F-105 Thunderchief

[Archibald]

Well, I didn't think my scale-up would change the wing-loading enough to make it bad in low-level ops (I mean the RA-5C did quite well at low-level with a lower wing loading, as I remember it was the only other aircraft over 'Nam capable of sea-level mach+ performance).

Now, once upon a time, years and years ago, I saw a proposal for increasing the wing area of the F-105 for takeoff via modified wing tips, outboard of the outer-most hardpoints, that would unfold to add wing area and span for takeoff.

Now, considering that the F-105's equivalent was the Su-7, I wonder if a vg set-up similar to that of the Su-22 would work?  The somewhat stalky main gear would be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

Brilliant! But why didn't we thought about that before ??  :dum:  

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Well, I didn't think my scale-up would change the wing-loading enough to make it bad in low-level ops (I mean the RA-5C did quite well at low-level with a lower wing loading, as I remember it was the only other aircraft over 'Nam capable of sea-level mach+ performance).

Now, once upon a time, years and years ago, I saw a proposal for increasing the wing area of the F-105 for takeoff via modified wing tips, outboard of the outer-most hardpoints, that would unfold to add wing area and span for takeoff.

Now, considering that the F-105's equivalent was the Su-7, I wonder if a vg set-up similar to that of the Su-22 would work?  The somewhat stalky main gear would be a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

Instead of going to larger wings, why not something simple like just extending the wing span using the existing wing?  It would not be that dificult a task to say extend the wing span by adding a four foot extension to the existing wing and in the process add another wing pylon.  A minimal increase in wingspan might have given the F-105 the extra lift needed for those hot dry day take off rolls that used up most of the runway to get airborne.  With the added wing span and the additional pylon the F-105 could have been better prepared for the requirements of carrying fuel, ECM, AAM and bomb load to carry out the mission.  Adding a 1.00''/25mm section to each wing on a 1/48th scale aircraft would be a very subtle enough change to the existing model to make the "experten" look twice.  

[Wyrmshadow]

I've been following this thread and have been up all night doing some digital representations of this to better illustrate what I want.

Should it be called the Superchief, or how about the Thunderclap?

[Archibald]

Wow! That's really impressive!!              

[Wyrmshadow]

Can you experts guess all the parts I used?

[AeroplaneDriver]

Can you experts guess all the parts I used?

Well I think F-15 wings and Tronado intakes are a start.

Great looking machine you've designed there.  I'd love to see one in styrene, but beyind my skills I think.

Part of me thinks that it would look just as good with the original canopies though...

[Wyrmshadow]

Tornado intakes yes, but I used a Jaguar's wings. They were the closest to the Thud's in shape while still having a larger surface area. The originals just look so spindly. The bubble canopy is a massively deformed one from an F-16B and the spine is an idea I got from Isreali F-16I's.

[B777LR]

Sooooo cool! But could you do one with the original tail fin?

[AeroplaneDriver]

Tornado intakes yes, but I used a Jaguar's wings. They were the closest to the Thud's in shape while still having a larger surface area. The originals just look so spindly. The bubble canopy is a massively deformed one from an F-16B and the spine is an idea I got from Isreali F-16I's.

Duhh.....I feel a plonker for missing that one.

Is the Jag wing really larger than the F-105?  I've only ever been up close to a 105 once, but the impression I got was that it was a massive aircraft, while the jag seems pretty small.

edit-just did a quick check and the F-105 wing is considerably bigger than the Jag's-385 sq. ft vs 260 sq. ft.  

Still looks great, you just might not be able to make it in styrene using a Jag wing of the same scale.

[ysi_maniac]

Hi Wyrmshadow

I love your designs          

[Archibald]

Tornado intakes yes, but I used a Jaguar's wings. They were the closest to the Thud's in shape while still having a larger surface area. The originals just look so spindly. The bubble canopy is a massively deformed one from an F-16B and the spine is an idea I got from Isreali F-16I's.

Duhh.....I feel a plonker for missing that one.

Is the Jag wing really larger than the F-105?  I've only ever been up close to a 105 once, but the impression I got was that it was a massive aircraft, while the jag seems pretty small.

edit-just did a quick check and the F-105 wing is considerably bigger than the Jag's-385 sq. ft vs 260 sq. ft.  

Still looks great, you just might not be able to make it in styrene using a Jag wing of the same scale.

Yep! they are not the same size at all! The Jag is 15m long for 8 m span, the Thud was 20 m long for 10+ m span. Maybe a 1/48 scale Jaguar wing on a 1/72 Thud ? (scalorama   )

[ChuckAnderson]

Hi Everyone!

How about a twin-engine Thud?

Or a droop-snoot Thud.

A side-by-side two-seat Thud.

How about a "Thud-ner screech"?

Or a Thud with a variable-incidence wing (like the F-8 Crusader?)


Chuck

[Archibald]

Hi Everyone!

How about a twin-engine Thud?

Or a droop-snoot Thud.

A side-by-side two-seat Thud.

How about a "Thud-ner screech"?

Or a Thud with a variable-incidence wing (like the F-8 Crusader?)

Twin engine thud

Two J-79, Phantom competitor (but keep the small wings and fieri air intakes)

Droop snoot ? you mean, kike concorde or the delta II ?

side by side Thud... hmmm graft a F-102B cockpit on it (could look terrific!)

Thudnerscreech ? with a tyne, T-56, ( or TV2F or  NK-12 russian turboprops) , and very, very long undercarriage

Like the idea of a VI Thud... naval variant for PA-58 Verdun, Essex, and CVA-01 ?  

Nice ideas, chuck!

[Wyrmshadow]

Tornado intakes yes, but I used a Jaguar's wings. They were the closest to the Thud's in shape while still having a larger surface area. The originals just look so spindly. The bubble canopy is a massively deformed one from an F-16B and the spine is an idea I got from Isreali F-16I's.

Duhh.....I feel a plonker for missing that one.

Is the Jag wing really larger than the F-105?  I've only ever been up close to a 105 once, but the impression I got was that it was a massive aircraft, while the jag seems pretty small.

edit-just did a quick check and the F-105 wing is considerably bigger than the Jag's-385 sq. ft vs 260 sq. ft.  

Still looks great, you just might not be able to make it in styrene using a Jag wing of the same scale.

You are correct in saying that ACTUAL Jaguar wings would be much smaller. But those rules do not apply for me when I can make them any size I wish.

[elmayerle]

How about a twin-engine Thud?

Two smaller engines than the J75 or two J75s on an overall larger airframe?

The first would be challenging but do-able, cribbing a bit from Sukhoi's on a two-engined experimental version of their Su-9/-11.  The second sounds like a cross between a scaled-up F-105 and the Republic AP-75 that showed up over on Secret Projects.  Again, a challenge to model, but do-able.

Me, I'm concetrating on trying to just model the AP-75 as depicted.