S-3 Viking, US-3 Viking COD, and ES-3 Shadow

[The Rat]

I was looking at pictures of an S3 Viking and thinking that's one short little bugger. There has to be a lot of stretch potential in there, but even though it's been chopped and modded various times they don't seem to have ever lengthened it. Any particular reason, other than storage on a deck and getting it on an elevator? I should think that there would be a number of uses that a longer one could be put to.  

[John Howling Mouse]

That is a great idea.   Did you see the article in FSM about 2 or 3 issues back where Paul Boyer showed how he stretched a C-130?

Would be cool to pull off.

^_^

[elmayerle]

Given the contours of the VIking's fuselage, I suspect that stretching it is going to be "challenging" as it doesn't appear to have a constant section that makes for easy stretching.  I'm not saying it can't be done, just that it's going to be a bit more interesting than the stretch Paul Boyer did on the Hercules which has a constant fuselage cross-section.

[P1127]

Mmmm, Viking what if potential.......

Exports - Argentina, Brazil, Australia, UK

Variants - Firebomber, VSTOL (There was a proposal to test podded pegasus on it)

[Davey B]

Hmm, stretched Viking, add another pair of TF34s on a non-folding, strengthened wing...    

[John Howling Mouse]

Did you see the article in FSM about 2 or 3 issues back where Paul Boyer showed how he stretched a C-130?

Nah, with the current fiscal situation I'm restricted to what I can get on the net or sneak a peek at during dreaming forays to the magazine racks.  

Have sent you a PM on this, Monsieur Le Rat.   ^_^  

[The Rat]

Nah, with the current fiscal situation I'm restricted to what I can get on the net or sneak a peek at during dreaming forays to the magazine racks.

Have sent you a PM on this, Monsieur Le Rat.

From one rodent to another, my thanks!    

[Jennings]

I was looking at pictures of an S3 Viking and thinking that's one short little bugger. There has to be a lot of stretch potential in there, but even though it's been chopped and modded various times they don't seem to have ever lengthened it. Any particular reason, other than storage on a deck and getting it on an elevator? I should think that there would be a number of uses that a longer one could be put to. 

I've always thought a stretched Viking would have made a fine regional airliner.  Loads of room inside that fuselage, square-ish cross section (optimises interior roominess), quiet engines, long range, low to the ground for easy boarding at smaller airports without jetways, etc...



J

[nev]

Mmmm, Viking what if potential.......

Exports - Argentina, Brazil, Australia, UK

Variants - Firebomber, VSTOL (There was a proposal to test podded pegasus on it)

IIRC there was a serious possibility of sales to Japan and Germany, but they went with other options.

[dexter059]

I read in another thread that the Chilean Navy it´s seeking for some of these to supplement the remaining P-3ACH Orion...that could be a close to reality what if.....
best regards

[Jeffry Fontaine]

You could always use fuselage parts of a 1/144th or 1/72nd scale C-130 and graft them in to create a cargo ramp for a COD version.  If you take the wheels and the fairings for the main gear and graft them on to the sides of the S-3 fuselage it would free up the internal space for cargo and passengers. 

Or go the other route and graft the major features of the S-3 such as the vertical and horizontal control surfaces, wings, engines, and cockpit of the S-3 on to the C-130 fuselage and presto-chango you have a COD bird with a cargo ramp.   

Since JP Santiago (aka Sentinel Chicken) did up those wonderful S-3 Viking profiles I have been pondering how best to create a COD S-3 from the AMT-Ertl/Esci/Italeri 1/48th scale S-3 kit.  I have been stumped by the fuselage of the S-3 as it has very little interior space/volume as it comes from the box.  Of course adding a fuselage plug in front and behind the wing would help some but the real problem is with the main landing gear.  SC addressed this by creating small sponsons for the main landing gear.  I thought this might be the solution but when you stop and consider that the aircraft would become a cargo carrying aircraft, the need for more wheels suddenly becomes an issue that needs to be addressed.  This is where I was stumped for a few months as I put the idea on the back burner and focused on something else for a while.  

A couple of months ago I was looking at one of my 1/72nd scale C-130 kits and the little light bulb over my head got a bit brighter when I realized that we were dealing with two Lockheed products.  What are the chances that the airfoil shape of the C-130 and the S-3 being the same?  Well a quck check fit of the 1/48th scale S-3 wing against the 1/72nd scale C-130 fuselage and I found out that it was the same airfoil shape.  What I found really inspiring was that the 1/48th scale S-3 wing butts up to the 1/72nd scale C-130 fuselage perfectly.  

Wow, what a concept!  The little hamster wheels are really rolling now...  

How about this for a WHIF?  Using the 1/72nd scale C-130 fuselage as your starting point and taking the necessary parts and pieces from the 1/48th scale S-3 kit, you can create a COD variant with a rear ramp and plenty of room inside for cargo and passengers.  By cutting the vertical and horizontal control surfaces from the S-3 kit and mating them to the C-130 fuselage you retain some of the original S-3 features with a completely different fuselage shape.  Going one step further, take the cockpit from the S-3 to include the canopy and adapt it to the fuselage of the 1/72nd scale C-130.  Now when this is all assembled you have a cargo aircraft fuselage with the wings, engines, and tail of the S-3 attached to it.  Sure it is a bit of scale-o-rama but it really makes a lot of sense when you start looking at the great differences between the current E-2 Hawkeye and the C-2 Greyhound aircraft.  the only thing that they really share in common is the wings and landing gear, the fuselage of each type is very different as it should be since one is an early warning radar aircraft and the other one is a trash hauler.  So with this in mind, I think the mating of the 1/72nd scale C-130 fuselage with the majority of the parts from the 1/48th scale S-3 kit will result in a unique cargo carrying aircraft that has little in common with the original S-3 but still carries the -3 number albeit C-3 instead of US-3.  

Anyone up to cutting up a couple of kits?

[Iranian F-14A]

One idea for the Viking I had sometime back was that of a mini-TACAMO aircraft.The purpose would be to act as airborne relays to the primary E-6 or EC-130G/Q aircraft.The main modifications would involve removing the MAD boom andthe sonarbuoy tubes and replacing them with smaller version trailing wires.The weapons bay would hold the avionics associated with the mission.Now,I'm no engineer,so I'm not sure that it would fit,but given the good endurance of the Viking,I figured it'd be good for the role with two external tanks.

Due to the secretive nature of their mission(during the Cold War),they would normally wear standard VS squadron colors.The TACAMO Viking could also be used as a general airborne command post,directing air strikes,CSAR,etc.

Then,of course the RS-3 recon model.Again strip out all ASW sensors and cut some camera ports into the weapons bay doors.Pretty straight foreward.Again,the endurance of the S-3 would be useful,however,over a high threat area.....eh,I'd go for an RF-14 or RF-4,but if you installed some decent ECM,maybe threw on a couple HARMS,have an Electronic Combat Recon model,that might work better then the unarmed recon model.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

One idea for the Viking I had sometime back was that of a mini-TACAMO aircraft.The purpose would be to act as airborne relays to the primary E-6 or EC-130G/Q aircraft.The main modifications would involve removing the MAD boom andthe sonarbuoy tubes and replacing them with smaller version trailing wires.The weapons bay would hold the avionics associated with the mission.Now,I'm no engineer,so I'm not sure that it would fit,but given the good endurance of the Viking,I figured it'd be good for the role with two external tanks.

Due to the secretive nature of their mission(during the Cold War),they would normally wear standard VS squadron colors.The TACAMO Viking could also be used as a general airborne command post,directing air strikes,CSAR,etc.

Then,of course the RS-3 recon model.Again strip out all ASW sensors and cut some camera ports into the weapons bay doors.Pretty straight foreward.Again,the endurance of the S-3 would be useful,however,over a high threat area.....eh,I'd go for an RF-14 or RF-4,but if you installed some decent ECM,maybe threw on a couple HARMS,have an Electronic Combat Recon model,that might work better then the unarmed recon model.

Another option to consider would be an additional stores pylon mounted outboard of the current pylon on the portion of the wing that folds.  This would allow carriage of additional equipment as well as fuel tanks on the larger pylons.  I managed to score a pair of pylons from the 1/72nd scale Hasegawa S-3 Viking that are going to be used for this purpose on the 1/48th scale S-3.  

Your TACAMO idea is worth a try, not a lot to really modify on the S-3 airframe and by removing the MAD Boom, you have an instant port for your trailing wire antenna.  

Another Idea I had for a KS-3 was to remove the MAD Boom and put the IFR basket in that location.  This would give you back two pylons for your additional fuel for the tanking mission.  

Your reconnaissance RS-3 might be better served by finding a smaller scale TARPS pod and adding that to the wing pylon or cutting the TARPS pod in half and using these halves on each side of the fuselage where the weapons bay is located.  Plenty of room all around for a lot of modifications for reconnaissance and surveillance missions.  

The one thing I found odd about the ES-3 was all of the ugly bumps and stuff across the top of the fuselage, I would have imagined the aerodynamics of the aircraft suffered a bit for these modifications, why not try to create one big bump with all of the bells and whistles hidden underneath?  I would imagine that would improve performance somewhat and get rid of the ECM/ESM warts as well.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

Another idea for the S-3:

Enlarge the bomb bay, make it deeper to accomodate more weapons.  Remove the SENSO and TACO positions to create a two seat attack bomber.

[GTX]

Said it before and I'll say it again - what about a multi-role Viking for use by smaller Air Forces:

Take one Ex-USN S-3 Viking, upgrade (may only require software changes) or replace the radar so that it can undertake not only maritime and attack functions but also air-to-air functions including the guidance functions associated with radar guided missiles.  Also make required cockpit avionics modifications to support this functionality.

The result:  A relatively in-expensive multi-role combat aircraft that is able to undertake Surveillance, Air-to-Air Refuelling (using buddy pack) Maritime Strike, Anti-Submarine Warfare, Land Attack and Air Defence duties.  Possible weapons include:  Harpoon, SLAM, Maverick, AMRAAM, Sidewinder, Depth Charges, Mines, Torpedos, Laser/GPS guided dumb bombs etc...often able to be carried in an internal weapons bay.

Speed may not be as sexy as most fighters but how often do they really use their top speed anyway. An effective combat radius of approx 1800 kms would be useful too - especially if you were to have a lot of ocean/border to protect - eg. Indonesia, New Zealand.

Regards,

Greg