Register here

Author Topic: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)  (Read 46785 times)

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #45 on: October 03, 2013, 05:42:27 pm »
 
However, looking at that first picture in the thread with the parachute inexplicably not getting sucked into the turbofan and air rescue being conductd next to the jet blast...

Itís called lateral separation. In the picture the perspective of the artist point of view may make them look close together but they are well separated and as the air vehicle is moving forwards the parachute will fly to the rear. The only way it would get sucked into the intake is if the interception was made in the hover with a strong side wind. Which would clearly not be the way to do it. The jet blast as well would not be much of a problem as the recovery wire from hook to door looks like it diverts around it.
 
...well, I can imagine a scenario where someone looked at the concept art and decided that this was either unserious or the engineers were smoking crack.

I can imagine the scenario where the USAF rescue service requested this kind of capability from the aerospace industry. Based on the extensive and highly costly experience of CSAR in VietNam and the proven air recovery of drones and satellite packages. If only they could pluck airman out of the air before they hit the ground they could save large numbers of shot down aircrew and avoid the huge risk and expense of a rescue mission.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline Tailspin Turtle

  • Naval Aviation Author
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 679
    • U.S. Navy Aircraft History
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #46 on: October 03, 2013, 05:56:40 pm »
My take on VSTOL A is that when it became apparent that the none of the lift fans could do the missions with existing technology, the Navy decided to focus on VSTOL B instead. Grumman went as far with the G-698 with their own money as they could. When Navy or NASA funding wasn't forthcoming to take the program to the next level, Grumman stopped work on it.

Offline Loren

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #47 on: October 03, 2013, 06:00:34 pm »
In this time period - I was in Flight School at Fort Rucker and large number of of viable projects were cancelled wholesale including the B-1A which had already flown.

This was a time period of huge defense cuts especially in new projects. I can't say for certainty that this was the case on this particular project, but it is highly likely that was the case.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein

Brown Flight 81-29: Rudis, Inconditus quod Amicabiliter Inconveniens

Offline circle-5

  • Concept Models Guy
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1156
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #48 on: October 04, 2013, 02:10:39 pm »
A trade-show model from Grumman's in-house model shop, showing the final configuration of the G-698 proposal for the U.S. Marine Corps. Note large canards, refueling probe (from an A-6 Intruder), repositioned main wing and removal of the mechanical linkage between tilt engine nacelles. All of these modifications allowed for a larger and more practical internal payload clearance, along with rear loading doors.

Folding wings and vertical fin allowed tighter storage on aircraft carriers.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2013, 10:52:14 am by circle-5 »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22042
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #49 on: October 04, 2013, 02:56:21 pm »
What a beauty,thank you for sharing Circle-5.

Offline Kiltonge

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 203
  • Greetings Earthling
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #50 on: July 04, 2014, 01:17:26 am »
Quote
The Marine Corps assault version would have an aft-loading ramp and could accommodate 23 combat-equipped troops.

Also being studied is a vertical on-board delivery (VOD) model that would exceed the 45,0001b limit. That aircraft would require a
third top-mounted engine a la Boeing 727.


http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1977/1977%20-%201312.html

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22042
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #51 on: December 21, 2014, 05:28:40 am »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22042
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #52 on: December 05, 2015, 08:00:31 am »
Hi,

here is an artist drawing to Grumman G-698.

Aircraft 2000, Bill Sweetman

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #53 on: December 05, 2015, 04:09:41 pm »
Cool pic. Here it is enhanced and reversed, the way it should be:

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22042
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #54 on: December 06, 2015, 03:47:01 am »
Cool pic. Here it is enhanced and reversed, the way it should be:

Nice work my dear Skyblazer.



Online SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 909
Re: Grumman G-698 V/STOL (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
« Reply #57 on: September 21, 2018, 06:32:38 am »
Nice to see the 28 year old SLAT concept come to reality.
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."