Mark Nankivil said:Greetings All -
From the Vought Archives, a drawing of the V-1000B.
Enjoy the day! Mark
Thank you for sharing Mark!
Interesting that in this drawing, that Vought incorporated additional outer hardpoints!
Regards
Pioneer
Mark Nankivil said:Greetings All -
From the Vought Archives, a drawing of the V-1000B.
Enjoy the day! Mark
Original V-1000 desk models come up for sale on Ebay occasionally.where can I find one of these models?
elmayerle said:V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).
It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!
Regards
Pioneer
Archibald, more from that damning book Pentagon Paradox...:elmayerle said:V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).
It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!
Regards
Pioneer
Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.
I'd be interested in reading this testimony overscan if you could direct me with a link please.It's fair to say that this version is disputed. According to Air Force testimony before Congress, the most capable design was the Lockheed CL-1200, not the V-1000, but it was also the most expensive, while the F-5E was last but cheapest and met the overall requirements.
Here are a few more of a similar model that I recently ran across.Found this picture of a model on a great German site picturing a whole variety of interesting
stuff
http://www.aeroscale.de/pages/p_m_26.htm
It is captioned "Precise Models South Vietnam Crusader".
Anyone know more?
Brilliant find thank you Bill SHere are some pages from the Technical Proposal that will thrill some and scare others! They show the empty weight derivation of the V-1000 in comparison with the F-8. Through these line items you can see the changes planned to create the V-1000 from the F-8 baseline.
Good point!"Remainder of system was useful load" and pointing to a reference implies it was only a partial removal, most likely related to the deleted fuel cells.
The retractable probe is certainly going to weigh much more than nine pounds and its not mentioned as deleted.
Thank you once again Bill SAt first blush it looks like the V-1000 was offered up for the International Fighter Competition and a V-1000B version was offered to the USAF, Royal Netherlands Air Force, West German Airforce as well. Most everything is the same with the alternative of an M61A1 cannon in place of the two M39A3 cannons. (not illustrated in the attached V-1000B General Arrangement)
Not sure the reason other than drag and simplicity, does anyone know if the original spec was for only two sidewinders? The F-5 did end up with only two.Brilliant find thank you Bill SHere are some pages from the Technical Proposal that will thrill some and scare others! They show the empty weight derivation of the V-1000 in comparison with the F-8. Through these line items you can see the changes planned to create the V-1000 from the F-8 baseline.
Alas, a lot of tweeking to derive reduction in weight and complexity.
I'm very surprised that Vought/LTV went to the effort of eliminating the twin fuselage-mounted Sidewinder missile arrangement.
Regards
Pioneer
Useful load considerations were not in what I posted, I will see if I can find those documents. The IFR probe, actuator and fuselage fairing were to be removed/not installed on the V-1000"Remainder of system was useful load" and pointing to a reference implies it was only a partial removal, most likely related to the deleted fuel cells.
The retractable probe is certainly going to weigh much more than nine pounds and it's not mentioned as deleted.
'At least 30% better dogfight'
GENERAL SUMMARY.
To enhance the demonstrated combat capability of the F-8 and to provide superior combat maneuverability, the V-1000B will differ from the F-8 in these significant areas.
- The J79-GE-17 engine replaces the J57 engine for an installed weight savings of 952 pounds and an improvement in specific fuel consumption (SFC).
- The two M39A3, 20 mm cannons replace four MK-12 cannons for an installed weight savings of 61 pounds.
- The F-8 avionics suit will be reduced with an installed weight savings of 125 pounds
- A total of 349 gallons of internal fuel will be deleted by removing six fuel cells.
- A three degree increase in leading edge maneuvering droop has provided an increase in maneuvering capability. Use of landing droop at low speeds has further expanded the maneuvering envelope.
- The center of gravity has been shifted aft to 29% M.A.C.
Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.elmayerle said:V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).
It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!
Regards
Pioneer
Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.
Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.elmayerle said:V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).
It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!
Regards
Pioneer
Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.
I concur with your analogy overscan!Unfortunately that book is hot garbage, and dosnt even have the reademing feature of his a-12 book wich covers a topic that isn't well covered. Honestly even getting it for a bargain i felt cheated by it, hoping for a book to figure out why the US whent for the f-18 when there were better, cheaper options out there, ended up throwing the book away after chapter 5 because how how much he got wrong on stuff that had nothing to do with the f-18, so not really surprised he got this wrong to. Got more info on the f-18 genesis from the first chapter of orr Kellys hornet then the trash in Pentagon Paradox.elmayerle said:V-1000 competed with the F-5E for official USAF support and lost. I'm not sure how well it would've sold without that (cf. F-20A).
It should be noted (and I will endeavour to find the source!!), that the V-1000 submission was the USAF's preferred choice to meet the U.S Governments IFA (International Fighter Aircraft) competition.
The USAF acting on behalf of the United States Government, wanted a fighter with expanded performance (over that of the Northrop F-5A/B Freedom Fighter!), able to fly airsuperiority missions against such aircraft as the MiG-21 'Fishbed'.
From what I can recall (I think it was from book the great book - 'Pentagon Paradox')- the USAF's choice of the V-1000 over that of the Northrop, McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed (Request for Proposal (RfP) went out to eight U.S manufacturers on 26 Feb 1970.) was stated over and over again -but for some unknown reason the then U.S Secretary of Defence overrode the USAF's choice and selected the Northrop F-5E Tiger II!
Regards
Pioneer
Pentagon paradox... isn't that famous book damning the F/A-18 Hornet procurement ?
Which I could know more about this.
I think that, with the F-5A having sold like hot cakes, the F-5E even with lower performance than MiG-21 (or V-1000) made more sense that starting from a clean sheet of paper. A lots of countries that bought F-5A then bought F-5E (Iran, cough, cough).
And fact is that Iran - Iraq showed that F-5Es could kick MiG-21 arses, plus USN agressors of course. Pilots skills had become more important than raw performance.
Still the V-1000 sounded like a terrific aircraft.
Please give an example of how it is "hot garbage".
I am researching the subject of the F-16 and F-18 genesis (LWF/ACF/VFAX/NACF) myself and I have found Pentagon Paradox to be impeccably well sourced from primary documents and interviews.
It is biased towards the Fighter Mafia version of what happened because his major sources were Fighter Mafia members, and you could take issue with his interpretation of events and facts, but "hot garbage" is not how I would describe it.
Orr's book is pretty decent though without proper endnotes, though he does discuss the sources for each chapter. It is very much covering a Navy-centric view of the F/A-18 program.
This isn't really the thread, but quite frankly there is a difference being biased in favor of something and annoying huge parts of your own cited works inorder to fit your narrative.Please give an example of how it is "hot garbage".
I am researching the subject of the F-16 and F-18 genesis (LWF/ACF/VFAX/NACF) myself and I have found Pentagon Paradox to be impeccably well sourced from primary documents and interviews.
It is biased towards the Fighter Mafia version of what happened because his major sources were Fighter Mafia members, and you could take issue with his interpretation of events and facts, but "hot garbage" is not how I would describe it.
Orr's book is pretty decent though without proper endnotes, though he does discuss the sources for each chapter. It is very much covering a Navy-centric view of the F/A-18 program.
Thanks Kurnass '86!Got this from Paul Metz's F-20 book (apologies for bad photo)
View attachment 715059
Absolutely! It's a treasure-trove of info, a lot of which I never knew or had seen beforeThanks Kurnass '86!
Definitely gotta get me that Paul Metz's F-20 book
Regards
Pioneer