Register here

Author Topic: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement  (Read 13368 times)

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« on: September 22, 2007, 07:05:59 am »
Boeing's LWF design was rated very highly in the LWF competition. It has been suggested it came second in the evaluation to General Dynamics Model 401 (F-16), but Northrop's P-610 was given the second contract because it was twin engined and hence represented a different approach. Boeing's design was too similar to General Dynamics'.

First time I've seen a 3 view presented, albeit very ropey quality.

Sources:

Mockup photos via Gary Morelock
Model photo: Boeing via Jay Miller
William H Ball, "Rapid Calculation of Propulsion System Installation Corrections" AIAA 74-1174
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Sundog

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2535
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2007, 10:37:54 am »
The last pic is obviously a different design/derivative, because of the blending. I think it looks better than the non-blended version, IMHO. Do we know which of the designs shown was the actual submission? I would guess the non-blended design, since it's a full scale mock-up, but I was just curious about that.

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2007, 01:56:51 pm »
I guess, the non-blended one, as the 1974 article used it for its illustration.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Maveric

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1734
  • Fight for yor Right!
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #3 on: September 23, 2007, 10:17:45 am »
Anybody have some technical data for this project, please.

Servus Maveric
I see you on the dark side of the moon.

Offline Hood

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1098
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2007, 05:54:28 am »
Is that a full size mock-up? Although I guess it shares the semi-reclined seating arrangement of the F-16 the cockpit seems too shallow to fit the pilots legs, rudder pedals and any other avionics in the nose. It would be a very tight squeeze taking references from the man standing beside it.

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #5 on: November 17, 2007, 03:57:10 pm »
Thanks to Tony Buttler's American Secret Projects we can confirm that the model illustrates Boeing Model 908-618, an earlier study, while the mockup and 3 view is the later 908-909 design. Unfortunately no dimensions are given.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #6 on: December 22, 2008, 03:59:27 pm »
Much better copy of the Boeing LWF 3 view plus 2 detail drawings. It should be possible to calculate size from the dimensions given in the detail drawings.

http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=AD907816&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf
« Last Edit: April 01, 2009, 02:56:59 am by overscan »
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #7 on: December 23, 2008, 12:48:16 pm »
Note the 2D intake, which compared to a simple pitot intake was supposed to optimise performance for Mach 1.6 and allow Mach 2.0 as a fallout.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2009, 02:51:54 am »
My attempt to scale this drawing from the detail drawing yielded a length of about 44ft 6in, which seems a bit low.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline SaturnCanuck

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 299
  • Any landing you can walk away from, is a good one.
    • AeroFile Publications
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2009, 10:00:03 am »
Hmmm....???

The Boeing F-16 "Stratohawk"?
Saturncanuck

:)

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #10 on: August 31, 2009, 02:11:38 am »
The earlier design with the LERX is the Boeing 908-618. Model 908-618-2 was featured in Riccioni, Boyd and Sprey's "Falcon Brief" presentation.

Apparently, Boeing were unable to converge a workable design for the LERX so removed it from their 908-909 submission.

Boeing 908-618-2 was 47.8ft in length from tip of pitot tube to end of tail. Excluding the pitot and tail, length was 43ft. Wing span was 29.3ft, tail span 17ft, height 14ft. Wing area was 240 sq ft. Takeoff weight clean was estimated at 16,000lb, empty weight 11,700lb, with provision for 4,300lb internal fuel. Engine was the F100-PW-100.

Source:
James P Stevenson The Pentagon Paradox

« Last Edit: August 31, 2009, 03:42:35 pm by overscan »
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline airman

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1055
    • my blogs
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #11 on: August 31, 2009, 05:58:18 am »
seems an interpretation of F-16 made by Boeing : an artistic flying technology !!!  ;D
writers , bloggers , content-curators ,  music composer and passionate of militaria and uchronia

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #12 on: August 31, 2009, 06:03:28 am »
It actually predates the GD F-16 design by a year or more.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline prolific1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 450
    • Aviation Design Boneyard
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #13 on: August 31, 2009, 10:17:15 am »
The lower of three images (with the blended wing) seems to amount to a significant redesign (as a derivative) as the wing appears to have a higher incidence in it's mounting location to "blend" with the nose strakes.
Windows/PCs/anything Microsoft sucks.

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10956
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: Boeing Lightweight fighter design to LWF requirement
« Reply #14 on: August 31, 2009, 03:45:04 pm »
Yes, as stated above, there are two different design in this topic, 908-618 with LERX and mid wing and 908-909 without LERX and low wing.
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm