XQ-11 / Radioplane RP-91 / F-108 Airborne Target

A

Andreas Parsch

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
2 March 2006
Messages
265
Reaction score
60
Hi,

this is a question for the real 8) F-108/WS-202A experts.

My research in the less-known corners of U.S. aircraft nomenclature space ;) turned up two pages (attached) about the request for allocation, and subsequent rejection, of the "XQ-11" designation to something called "F-108 Airborne Target". Unfortunately, while I have a few sources which say a bit about the development of the F-108 Weapons System (WS-202A) and its components, none of them mentions any associated "Airborne Target". So, has anyone ever heard about an effort to develop an aerial target specifically for (test and evaluation of) the F-108?

TIA!

Andreas
 

Attachments

  • xq-11-1.jpg
    xq-11-1.jpg
    270.9 KB · Views: 272
  • xq-11-2.jpg
    xq-11-2.jpg
    114.5 KB · Views: 247
Haven't heard anything, but it is seriously not suprising. Given the massive quantum leap in capability they were after, a new type of aerial target would have been logical as at the time there weren't a lot of high-performance jet targets available, nor were there loads of bomber-type targets either. The interesting part is that they state that they want a storable rocket, implying that they aren't interested in simulating slower moving targets. I do have one slightly off-the-wall theory: it was an X-11 Atlas missile variant. The YF-12A, using pretty much the exact same weapon system, was used to track ICBMs out of Vandenberg AFB to test the system's applicability in a potential ABM role. Maybe that was a planned role the whole time, and what they were after was an X-11 Atlas missile variant to use for testing? I'll dig through what I have at home tomorrow or Sunday (I'm off on vacation right now). On a related note, do you have anything about an armed D-21 variant?
 
Thank you for the input, Sean. However, the specific connection to the ATLAS missile is probably a bit far-fetched. The proposed "XQ-11" nomenclature has definitely nothing to do with the old "X-11" designation for an ATLAS research vehicle (Q- and X-series were totally distinct; 11 was simply the next available number in the Q-series in 1958). Of course, that doesn't mean that the XQ-11 was not to be a ballistic rocket.

As for the armed D-21, I haven't read anything about such a derivative. Sorry.
 
Andreas Parsch said:
Hi,

this is a question for the real 8) F-108/WS-202A experts.

My research in the less-known corners of U.S. aircraft nomenclature space ;) turned up two pages (attached) about the request for allocation, and subsequent rejection, of the "XQ-11" designation to something called "F-108 Airborne Target". Unfortunately, while I have a few sources which say a bit about the development of the F-108 Weapons System (WS-202A) and its components, none of them mentions any associated "Airborne Target". So, has anyone ever heard about an effort to develop an aerial target specifically for (test and evaluation of) the F-108?

TIA!

Andreas
Click to expand...


My first thought was to suggest you contact Andreas Parche but I gues that won't work huh? ;) Could it have been a theoretical derivative of some other existing system at the time such as the X-7 or one of the ALBMs considered for the B-58?
 
sferrin said:
My first thought was to suggest you contact Andreas Parche but I gues that won't work huh? ;)
Click to expand...
*LOL* ;D

Could it have been a theoretical derivative of some other existing system at the time such as the X-7 or one of the ALBMs considered for the B-58?
Click to expand...
The X-7 drone was the XQ-5, which was under US Army control at that time - so it was probably ignored by the Air Force ;). A projected derivative of another existing high-performance missile is of course entirely possible. I also have a few more or less spurious references to new high-performance target projects in the 1959 time frame, but nothing really substantial (e.g. Bell/Bendix "Penny 1C"; strange name, if it is actually real).

Anyway, I just wanted to tap into the amazingly big combined knowledge base of all members of this forum :) - there's always the chance that one of you pulls something out of a 1950s AvWeek ;).
 
http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/app1/q-11.html has this to say:

"In July 1959, the USAF's WADC (Wright Air Development Center) requested the allocation of the designation XQ-11 to a so called "F-108 Airborne Target". This probably referred to a projected high-performance aerial target for evaluation of the whole F-108 interceptor weapons system (WS-202A). However, USAF Headquarters did not approve the request, stating that a specific designation for the target would not be necessary at such an early stage of the program. In the end the WS-202A program, and with it the "F-108 Airborne Target", was cancelled before a F-108 prototype had been built."
 
The Airborne Target missile.

Would have been carried in the internal weapons bay and launched to provide Mach 3+ targets with possibly programmed evasive manouvers to help train F-108 pilots in using their Radar/GAR-9s against Mach 3+ targets.
 

Attachments

  • F-108 Airborne Target.jpg
    F-108 Airborne Target.jpg
    216.3 KB · Views: 333
  • F-108 Airborne Target Cutaway.jpg
    F-108 Airborne Target Cutaway.jpg
    229 KB · Views: 377
Scott Kenny said:
Okay, yes a decoy could be a thing. Seems odd for an interceptor to carry a decoy, so I suspect this was for the Penetrating Fighter mission.
Click to expand...
Dubious. The unrefueled combat radius of the F-108 was only a bit over a thousand miles. Not going to be doing much penetrating with that performance.

The drone is described only as an "airborne target for the F-108." This likely means that it was to be used as a training aid for the F-108... carried and launched by *something* *else,* shot out of the sky by an F-108/AIM-47 at great range. The drone would presumably have an RCS designed to look like a supersonic Soviet bomber.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
this image of the XQ-11 was posted on @Andreas Parsch website. I wonder if there were mutiple bidders? Is this the Radioplane RP-91 or something else?
Click to expand...
The XQ-10 was a Radioplane, and the XQ-6 was WADC/Radioplane, but to the best of my knowledge, the XQ-11 did not involve Radioplane; in my list, the XQ-11 is solely a WADC design. Radioplane did submit a proposal for the F-108 program, but it doesn't mean it was accepted and/or was given a designation. But I'm willing to be proven wrong, by all means!
 
Air Force competition for the developmcnt of a high performance target system for its North American F-108 Mach 3 fighter is still in the planning stage. North American Aviation (Coumbus), after sounding out drone manufacturers on the idea, has recommended the development of a new target system for the F—108 to the Air Force.
Click to expand...
25 April 1959
 
Last edited:
Orionblamblam said:
Dubious. The unrefueled combat radius of the F-108 was only a bit over a thousand miles. Not going to be doing much penetrating with that performance.

The drone is described only as an "airborne target for the F-108." This likely means that it was to be used as a training aid for the F-108... carried and launched by *something* *else,* shot out of the sky by an F-108/AIM-47 at great range. The drone would presumably have an RCS designed to look like a supersonic Soviet bomber.
Click to expand...
Given the kinematic needs of an airborne target for a mach-3 interceptor, it makes sense for the target to be launched from another mach-3 interceptor.

This reconciles the “carried by the F-108” and “108 airborne target” quandry.
 
overscan (PaulMM) said:
this image of the XQ-11 was posted on @Andreas Parsch website. I wonder if there were mutiple bidders? Is this the Radioplane RP-91 or something else?
Click to expand...
Also this picture from RyanC's post.
f-108-airborne-target-cutaway-jpg.84342
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Cheers - moved Ryan's post to this topic.

""In July 1959, the USAF's WADC (Wright Air Development Center) requested the allocation of the designation XQ-11 to a so called "F-108 Airborne Target"

It seems possible this follows a contract being signed, but the entire F-108 program was cancelled in September and it might be the "winner" was not yet selected.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom