- Joined
- 8 March 2009
- Messages
- 939
- Reaction score
- 924
Last edited by a moderator:
Cleaned up a bit.
Larger and better, but still with watermarks. I found at the Cradle of Aviation Museum web archive.It would be interesting to see the full colour original
Great find fightingirish!!Cleaned up a bit.Larger and better, but still with watermarks. I found at the Cradle of Aviation Museum web archive.It would be interesting to see the full colour original
And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Political and industrial base considerations also enter into this type of selection. I assume that the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) aircraft would have been assembled on Long Island, NY, just down the road from Grumman who was hard at work on the F-14. McDonnell, the only airframer left in the midwest, in St. Louis didn't have much to do outside of the F-4 program, which would be winding down as the F-15 was introduced.And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Regards
Pioneer
The scoring results are somewhere in the McDonnell Douglas FX thread - they had the edge on the Fairchild bit on purely technical grounds, but not decisively so. It was on the industrial assessment that their bid pulled clear.Political and industrial base considerations also enter into this type of selection. I assume that the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) aircraft would have been assembled on Long Island, NY, just down the road from Grumman who was hard at work on the F-14. McDonnell, the only airframer left in the midwest, in St. Louis didn't have much to do outside of the F-4 program, which would be winding down as the F-15 was introduced.And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Regards
Pioneer
Political and industrial base considerations also enter into this type of selection. I assume that the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) aircraft would have been assembled on Long Island, NY, just down the road from Grumman who was hard at work on the F-14. McDonnell, the only airframer left in the midwest, in St. Louis didn't have much to do outside of the F-4 program, which would be winding down as the F-15 was introduced.And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Regards
Pioneer
I think that the Harrier and Hornet work came a few years later.Political and industrial base considerations also enter into this type of selection. I assume that the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) aircraft would have been assembled on Long Island, NY, just down the road from Grumman who was hard at work on the F-14. McDonnell, the only airframer left in the midwest, in St. Louis didn't have much to do outside of the F-4 program, which would be winding down as the F-15 was introduced.And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Regards
Pioneer
They did get the Harrier and Hornet work.
1st Flight Dates:I think that the Harrier and Hornet work came a few years later.Political and industrial base considerations also enter into this type of selection. I assume that the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) aircraft would have been assembled on Long Island, NY, just down the road from Grumman who was hard at work on the F-14. McDonnell, the only airframer left in the midwest, in St. Louis didn't have much to do outside of the F-4 program, which would be winding down as the F-15 was introduced.And I think McDD's design was deemed less risky.Because the latter was better than the former according to the USAF, TAC (now ACC) and DoD. -SPMichel Van said:I have a question: Why has the Fairchild-Hiller (Republic) F-15 lost against McDonnell Douglas F-15 ?
Regards
Pioneer
They did get the Harrier and Hornet work.
Cleaned up a bit.Larger and better, but still with watermarks. I found at the Cradle of Aviation Museum web archive.It would be interesting to see the full colour original
I think it looks more like an F105 with two podded engines (the forward fuselage is very F-105) which it kind of is since its an outgrowth of studies to improve survivability with two widely separated engines. It's a bit early for TVC though."Reminds me irresistibly of a cross between the Su-27..."
Thank you for nailing my 'deja vu'. Also, a whiff of 'Hustler' ??
Hmm: Twin tails would certainly help with an 'engine out'. But so would any thrust vectoring ?
The article was divided into 8 segments (printed over 8 issues), starting with Seversky. This was the last segment and it was all written by Graham Salt. In this last segment, there's a little bit about the swing-wing V/STOL too. Quite a bit about the A-10 and the T-46 (plus a bit about the 62% scale demonstrator)
a twin-engined fighter with a fixed, cranked wing, and a single fin/rudder. The wide spacing of the two Pratt & Whitney F100 turbofans offered aerodynamic and drag advantages, as well as structural weight saving, enhanced fuel capacity, and better survivability in a hostile combat situation.
In spite of Republic offering a credible design, capable of providing a first class air combat fighter, the award of the contract from the USAF went to McDonnell Douglas, and this ultimately resulted in the highly successful F-15C/D Eagle, and later F-15E Strike Eagle designs.
Republic was aware that opportunities to particulate in programmes like the F-15 were rare and infrequent, and it had made an intensive effort to secure a contract. Whatever the relative merits of its, and McDonnell Douglas's designs, no doubt many other factors came into play, not least the US Government's need to spread the work around. the award to Grumman for the new F-14 Tomcat to produced just a few miles up the road at Bethpage, NY, may have possibly worked against Republic at Farmingdale, and in favour of McDonnell Douglas.
There is a suze break down as the fifth image in this thread.Does anybody know the distance between the engine pods on this plane? Because they look a lot further apart then even the f-14's did, but that might just be artistic distortion.
Grumman engineering team has moved to Hagerstown, Md., to work with Fairchild Hiller on that company’s design proposal for the Air Force F-15
air superiority fighter.
The F-16's flight control software enforces the aircraft's limited AoA range, which probably doesn't matter that much: it's likely the most maneuverable aircraft of its generation.I wonder how well it and the NAA design would have handled high AOA with their single tails. (Then again the F-16 seems to do okay without the need for high AOA excursions so who knows?) Personally, my favorite of the three was the NAA design with Republics a close second. Thing is, NAA would have probably run into the same issues Sukhoi did with the gothic wing, and the box-like fuselage of McDD's design came in pretty handy when the CFTs came along.
Probably depends on how you measure it. The YF-17 could do a Pugachev's Cobra.The F-16's flight control software enforces the aircraft's limited AoA range, which probably doesn't matter that much: it's likely the most maneuverable aircraft of its generation.I wonder how well it and the NAA design would have handled high AOA with their single tails. (Then again the F-16 seems to do okay without the need for high AOA excursions so who knows?) Personally, my favorite of the three was the NAA design with Republics a close second. Thing is, NAA would have probably run into the same issues Sukhoi did with the gothic wing, and the box-like fuselage of McDD's design came in pretty handy when the CFTs came along.
Has anyone scanned the F-15 General Arrangement from Box 386, Folder 9?Any US members fancy a trip to NASM in Washington?
[Box 178]
Folder 2 Fairchild Hiller Republic Aircraft Division F-X Phase 1B/C Technical Resources, October 18, 1968
[Box 189]
Folder 6 Fairchild F-15 brochures
[Box 381]
Folder 8 F-15 pamphlets
[Box 386]
Folder 9 ...and F-15 General Arrangement
[Box 396]
Folder 1 F-15, Air Superiority Fighter pamphlet, advertisements, brochures, photographs and
stickers, 1969
Folder 2 F-15 dismantling, September 1970, photographs
Folder 3 F-15 Design Team, biographical sketches and photographs
Folder 4 F-15 articles
Folder 5 United States Air Force, information on the F-15, February – November, 1969
Folder 6 F-15 contract awarded to McDonnell Douglas, December 23, 1969, statements and
articles
Folder 7 F-15 articles, 1969-1970
[Box 569]
Folder 12 F-15, promotional brochures
[Box 579]
Folder 19 F-15, advertisement order, June 18, 1969, “Happiness is the F-15”
[Box 588]
Folder 7 Fairchild Hiller and F-15, bumper stickers and correspondence
Link?
I think it's just that everything Republic made was a thunder-something. Thunderbolt, Thunderjet, Thunderchief, Thunderbolt II...Great find!!!
I have always loved Fairchild FX (F-15) ever since I first saw it in the book 'The Thunder Factory'.
Was the 'Thunder' the official name for the design (as portrayed in this picture!)
I look forward to a colour version of this picture and I salute the man who finds it!!!
Regards
Pioneer
1971 Fairchild Hiller News Republic Aviation A-10 F-15 | #26944350
This auction is for 2 orig 1969 and 1971 Fairchild Hiller News... Republic Aviation Vol 8, No1 January 1971....Fairchild Hiller News.....2 page foldout... all about the contract to build the A-10 ...awww.worthpoint.com
This auction is for 2 orig 1969 and 1971 Fairchild Hiller News... Republic Aviation Vol 8, No1 January 1971....Fairchild Hiller News.....2 page foldout... all about the contract to build the A-10 ...also F-105 photo.. and SST..... Vol6, No 12 Dec 1969...Fairchild Hiller News... all about F-15 proposal against the MacDonald Douglas aircraft..
Fairchild Hiller News Jan 1969Fairchild Wins Award for Next Phase of F-15
Fairchild Hiller has been chosen as one of three companies to receive $9.6-million contracts to proceed into the next phase of contract definition
of the U.S. Air Force F-15. The two other companies are McDonnell-Douglas and North American Rockwell. A runoff for the 1200-plane, $8-billion program is expected to continue till next fall.
The Air Force described the F-15, which will replace the present F-4 series, as a highly maneuverable, single-place, twin-engine jet that is expected to become operational in the mid-1970s.
Dedication Praised
Commenting on the award, Donald J. Strait, Vice President and General Manager at Republic Aviation Division where the previous work was performed, said: “I want to compliment Dr. Norman Grossman and his team of dedicated and professional people for an outstanding effort which enabled us to wrin this award. The companies involved in the F-15 race are as tough as they come and it is to our credit that we won a CDP. “Now we have six months to prove we can do it again and win the final award.”
Will Have Missiles
The F-15 tactical fighter will be armed with a mix of air-to-air weapons, including short range missiles, to ensure air superiority at low and medium altitudes. Formerly designated the FX, it will carry four AIM-7F radar-guided Sparrow missiles and an internal cannon. It is also expected to carry the AIM-82 short-range missile, designed as a “dogfight” weapon, capable of withstanding high g-loads and striking sharply maneuvering targets at ranges under two miles.
The F-15 will be powered by 22,800-pound thrust turbofan engines with afterburner which are being developed competitively by General Electric and .
Pratt & Whitney. The engines are to have an extremely high thrust-to-weight ratio, possibly as much as 8.3 at sea level.
Capabilities Described
The aircraft, according to Aviation Week, is to have a range in its air-superiority role of 260 nautical miles. For point intercept, the range will shrink to 215 nautical miles. In a high-low-high profile, range is expected to be 600 miles and for ferrying, it. can be stretched to 2600 miles.
The publication said that the design aim is a maximum continuous speed at altitude of Mach 2.3, with Mach 2.5 in bursts. On-the-deck maximum velocity will be about Mach 1.2.
Charles Collis , Fairchild Hiller Executive Vice President, said -that the company is “trying to make the F-15 a pilot’s aircraft. We are trying to optimize the relationship of man and aircraft more than has ever been achieved before.”
F-105 Experience Helpful
Mr. Collis said that the expenence gained by the Company's F-105 Thunderchief in Vietnam has enabled Fairchild engineers to design increased survivability into the F-15.
Heading the company’s design efforts has been Dr. Norman Grossman recently named Vice President and Manager of the F-15 project. Dr. Grossman has worked closely with the Air Force in bringing important advances to the F-105 and has more than 20 years experience in advanced fighter design.