General Dynamics Fv-13a

[Howard of Effingham]

Maybe I should post some pics of my model at "the whatif and oddball model page" ? (Telford V/STOL GB...)

good idea!  ^_^  B)    

[Archibald]

I've posted one pic, then made a mistake. I've dowloaded the MSN sofware (so that I can put more photos at the same time, not only one).
Since then, no way of adding more pics...     I'll try again later...

Thanks for the cheers comments guys!

Now I'm tempted by the AV-16 you know. With all these AV-8B at the shop   ... what are the main differencies ? (Tony Buttler is a bit "short" on the subject in its book, maybe because it was not a 100 % British design   )

I love Harriers, I've already build four of them. Harrier, Harrier II and Sea Harrier FR.1, of course, but I also changed a  Harrier T.10 into a supersonic interceptor... (my own vision of the Harrier III in fact! )

[ysi_maniac]

Any pic (3 view or artist's impression) of that AV-16?

[Archibald]

There's one in Tony Buttler book. I'll try to take a decent photo of it, then post it here ok ?

Guys, there's now a bunch of pics of the XFV-13A at "the whatif and oddball model page"      

[Thorvic]

Try Harriers Harrier.org  website as that has the later AV-16 drawing.

[Thorvic]

I've posted one pic, then made a mistake. I've dowloaded the MSN sofware (so that I can put more photos at the same time, not only one).
Since then, no way of adding more pics...     I'll try again later...

Thanks for the cheers comments guys!

Now I'm tempted by the AV-16 you know. With all these AV-8B at the shop   ... what are the main differencies ? (Tony Buttler is a bit "short" on the subject in its book, maybe because it was not a 100 % British design   )

I love Harriers, I've already build four of them. Harrier, Harrier II and Sea Harrier FR.1, of course, but I also changed a  Harrier T.10 into a supersonic interceptor... (my own vision of the Harrier III in fact! )

The AV-16 in BSP:B is basically an AV-8B fuselage fitted with SHAR fwd fuselage, SHAR tail fin and SHAR nozzels. The Pylon placement is also slightly different from the AV-8B.

(Basically its cross kitting an Italeri AV-8B with an Italeri Sea Harrier FRS1. Italeri AV-8B becasue it still has the double rox aux inlet doors around the intakes as opposed to the larger ones on later kits as Italeri just modified their original YAV-8B kit)

G

[F-32]

very nice indeed, really good job  

[elmayerle]

It's not a whif per se, but there's a thought of doing an AV-8C from one of the better AV-8A kits, and then using the applicable bits of that mod to whif a Harrier GR.3A in RAuxAF markings.

[Archibald]

I've posted one pic, then made a mistake. I've dowloaded the MSN sofware (so that I can put more photos at the same time, not only one).
Since then, no way of adding more pics...     I'll try again later...

Thanks for the cheers comments guys!

Now I'm tempted by the AV-16 you know. With all these AV-8B at the shop  ... what are the main differencies ? (Tony Buttler is a bit "short" on the subject in its book, maybe because it was not a 100 % British design  )

I love Harriers, I've already build four of them. Harrier, Harrier II and Sea Harrier FR.1, of course, but I also changed a  Harrier T.10 into a supersonic interceptor... (my own vision of the Harrier III in fact! )

The AV-16 in BSP:B is basically an AV-8B fuselage fitted with SHAR fwd fuselage, SHAR tail fin and SHAR nozzels. The Pylon placement is also slightly different from the AV-8B.

(Basically its cross kitting an Italeri AV-8B with an Italeri Sea Harrier FRS1. Italeri AV-8B becasue it still has the double rox aux inlet doors around the intakes as opposed to the larger ones on later kits as Italeri just modified their original YAV-8B kit)

G

Thank you for the tip! I see you already studied this case    

I've always felt that if the USN had been serious about vstol fighters, they'd have gone for an AV-16 variant for the immediate future and committed R&D funding to explore other, less established, concepts. Instead, they bet it all on the riskiest approach with no fall-back. I can't help wondering if the XFV-12A's failure was used to help justify killing the SCS.

Well my main source of data on the XVF-12 / type 200 history (aside the web and secret projects) is Le Fana de l'Aviation, april 2003 article by Alexis Rocher (au fait, he is now member of the Secret Projects board   )

According to the article, the General Dynamics was funded even after  the XVF-12 won, in January 1972 (some USN staff had doubts about the "groundbreaking"
XFV-12  concept)

So why the type 200 was not build after XFV-12 failure ? Because of timing problems... delays in the XFV-12 program pushed the prototype stage to mid- 77.
But at the time, the General Dynamics study had been stopped in 1974, after Zumwalt resignation, which led to (imediate) death of the Sea Control Ship.

Had the SCS survived (Zumwalt stay longer?) until 1980 or so, maybe the
Type 200 would have been build as XFV-12 replacement...

PS As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Anthony P "manifesto" has some interesting "austere carriers" concepts. they are loaded with evolved Harriers and XFV-12. Just replace XVF-12 by Type 200