Register here

Author Topic: Seaplane Jetfighters  (Read 33187 times)

Offline elmayerle

  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1042
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #30 on: June 14, 2007, 04:02:15 pm »
In "The Aeroplane", december 1951, there was an article entitled
"Servicing The Flying Boat Fighter". A model for hydro-dynamic tests
of the Convair Skate is shown, featuring a blended hull wing, probably
a twin engined aircraft. No other infos given there.

ISTR that the "Skate" was a step in the evolution toward the Convair Sea Dart.

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #31 on: June 15, 2007, 12:37:24 pm »
"ISTR that the "Skate" was a step in the evolution toward the Convair Sea Dart."

Seems logical, although the Skate isn't mentioned in the article, just the Seadart,
as the winner of the competition for a seabased fighter .
A little bit strange, I think, that Boeing offered a twin-seat night fighter for a
specification, that eventually was won by a single seat day fighter. But it isn't
known , if the Boeing design was ever submitted to the Navy !

At least I've finished the last drawing today:
The third design was more or less a refinement of the second. The reduction in
size probably was made possible by the use of two Westinghouse X24C engines,
housed in nacelles and so freeing up internal volume, although I doubt, that this
arrangement would have kept out spray from the engines.
Dimension had been reduced to span as 12.7 m and lenght 15.92 m.

The mentioned article with its sketches and artist’s impressions was the sole basis
for the drawings, so they should be regarded as provisional only .

The model 486 was the only seaplane fighter designed by Boeing and the last flying
boat at all for this company.
Pros and cons of the concept of the seaplane fighter apart, I would have really loved
to sea photos of this aircraft at anchor in a lagoon of a pacific atoll, or low flying
over a coastline !   So, Jozef, if you have some spare time ....    ;)

 
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1784
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #32 on: July 04, 2007, 12:01:55 am »
Speaking of jet seaplane fighters, does anyone have a good quality 3-view (or at least the side profile) of the SARO SR/A1.

Regards,

Greg

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #33 on: July 06, 2007, 06:02:44 am »
That's what I can offer (from FlugRevue 11/1993 and from
Aeroplane Monthly 3/1993).
If it fits your needs, just give me a PM with your mail adress,
to send it in a reasonable resolution.
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline smurf

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 544
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #34 on: July 06, 2007, 08:10:10 am »
You may also be interested in "SARO A/1 flying boat" by Richard Bateson.  ISO Publications 1996
ISBN 0946784051.  Lots of pictures, small 3-views of other variants, but the splendid colour 3-view is ruined by being printed across two A4 pages so part gets lost in the gutter between the pages.

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1784
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #35 on: July 06, 2007, 11:57:15 am »
Thank you.

Regards,

Greg

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #36 on: September 05, 2007, 08:49:40 am »
With material about the line of the Convair Skate projects, which I thankfully got from lark,
I’ve tried to portray four of these designs, which I could identify. There were more, nine
different configurations are mentioned. I've got no type dsignation or project number and the name "Skate" may well have been more an unofficial designatoin of the program.

As already told in the post about the Boeing model 486, after the cancellation of the super
carriers of the United States class, the USN  was following a new idea, called the “seaplane
strike force” or the mobile base concept. Three types were ordered into development, a bomber,
a transport and a fighter. In the end, all three types were actually built, although only the
Convair R3Y Trader transport flying boat ever saw limited service. For the part of the bomber,
there was one of Scotts APR issues, I think, which probably is available as electronic version
in the near future again.
Earlier designs were for a twin seat, radar equipped night fighter, shifting later to the single seat
interceptor, which was ultimately built in the form of the XF2Y Sea Dart. The following four designs
probably were made between 1948 and 1951, all based on a blended hull configuration, which was
thought to give sufficient buoyancy and good damping characteristics for take-off and landing.
Please note, for the drawings and conclusions, I mainly used photos of the hydrodynamic models
or artist’s impressions. Still yet, I couldn’t find dimensional, nor performance data, so for length and
span, I was restricted to estimations and comparisons of details like pilots or engines. I’m absolutely
aware, that I may have misinterpreted things ! I’ve always attached at least one of the source
pictures in low resolution, so you can make up your mind on your own. If someone has better or
additional material, please let me know !

___________________________________________________________________________

What to my opinion is the earliest of the four designs  (but not necessarily the first !),
shows a twin engined aircraft, with a short fuselage, with carries in its upper half two
jet engines and the crew in a tandem cockpit. The straight wing is blended into the fuselage,
 a long, uprising fin carries a V-tail, which is located far behind the fuselage. It isn’t recognisable,
 if a retractable step was incorporated, or if just the edge of  the fuselage was regarded as
sufficient. An interesting feature is the nose armament, which consisted of a turret, which
formed the nose cone, probably containing two guns, besides a small radar antenna. Two
additional guns were placed in the wing roots. A spray dam, probably retractable, is fitted
to the bow.

(Cut-away from  Treadwell “Strike from beneath the Sea”)
« Last Edit: September 05, 2007, 08:53:04 am by Jemiba »
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #37 on: September 05, 2007, 08:50:44 am »
After this quite archaic looking design, the next one .....

Temporarily deleted, see Orionblamblams post, sorry for any inconveniences !
« Last Edit: September 06, 2007, 11:46:20 am by Jemiba »
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline lark

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1470
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #38 on: September 05, 2007, 10:17:30 am »
Excellent! Thanks Jens ;)

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 5923
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #39 on: September 05, 2007, 11:23:08 pm »
After this quite archaic looking design, the next one comes with a more modern shape,
though still with unswept wings and control surfaces.

A bit off there. That particular SKATE was to be a modified B-46... a sizable bomber, not a fighter.

Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #40 on: September 06, 2007, 11:41:42 am »
Sorry for that, but I had only this model photo with the description, saying that
"Convair tested the blended-hull concept with this scale model of the Skate.Later
studies added swept wings, then finally the delta was adopted".
The Flight article mentioned studies, which used the XB-46, but without drawings or
model photos. But with hindsight the similarity to the XB-46 is obvious ...   :-[
Nevertheless, I dare to present the next Skate design :

_______________________________________________________________________________

The third design is the one, I’ve got most informations about, a cut-away and several photos
of the surprisingly well detailed hydrodynamic models. Probably this design is the one, usually
associated with the term “Convair Skate”. The fuselage basically resembles its predecessor,
but the intakes were moved forward and astonishingly low, I think, and the crew isn’t housed
in a tandem cockpit anymore, but is located in stepped side-by-side seating, similar to the british
Canberra or the DH Sea Vixen, where the navigators/radar operators seat usually was called the
“coal hole” ! Straight wing and tail surfaces have given way to swept ones, the lower part of the
tail housing a combined dive brake/water rudder. Again the position of the armament isn’t clear,
although it seems quite probable, that it would have been in the wing roots, as some details in
the cut-away seem to indicate. But we know for sure, that no turreted guns were envisaged .   

(Cut-away and model photo from  Mendenhall, "Delta Wings, Convair's High-Speed Planes"  )
 
« Last Edit: September 06, 2007, 12:11:48 pm by Jemiba »
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7572
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #41 on: September 06, 2007, 12:14:38 pm »
The last design I could find belonging to the Convair Skate line, is illustrating the shift from
the two seat to the single seat fighter and now incorporating the delta wing, the result
already is very near to the Sea Dart. Main differences are the elongated tail and  the intakes
still are lower and further forward, than in the definitiv version. I’m not sure, if this version
already would have used hydroskis, or if it still would have had a step in the planing bottom.
The artist’s impression in “L’Echo des Ailes” and “Science et Vie” clearly show a step, but at l
east the description in “L’Echo des Ailes” is speaking of retractable hydroskis. An underside
view in “Flight” gives neither a clue for a step, nor for hydroskis, but it could still represent
the design with the step retracted. To my opinion, the use of hydroskis would have allowed
a flatter underside, as for the Sea Dart, so the deep fuselage of this design would be an
argument for the use of a “classical” step.  For this reason, and because the step got a slight
majority, I’ve incorporated it into my drawing   ;-)   Length and span data are from comparison
with the Sea Dart.

Again, all these drawings should be regarded with some scepticism, as several artist’s impressions
 were used as basis, which may be debatable and so probaly are some of my conclusions. But I’m
open to discussion and if we find more accurate informations, it’s no problem to iron out errors.


(Artist’s impression from “L’Echo des Ailes”, model photo from “Flight Magazine”
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 5923
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #42 on: September 06, 2007, 02:15:49 pm »
The delta winged one was not in the normal SKATE run of things, but was one of the "Betta" designs. Robert Bradley ran an article on this and other related Convair seaplane jet bombers in the V2N5 issue of APR several years back.

Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Offline Orionblamblam

  • Secret Projects Guru
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 5923
    • Aerospace Projects Review
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #43 on: September 06, 2007, 02:21:39 pm »

The third design is the one, I’ve got most informations about...

I have some exquistely detaield drawings of this version, I believe. General arrangements and inboard profiles. Or at least a very similar version. I'll see if I can find and scan 'em.
Aerospace Projects Review


And so the endless circle of life comes to an end, meaningless and grim. Why did they live, and why did they die? No reason. Two hundred million years of evolution snuffed out, for in the end Nature is horrific and teaches us nothing

Offline Skybolt

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2261
Re: Seaplane Jetfighters
« Reply #44 on: September 06, 2007, 02:47:04 pm »
You have found something new to put for sale, Scott!