F-111, FB-111, EF-111, Aardvark, Merlin, Raven, Sparkvark, and Pig

[AeroplaneDriver]

Well being a British military procurement program, I'd guess we'd be seeing them in frontline service any day now.   

[MAD]

How about the F-111 as the basis for a small, supersonic civilian/executive jet:



Regards,

Greg

My god - every general in SAC would want one as his personal liaison aircraft!

M.A.D

[MAD]

Back in the '60s, both the VG wing and various Jet lift V/STOL concepts were equally in vogue.  The F-111 went the VG way, but what if it went the other way with 4 lift jets and fixed wing (with landing gear moved to wings).  It wouldn't really be VTOL capable, but maybe extreme STOL:



Regards,

Greg

Nice work Greg!!!

Now all I ask is for a frontal view drawing, so as to make it a complete 3-view drawing arrangement!!!!!!!!!!!

M.A.D

[MAD]

GTX,

Regarding your V/STOL F-111-concept:  Wouldn't all those lift jets add a lot of weight?


Kendra

What 'lift jet' arrangement didn't?
You would also lose a lot of valuable fuel space to the lift engines!

M.A.D

[MAD]

Greg's (GTX's) STOL F-111 derivative with A-5 Vigilante wings
Sorry rough I know!!!!


M.A.D

[GTX]

Now all I ask is for a frontal view drawing, so as to make it a complete 3-view drawing arrangement!!!!!!!!!!!

I'll see what I can whip up on the weekend.

Regards,

Greg

[MAD]

Thanks Geig - the weekend can't come quick enough!

Your new landing gear arrangement (which replaces the very large and space consuming) would go a long way in compensating for the otherwise fuel/avionics space  now taken up by your lift jets!
It looks somewhat like the CF-105 Arrow's
Your landing gear arrangement will also fix one of the greatest weakpoints (my personal opinion!) of the GD F-111 design - the non ability to use the under-fuselage for the carriage of weapons or a larger more purposeful weapons bay. This would free up the wing hardpoint to be used for drop tanks tanks.
Oh and hopefully your design would eliminate that stupidly massive under-fuseage airbrake, which also took up potential weapon space.



M.A.D

[GTX]

Now all I ask is for a frontal view drawing, so as to make it a complete 3-view drawing arrangement!!!!!!!!!!!

M.A.D

Here you go:

Your new landing gear arrangement (which replaces the very large and space consuming) would go a long way in compensating for the otherwise fuel/avionics space  now taken up by your lift jets!

Except the lift jets take up much the same (if not more) room - the wing is larger now though so would probably be available for more fuel.

Your landing gear arrangement will also fix one of the greatest weakpoints (my personal opinion!) of the GD F-111 design - the non ability to use the under-fuselage for the carriage of weapons or a larger more purposeful weapons bay.

Use of the under fuselage and/or a larger weapons bay would still be difficult given the lift jets need to exit somewhere.  Mind you if your weapon of choice was a nuke (as was often the case in the era of the F-111 design, it isn't so much of an issue.

Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

I'm wondering where that dirty great big wheel is going to go Greg, what about a F-14 main u/c, that would retact forward with the wheel rotating 90 degrees to go in the 'glove' (on a F-14) space, like this below:

[GTX]

I'm wondering where that dirty great big wheel is going to go Greg, what about a F-14 main u/c, that would retact forward with the wheel rotating 90 degrees to go in the 'glove' (on a F-14) space, like this below:

Yeah, something like that

Regards,

Greg

[Caveman]

A similar concept with the MiG 25


found on secretprojects

[KJ_Lesnick]

Evan,

*Laughs* More like they knew where the problem areas were in using the "common airframe" and were able to design something more dedicated.  BTW, there are pics around here of an F-111B coming aboard a carrier, despite what histories report.

The USN likely from the very beginning had decided they did not want the F-111.  They probably didn't like the fact that they couldn't fit as much USN specific equipment, such as the desired cockpit configuration, radar-dish, and other additions that they wanted due to the commonality requirements between the USAF and USN/USMC variants among other things.  As Vietnam drove on and the F-4 proved to have serious short-comings in terms of agility, this only furthered their resolve and also helped give them an easily exploitable way out of the TFX design.  

They would need an airplane to replace the F-4 in the air-superiority role, which the F-111 just couldn't do, and the A-7 (which to the best of my knowledge was forced upon the USN by McNamara) which lacked supersonic performance.  The F-111A had supersonic on the deck performance, however I'm not sure how well the F-111B faired with it's blunter nose.  From what I remember reading the F-111A wasn't as agile as the F-105 or F-4 on the deck (The F-111B had a bigger wing and was oddly lighter so I'm not sure, but I'm sure the USN would exploit the "It's not maneuverable enough" argument for what it's worth anyway).  In this time, the USN, it would seem, managed to limit the Air-to-Ground capability to nuclear only for the F-111B, I'm guessing because it would make it easier for them to get their F-4/A-7 replacement (not sure about this part).  This F-4/A-7 replacement was called the VFAX and it was designed around a great degree of agility with a good T/W ratio for air-to-air combat purposes, with the supersonic performance the F-4 had on the deck.  All they had to do now was fit an AWG-9, and AIM-54 Phoenix's on the plane, and make sure it's range and loiter time were good enough and they could effectively use this to perform all the VFAX roles, and the TFX roles.  

Once they were sure they could do that, all they'd have to do is wait for carrier certification trials and then then point out every single flaw, minute or major, exaggerate them, make some up, and then claim the airplane was unsuitable for carrier operations (That's Navy talk for "We don't want this f***ing aircraft!  Got it?") and cancel the program.


KJ Lesnick

[Shasper]

Well the Bravo did have some serious weight issues at first (think NAVAIR did like 4 weight-reduction programs before the B was canned), but in order to get the weight in check the all importaint "commonality" factor would be significantly reduced. I think thats where the navy hit on the idea of scrapping the Bravo & going with the VFX.


Now in a alternative universe, even though the B flunked Fleet Defense U, why not re-role it as a strike bird? I'm sure the A-6 guys would've preferred something that could out-run a tossed rock . . .

[MAD]

Here you go:

Your new landing gear arrangement (which replaces the very large and space consuming) would go a long way in compensating for the otherwise fuel/avionics space  now taken up by your lift jets!

Except the lift jets take up much the same (if not more) room - the wing is larger now though so would probably be available for more fuel.

Your landing gear arrangement will also fix one of the greatest weakpoints (my personal opinion!) of the GD F-111 design - the non ability to use the under-fuselage for the carriage of weapons or a larger more purposeful weapons bay.

Use of the under fuselage and/or a larger weapons bay would still be difficult given the lift jets need to exit somewhere.  Mind you if your weapon of choice was a nuke (as was often the case in the era of the F-111 design, it isn't so much of an issue.

Regards,

Greg

Yeah very nice Greg!
I can not but help of what internal space this may have allowed in the actual F-111 design!
Although kitnut617 has a good point with the Grumman approach with its F-14 main gear arrangement
Any chance of you utilizing that skill of yours and incorporate the F-14 main gear arrangement into a drawing of the actual F-111 (VG-wing) design, with no lift engines - with the  space saved being utilized for either more internal fuel (freeing up wing pylon space!) or an enlarged and more useful weapons bay?
Or even better incorporating a 'Martin' type revolver bomb bay door/fuel tank arrangement as used by their XB-51, B-57 and later the Hawker Siddeley Buccaneer!
Now that what I would call a true strike/interdiction F-111!!!!

M.A.D

[KJ_Lesnick]

Shasper,

Well the Bravo did have some serious weight issues at first (think NAVAIR did like 4 weight-reduction programs before the B was canned)

The F-111B was actually lighter than the F-111A.  The F-111A was supposed to weigh 85,000 lbs but it ended up weighing around 100,000 lbs.  The F-111B weighed around 84,000 lbs by the time they cancelled it.  I have no idea what it would have been if they didn't try and strip it down, but the F-111A or F-111B were both large, massive aircraft.

Now in a alternative universe, even though the B flunked Fleet Defense U, why not re-role it as a strike bird? I'm sure the A-6 guys would've preferred something that could out-run a tossed rock . . .

Unlikely.  With the blunter nose, it probably couldn't have flown as fast on the deck as the USAF F-111A or USN/USAF F-4's and as such probably wouldn't have been considered good enough for the role.


KJ Lensick