with. Hint: Naval Float Plane 

Gondor

Quote from: Weaver on February 03, 2023, 12:06:53 AMOof:

Mirage:
MTOW - Empty weight = 14,600lb
SNECMA Atar 09C:  9,440lb thrust dry, 13,240lb with afterburner

F-102:
MTOW - Empty weight = 12,150lb
P&W J57-P-25: 11,700lb thrust dry, 17,000lb with afterburner

So with 2,260lb less dry thrust and 3760lb less afterburning thrust, the Mirage managed to carry 2,500lb more fuel & weapons and have a top speed 76% faster...

I wonder if that F-102 max TO weight was the real limit of the airframe+engine or whether it was constrained by available capacity/pylons/bay payload? That is to say, if you could fill the bays with lead ballast weights instead of low-density missiles and uprate the pylons to carry bigger tanks, could it have taken off at higher weights?

Mirage external hardpoints make all the difference and it was designed as a fighter, the F-102 was designed as an interceptor, with all the limitations that implies. Including a lack of external carriage beyond fuel tanks. The J57 engine weighed ~ 2,000 lbs more than the Atar and all of the gubbins of the missile bay no doubt added a fair amount of weight.

Dump the weapons bay, replace it with fuel tanks and hardpoints, add more wing hardpoints and it would be more flexible, but you'd still have all of the aerodynamic limitations of the basic design. It was never as fast as it was supposed to be, thus the F-102B which was so different it was redesignated as F-106. The F-102 wouldn't be a good choice as a fighter.

1959 saw fins on cars reach their zenith.

1950 saw the first flight of the Douglas Skyshark.

Two possible builds there for me.  '59 Caddy hover car and RAN FAA Skyshark.