Steve Pace
Aviation History Writer
- Joined
- 6 January 2013
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 167
Does anyone have any info on CP35-414 (X-602) that called for a two-place pursuit? -SP
Circular Proposal CP35-414 X-602
- Thread starter Steve Pace
- Start date
Steve Pace
Aviation History Writer
- Joined
- 6 January 2013
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 167
Steve Pace
Aviation History Writer
- Joined
- 6 January 2013
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 167
Steve Pace
Aviation History Writer
- Joined
- 6 January 2013
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 167
Similar but not exactly - sure doesn't resemble the Mustang in anyway at all which came along five years later. SP
Steve Pace
Aviation History Writer
- Joined
- 6 January 2013
- Messages
- 2,266
- Reaction score
- 167
It looks single-place as well - NA-53 maybe?
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 13,782
- Reaction score
- 3,062
XB-70 Guy said:
Well, the "NA-53" designation is given as a "canceled single-seat fighter", possibly for China, but it also carries the designation NA-16-5. To me this is too different from an NA-16 to be it... All NA-16 products were derived from the same basic design and looked either like a BT-9 or an AT-6, give or take.
I have only three unidentified charge numbers in the NA-16 > NA-354 range, and they are NA-80, NA-86, and NA-131 (the latter described only as a "canceled project"). Perhaps NA-80? But more likely, this was one of the many projects that did not receive an NA- number (charge numbers were reserved for projects that actually reached the contract stage).
In the FWIW category, the proposal was circulated (hence, Circular Proposal) as CP35-414. The "X-602" part refers to the specification involved. It's possible that a copy of X-602 is in the RG341 (Sara Clark) materials at College Park, MD.
Apteryx
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 28 September 2007
- Messages
- 154
- Reaction score
- 32
The T-6 wing outer sections were swept back. The "fighterized" version of the Texan, the P-64, had swept-forward outer sections, as can be seen from photos (I believe a P-64 still exists and is held by the EAA Museum, Oshkosh). I've never seen a plan drawing of the P-64, but it might make interesting comparison with this project.
I did a bit searchwork Nugo and I was unable to find a trail of the
Consolidated XP-33 project in a RFP or whatsoever...
All sources mentioned the XP-33 only as a re-engined ad thus recontoured
development of the XP-30 (PB-2)
Consolidated XP-33 project in a RFP or whatsoever...
All sources mentioned the XP-33 only as a re-engined ad thus recontoured
development of the XP-30 (PB-2)
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 13,782
- Reaction score
- 3,062
lark said:
Consolidated Aircraft had three different basic model designations for their developments of the Lockheed Y1P-24:
- Model 25 was for the Y1P-25
- Model 26 was for the P-30 (PB-2) and P-30A (PB-2A)
- Model 27 was for the XA-11 and A-11
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 13,782
- Reaction score
- 3,062
lark said:
Yes, and as a matter of fact, it would have been one of the first aircraft with a P&W Twin Wasp engine if it had been done.
Here are some allocations of the earliest Twin Wasp variants:
XR-1830C Wedell-Williams P-34 (not built)
R-1830-1 Consolidated P-33 (not built)
YR-1830-3 Martin XB-14
R-1830-7 Northrop 2C (XA-16)
R-1830-9 Seversky P-35 / Northrop YA-13 / Martin XB-14 / Seversky SEV-7
R-1830-11 Boeing YB-9 / Boeing XB-15
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 13,782
- Reaction score
- 3,062
If the XP-33 was submitted against the X-602 proposal, then the XP-34 also must have, since they were competing designs. It might even be assumed that these two won over all the other contenders before the whole program was scrapped.
Now if the very first version of the Twin Wasp was to equip the Wedell-Williams XP-34, my assumption may not be quite appropriate, as the known three-view arrangement of the latter shows a very different looking engine (see attachment below).
Now if the very first version of the Twin Wasp was to equip the Wedell-Williams XP-34, my assumption may not be quite appropriate, as the known three-view arrangement of the latter shows a very different looking engine (see attachment below).
Attachments
The XP-33 was no part of an RFP as far as I know. A proposal to mount
a 880Hp fourteen cylinder P&W P-1830-1 Twin Wasp in the P-30airframe
led to the designation XP-33.
This project was cancelled as the two place concept of the P-30 proved
in the long run,to be impractical.
a 880Hp fourteen cylinder P&W P-1830-1 Twin Wasp in the P-30airframe
led to the designation XP-33.
This project was cancelled as the two place concept of the P-30 proved
in the long run,to be impractical.
Tophe
ACCESS: Top Secret
Hi All!
From page 5-6:
"It was now evident that a new generation of monoplane fighters was necessary. Looking forward to the funding for fiscal 1936 (the budget year from July 1, 1935, to June 30, 1936), the Army Air Corps planned to buy new fighter types. On January 15, 1935, the Air Corps announced a design competition for pursuit planes. An all-metal monocoque fuselage and cantilever monoplane wings were desired. Bids were to be opened May 6 on proposals to fit two specifications: X-602 for pursuit, two place, and X-603 for pursuit, one-place.
In a design competition, the Air Corps invited private companies to offer preliminary drawings of proposed aircraft to fulfill an Army specification. The winning designs would be given an Army designation and a contract for engineering data, an experimental prototype, or perhaps even a service test contract for 3 to 15 planes.
At the same time, the Army needed to buy about 80 pursuits in fiscal 1936 to replace aircraft in service, so bids were also requested for two-place and one-place pursuits, to be opened May 27 and August 9, 1935, respectively. To enter a production contract competition, private builders had to submit a sample aircraft, built at their own expense, for testing at Wright Field. As it turned out, the result of this complicated procedure, required by the law intended to encourage competition among private enterprises, was that not a single aircraft was purchased during 1935.
The winner of the design competition for two-seaters had been designated XP-33 and was essentially the Consolidated P-30 with a new air-cooled, Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp R-1830-1 twin-row radial. For the production contract, a colorful Russian immigrant, Alexander de Seversky, offered the only sample plane, but it was damaged on the way to Wright Field and didn't arrive in time.
Meanwhile, service tests were convincing the Army that two-seaters were too lacking in maneuverability to be good fighters and that the single .30-caliber hand-operated gun in the rear cockpit was unlikely to be of much help in a battle. No more two-seater fighter production contracts were to be made, and the Consolidated XP-33 was canceled while still in the blueprint stage.
The single-seat fighter competitions were much more active, and the patterns of World War II fighters were firmly established. No less than 16 bids were opened in the May design competition. After five months of evaluation, an unexpected choice was made. The fastest American plane then was the Wedell-Williams racer, built in a Louisiana hangar, without blueprints, by a pair of brothers who were amateur engineers. Although they had no real factory, the little company was awarded a development contract for an XP-34 design based on their racers.
No XP-34 ever appeared, due to the death of the Wedell brothers and their backer Williams in flying accidents and the inability of their survivors to complete the contract requirements. The lesson learned was that a company with mass-production capacity was needed. Fortunately, the next production contract competition produced prototypes the unfulfilled XP-34's promise.
The most successful pursuit effort of 1935 was the Curtiss design, by Donovan R. Berlin, that became the P-36. Berlin had been hired away from Northrop as chief engineer by the Buffalo, New York, firm because of his experience with all-metal construction. Born in Romona, Indiana, on June 13, 1898, he was a mechanical engineering graduate of Purdue University. His P-36 would be the first American fighter to down German planes, the first to pass the 1,000-plane production total, and was developed into the P-40, the principal U.S. production fighter of the war's early years."
Source: Mustang Designer, by Ray Wagner.
and X-604---Bell XFM-1 and Lockheed XFM-2 (proposal).
From page 5-6:
"It was now evident that a new generation of monoplane fighters was necessary. Looking forward to the funding for fiscal 1936 (the budget year from July 1, 1935, to June 30, 1936), the Army Air Corps planned to buy new fighter types. On January 15, 1935, the Air Corps announced a design competition for pursuit planes. An all-metal monocoque fuselage and cantilever monoplane wings were desired. Bids were to be opened May 6 on proposals to fit two specifications: X-602 for pursuit, two place, and X-603 for pursuit, one-place.
In a design competition, the Air Corps invited private companies to offer preliminary drawings of proposed aircraft to fulfill an Army specification. The winning designs would be given an Army designation and a contract for engineering data, an experimental prototype, or perhaps even a service test contract for 3 to 15 planes.
At the same time, the Army needed to buy about 80 pursuits in fiscal 1936 to replace aircraft in service, so bids were also requested for two-place and one-place pursuits, to be opened May 27 and August 9, 1935, respectively. To enter a production contract competition, private builders had to submit a sample aircraft, built at their own expense, for testing at Wright Field. As it turned out, the result of this complicated procedure, required by the law intended to encourage competition among private enterprises, was that not a single aircraft was purchased during 1935.
The winner of the design competition for two-seaters had been designated XP-33 and was essentially the Consolidated P-30 with a new air-cooled, Pratt & Whitney Twin Wasp R-1830-1 twin-row radial. For the production contract, a colorful Russian immigrant, Alexander de Seversky, offered the only sample plane, but it was damaged on the way to Wright Field and didn't arrive in time.
Meanwhile, service tests were convincing the Army that two-seaters were too lacking in maneuverability to be good fighters and that the single .30-caliber hand-operated gun in the rear cockpit was unlikely to be of much help in a battle. No more two-seater fighter production contracts were to be made, and the Consolidated XP-33 was canceled while still in the blueprint stage.
The single-seat fighter competitions were much more active, and the patterns of World War II fighters were firmly established. No less than 16 bids were opened in the May design competition. After five months of evaluation, an unexpected choice was made. The fastest American plane then was the Wedell-Williams racer, built in a Louisiana hangar, without blueprints, by a pair of brothers who were amateur engineers. Although they had no real factory, the little company was awarded a development contract for an XP-34 design based on their racers.
No XP-34 ever appeared, due to the death of the Wedell brothers and their backer Williams in flying accidents and the inability of their survivors to complete the contract requirements. The lesson learned was that a company with mass-production capacity was needed. Fortunately, the next production contract competition produced prototypes the unfulfilled XP-34's promise.
The most successful pursuit effort of 1935 was the Curtiss design, by Donovan R. Berlin, that became the P-36. Berlin had been hired away from Northrop as chief engineer by the Buffalo, New York, firm because of his experience with all-metal construction. Born in Romona, Indiana, on June 13, 1898, he was a mechanical engineering graduate of Purdue University. His P-36 would be the first American fighter to down German planes, the first to pass the 1,000-plane production total, and was developed into the P-40, the principal U.S. production fighter of the war's early years."
Source: Mustang Designer, by Ray Wagner.
and X-604---Bell XFM-1 and Lockheed XFM-2 (proposal).
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 13,782
- Reaction score
- 3,062
Maveric said:
This is from a list of engine allocations I did almost 20 years ago, at a time when I did not keep track of any reference at all... So although I just MIGHT find the reference again, chances are it is lost. Of course it could also have been a typo in the original book or magazine...
Nugo,
Thanks for your contribution. At last a bit more about the XP-33. Most books and authors
about U.S.Fighter planes of that period (Jones,Angeluci,Pelletier..) spend only
two lines or less about this project.The only 3 view with a few specs.I ever saw was in an Air Enthusiast article
written by Mr.Pelletier .
A question, is there more about X-604 in the book you cited ?
Thanks for your contribution. At last a bit more about the XP-33. Most books and authors
about U.S.Fighter planes of that period (Jones,Angeluci,Pelletier..) spend only
two lines or less about this project.The only 3 view with a few specs.I ever saw was in an Air Enthusiast article
written by Mr.Pelletier .
A question, is there more about X-604 in the book you cited ?
SlickDriver
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 20 June 2006
- Messages
- 161
- Reaction score
- 28
The overhauled SEV-1XP arrived at Wright Field on August 15, 1935. The USAAC had postponed the fly-off until April of 1936, due to the crash of Northrop's entry. During the test flights at Wright Field, Severskys' entry never achieved the promised 300 MPH, despite an uprated engine and tail modifications. Its designation changed from SEV-1XP to SEV-7 to AP-1.
