Author Topic: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition  (Read 14615 times)

Offline circle-5

  • Concept Models Guy
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 950
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2013, 09:38:01 pm »
North American Aviation factory model of WS-300A proposal.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2610
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #16 on: March 07, 2013, 02:21:12 am »
That must be the Long Range Interceptor (LRI) offering rather than FBX one? (both requirements cancelled 1956-7 along with TBX)

Some Flight articles from the era talk of the F-105 and F-107 being built to WS-300A whilst others talk of FBX being WS-300A.

I have the following from American Aviation Volume 19.

LRI: WS-202A (North American & Northrop), eventually became the F-108 Rapier
FBX: WS-300A (North American & Republic)
TBX: WS-302A (Douglas & Martin), Martin B-68 cancelled in 1957
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 02:55:17 am by JFC Fuller »

Offline circle-5

  • Concept Models Guy
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 950
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #17 on: March 07, 2013, 08:08:04 am »
That must be the Long Range Interceptor (LRI) offering rather than FBX one? (both requirements cancelled 1956-7 along with TBX)

Some Flight articles from the era talk of the F-105 and F-107 being built to WS-300A whilst others talk of FBX being WS-300A.

The above photo is not the NAA LRI proposal (WS-202A). It really is the NAA proposal for WS-300A. See additional photos, attached. The stand is marked: North American Aviation, Inc. / Fighter Bomber System 300A / Secret.

I have the proposal models for NAA WS-202A (LRI) and WS-302A, which are very different airplanes. WS-202A photos have been posted elsewhere in this forum and I will get around to WS-302A at some point.

While it is very possible the F-107 was offered by NAA for WS-300A as an alternative, its light weight, short range and single engine would have required considerable redesign for any hope of meeting USAF WS-300A requirements.
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 08:10:04 am by circle-5 »

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2610
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #18 on: March 07, 2013, 08:39:14 am »
Well I can't argue with that! Thanks for posting the model pictures circle-5. I have had a hunt around my usual sources and I can not find any detailed history on LRI, FBX or TBX, is there a good source around for these? I would be particularly interested in seeing the requirements for WS-300A, they must have been demanding to produce an aircraft as large as the NA entry looks? Given the time-frame and the engine choice on the Vigilante I am thinking J-79, or even J-75 given the size?
« Last Edit: March 07, 2013, 08:42:21 am by JFC Fuller »

Offline circle-5

  • Concept Models Guy
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 950
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2013, 12:09:05 am »
Top view of the NAA WS-300A factory proposal model, marked "Secret" from its classified origins. Note multiple bleed air louvers on variable intakes. Top of fuselage is occupied by what appears to be a row of equipment bays or large access panels.

Faux afterburner flames are part of the rotating base -- a signature detail of the North American Aviation model shops in Columbus and Los Angeles.

It's hard to believe we're looking at something designed barely 10 years after WWII.

Offline Graham1973

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 407
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #20 on: July 23, 2013, 10:17:13 am »
It's hard to believe we're looking at something designed barely 10 years after WWII.

I'll second that comment, if someone had shown me that model and asked to guess when it was designed I'd have said the 70s.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 4468
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #21 on: July 23, 2013, 12:18:50 pm »
Ditto.

Offline Graham1973

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 407
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #22 on: July 23, 2013, 07:36:10 pm »
Are there any surviving specifications for the NAA WS-300A?

Offline shine

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 4
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #23 on: July 24, 2013, 03:57:29 am »
This could be the inspiration for MiG for the 25.
Did they had a man inside NAA?
 
Mark

Offline circle-5

  • Concept Models Guy
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 950
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #24 on: July 24, 2013, 10:34:21 am »
This could be the inspiration for MiG for the 25.
Did they had a man inside NAA?
 
Mark

Mark, I think this discussion took off and landed over here.

Offline famvburg

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 256
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #25 on: July 24, 2013, 10:54:02 am »
Looks like it could have as much Rapier influence is Vigilante.

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 5295
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #26 on: July 24, 2013, 11:02:45 am »
I'd really like to see a Vigilante/WS-300A/Rapier timeline.   The Vigilante's design was probably locked down around 1956.  Looks like the Rapier was '58-59.  WS-300A? 
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline PlanesPictures

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 650
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #27 on: July 24, 2013, 02:03:05 pm »
It is sad for me to see this discussion. Your absolutely simplistic view on design and construction of planes, similarly as your view and inability to see difference between sketch done in 10-20 minutes and complex rendered picture done in 20-50 hours again let me ask what happen when we time by time still have to solve similar problems  ? I'm not sure if it was Boeing F-32 but company produced hundreds (near to one thousand) possible and impossible designs and only one of them was selected as number one. And was criterion some similarity with some next plane or project? You really mean that from simple view you are able rebuild new plane? In last time I'm looking without result for a new infos on new or old secret projects. Is this theme already dead or closed and we will only presents our opinions on some events?

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2610
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #28 on: July 24, 2013, 02:22:45 pm »
I'd really like to see a Vigilante/WS-300A/Rapier timeline.   The Vigilante's design was probably locked down around 1956.  Looks like the Rapier was '58-59.  WS-300A?

Thats an interesting question, Vigilante appears to have come first having received a development contract on the 29th August 1956. After that, for me at least, things get muddy, WS-300A appeared at about the same time as WS-202A (LRI/GOR-114) in 1955 but the WS-300A was cancelled sometime in late 1956 (along with WS-302A- the Martin XB-68) whilst NAA was given a development contract for the F-108 in June 1957 (original procurement target was 480) only for the type to be cancelled on the 23rd September 1959 though the F-108 evolved considerably over time.
« Last Edit: July 24, 2013, 02:33:46 pm by JFC Fuller »

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 5295
Re: WS-300A(Fighter-bomber) Competition
« Reply #29 on: July 24, 2013, 03:06:01 pm »
It is sad for me to see this discussion. Your absolutely simplistic view on design and construction of planes, similarly as your view and inability to see difference between sketch done in 10-20 minutes and complex rendered picture done in 20-50 hours again let me ask what happen when we time by time still have to solve similar problems  ? I'm not sure if it was Boeing F-32 but company produced hundreds (near to one thousand) possible and impossible designs and only one of them was selected as number one. And was criterion some similarity with some next plane or project? You really mean that from simple view you are able rebuild new plane? In last time I'm looking without result for a new infos on new or old secret projects. Is this theme already dead or closed and we will only presents our opinions on some events?

What?
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.