Register here

Author Topic: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects  (Read 36418 times)

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« on: April 30, 2008, 10:56:15 pm »
Does anyone have any information on the design for the enlarged S-3 Viking offered as a carrier onboard delivery (COD) aircraft in competition with the second batch of Grumman Greyhounds? And I don’t mean the US-3 which was just a stripped ASW Viking for high speed COD duties. Apparently this super Viking COD had a new fuselage, engines and seats for up to 30 passengers.

http://www.vectorsite.net/avs3.html
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline fightingirish

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2058
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2008, 09:36:30 am »
Did not JP Santiago (aka Sentinel Chicken) do some what-iff's of a Viking COD with a longer fuselage?
« Last Edit: May 01, 2008, 09:41:23 am by fightingirish »
Slán,
fightingirish

Slán ist an Irish Gaelic word for Goodbye.  :)

Avatar:
McDonnell Douglas Model 225 painting by "The Artist" Michael Burke (Tavush) 2018, found at deviantart.com and at Secret Projects Forum » Research Topics » User Artwork » McDonnell Douglas Model 225 Painting

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2514
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2008, 11:14:53 am »
Do you mean these:




See here:  http://www.madoc.us/profiles.html#rainbower12h

Regards,

Greg

Offline fightingirish

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2058
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2008, 05:57:58 pm »
Yes!!!  ;D

Note also new main gear!
Maybe JP Santiago / Sentinel Chicken or someone else can give us info, if this concept is based on facts or on fiction.
If fiction, the mods have the right to move this thread over to Scale Modelling, CGI and Profiles forum.
Slán,
fightingirish

Slán ist an Irish Gaelic word for Goodbye.  :)

Avatar:
McDonnell Douglas Model 225 painting by "The Artist" Michael Burke (Tavush) 2018, found at deviantart.com and at Secret Projects Forum » Research Topics » User Artwork » McDonnell Douglas Model 225 Painting

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #4 on: May 04, 2008, 11:36:37 pm »
Nope, the Vector site article is pretty clear that the Lockheed COD would have a new fuselage and engines and not just a remodelled aft fuselage. It would also have seats for 30 which is quite large.
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline nova10

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 51
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #5 on: May 27, 2008, 11:06:44 am »
Hi there

Has anybody got any info or pics on the proposed smaller "mini" or "micro" s-3 viking intended to operate from smaller carriers?

Many thanks

Offline Sentinel Chicken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 576
  • American 71 Heavy, contact departure 126.47
    • TAILS THROUGH TIME: Short Trips on the Long Road of Aviation History
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #6 on: May 27, 2008, 08:03:54 pm »
My COD version was purely conjectural on my part. Couldn't find any info at the time on the COD Viking so more or less took a wild-arse guess.

Offline AeroFranz

  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2076
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #7 on: May 28, 2008, 07:19:24 am »
My COD version was purely conjectural on my part. Couldn't find any info at the time on the COD Viking so more or less took a wild-arse guess.

Looks good nonetheless! :)
All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics.   TSR.2 got the first three right - Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Mark Nankivil

  • Archive Raider
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 1413
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #8 on: November 21, 2008, 06:29:16 am »
Greetings All -

I did not find a previous thread looking at AEW variants/proposals of the S-3 so started up this one.  This model is in the possession of the Frontiers of Flight Museum at Love Field in Dallas, TX.  This is a Vought/LTV proposal for an AEW variant of the S-3.  Makes sense coming from Vought as they did the Navy acceptance qualification work for the original S-3 and obviously had far more navair experience than Lockheed.  Not bad looking either....

Any other proposals out there to replace the E-2?  There's the joined wing Boeing design in another thread but what else might be out there?

Enjoy the Day!  Mark

Offline Pyrrhic victory

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 73
  • This is going to hurt
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #9 on: November 21, 2008, 12:09:03 pm »
An older thread

Lockheed & Grumman Multiple Purpose Subsonic Naval Aircraft (MPSNA) studies (1986)

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2012.0/highlight,lockheed+grumman.html

As a side note on the E-2 in general, its been said that Vought's E-2 submission was superior to Grumman's but the contract went to Grumman anyway.  The more aerodynamic antannae from Vought's proposal found its way into the Hawkeye.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
« Last Edit: November 01, 2012, 09:53:14 am by hesham »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2009, 04:03:23 am »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #12 on: July 06, 2010, 04:09:39 pm »
Model of AEW (Airborne Early Warning) version of Lockheed S-3 Viking.

Source: http://s22.photobucket.com/albums/b336/Bager1968/Aircraft/AEW%20aircraft/?action=view&current=ES-3c-001.jpg
« Last Edit: July 06, 2010, 04:14:05 pm by Triton »

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #13 on: September 27, 2012, 07:42:10 pm »
A recent issue of Naval History magazine had an article by Norman Polmar about the S-3 Viking. It mentioned the stretched COD version of the aircraft that was proposed in the 1980s. It did not mention a new fuselage or seats for 30, only a fuselage plug of 70 inches.

The vector website is gone. Anybody know what it referred to?

Offline RLBH

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2012, 10:48:46 am »
The vector website is gone. Anybody know what it referred to?
Not gone, the author just hived off the aviation side of his site to a separate URL. The relevant article can now be found here:
http://www.airvectors.net/avs3.html

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2012, 02:14:45 pm »
Thank you for that. Here is an excerpt:

"One of the interesting derivatives of the "stock" S-3A was a modification for the "carrier on-board delivery (COD)" cargo / personnel transport role. Lockheed initially proposed a major redesign of the Viking for COD operations, featuring a longer and wider fuselage with a rear loading ramp and accommodations for 30 passengers, plus more powerful engines to handle the bigger airframe.  The Navy didn't buy the idea, so Lockheed came up with a minimum-change solution, originally given the designation "S-3A(COD)" but then redesignated "US-3A".  Combat avionics were removed, with a color navigation radar and a LORAN-Omega navigation beacon receiver installed.  The seats for the SENSO and TACCO were removed, though a place was installed for a loadmaster.  The US-3A could carry six passengers or up to 2,125 kilograms (4,680 pounds) of cargo internally in a cargo hold with 7.6 cubic meters (10 cubic yards) of usable space.  It could be fitted with either an external tank or a cargo pod under each wing, depending on whether the mission demanded range or load.

  One of the original YS-3A Viking prototypes was converted as a demonstrator, performing its first flight on 2 July 1976.  The Navy was impressed, but decided to standardize on the Grumman C-2A Greyhound instead.  However, the Navy did acquire six more US-3A conversions to meet a specialized COD requirement.  They provided service during the Gulf War, but were retired in the mid-1990s.  One was lost in a crash.  The US-3A's cargo pods, known as "blivets", were carried on other Viking variants on rare occasions."


I think that there are actually three COD versions that were proposed or built:
1-the original COD proposal, with a much larger fuselage.
2-the actual US-3A COD that was built, essentially consisting of the standard fuselage with the interior stripped out to serve in the COD role.
3-the COD version mentioned in Polmar's Naval History magazine article, which would have consisted of the basic S-3 airframe with a 70-inch fuselage plug. The article linked above does not refer to that version.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #16 on: November 01, 2012, 08:47:00 am »
Also AIBF,ultra-STOL concept,fitted with four engines;

To assess the AIBF ultra-STOL performance  potential,the experimental data
developed by the NASA/USAF/Lockheed large-scale tests for the AIBF concept
were used for analyzing the deck performance of a typical sea-based aircraft
configuration.Figure 10 depicts this conceptual AIBF ultra-STOL configuration
which had an aspect-ratio  7.73 wing of 68-ft span and a wing area of
598 sq.ft.The power plants were four TF34-GE-2 turbofans. It was assumed
that the TF34/AIBF installation was similar to the AIBF  application scheme
shown in Figure 1b and that the flap setting for both takeoff and landing
configurations was 30 degrees.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a078909.pdf


« Last Edit: November 06, 2012, 01:55:04 pm by hesham »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2012, 01:58:56 pm »
Hi,

amazing V/STOL concept to the Lockheed S-3 Viking,with changing the
land gear system.


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19800015801_1980015801.pdf


Online PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10794
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
« Last Edit: January 04, 2013, 09:38:17 pm by PaulMM (Overscan) »
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Online PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10794
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Bill S

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #20 on: September 28, 2013, 07:20:20 am »
Two images of the Viking AEW concept.


The first is a PK Nagata artists concept of the Viking AEW getting ready to launch
The second is a different scan of the same poor image of a Viking AEW model
Both from Vought Aircraft Historical Foundation archives.


bill

Offline Bill S

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #21 on: September 28, 2013, 08:14:07 am »
I also found this graphic for the program.
VAHF


bill

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #22 on: November 23, 2013, 07:36:17 pm »
Proposed revised version of Viking COD. New fuselage.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #23 on: November 23, 2013, 08:17:39 pm »
Proposed revised version of Viking COD. New fuselage.

Related topic:

"Common Support Aircraft  (C-XX) competition [2014]" 
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,19148.0.html
« Last Edit: November 23, 2013, 08:23:50 pm by Triton »

Online Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7871
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #24 on: November 24, 2013, 02:00:06 am »
Maybe the results of the X-55 ACCA could be incorporated ?

It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #25 on: November 24, 2013, 06:23:18 am »
I wish they had released a better illustration of the aircraft. I am curious as to how they add a larger fuselage to an existing cockpit. Is it just longer or do they increase the width?

Online Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7871
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #26 on: November 24, 2013, 08:54:59 am »
My interpretation is an increased length, a higher set wing and maybe
taper of the rear fuselage on a shorter length of the aft fuselage, so
retaining the maximum width on a longer part of the cabin.
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline aim9xray

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #27 on: November 24, 2013, 09:44:56 am »
Going by the article, both widened and lengthened .  They will have some interesting challenges due to "knock-on" effects.

- If they are to keep the wing intact, they are limited as to how much the fuselage can be widened - this is driven by the current engine placement (i.e. you can't move the engines outboard to make room for more fuselage width).  As a very rough guess, they can't bump out the fuselage sides more than 9-12 inches on either side. (The reduced clearance could have some aero effects as well as impede maintenance accessibility to the inboard side of the engines.)

- The fuselage outer mold line would probably be bumped out on the sides like that of the 747 Dreamlifter.

- Raising the wing above the "cargo box" of the fuselage means that the empennage group must be raised by roughly the same amount; this driven by the need to have the engine exhaust plume not interact (much) with the horizontal stabilizer.

- Tying in the new fuselage structure to the existing cockpit/nose landing gear structure will be a challenge; the S-3 was designed around a very efficient dual keel beam structure that reacted longitudinal loads all the way from the nose landing gear (cat loads) to the main landing gear, to the tailhook (trap loads).  The depth of this structure will have to be greatly diminished in the cargo box to make room for, well, cargo; the transition to the existing structure under the cockpit will be interesting.   On the other hand, they won't have to have the gaping [structural] holes in the current upper forward fuselage for the back seaters to eject through.

I would imagine that a lot of the initial groundwork for this was done by Lockheed and Vought in the late 70s/early 80s when last a new COD aircraft was needed.  (The customer's solution then was to reprocure the C-2 essentially "off the shelf" rather than engage in a development effort.) 

My thoughts anyhow, YMMV.

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #28 on: November 24, 2013, 01:12:28 pm »
I think that the COD requirement is to be able to carry an F110 engine without any disassembly. So they need a fuselage that can hold that.

But I agree that eliminating the taper at the back could constitute "widening."


Offline aim9xray

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 454
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #29 on: November 24, 2013, 03:13:08 pm »
If that is still a requirement, it's an anachronism - F110 powered the F-14D which is long gone.  Engines in use by the air wing are F414, F404, J52 (vanishing), T700 and T56 (am I missing any?).  I think the driver is probably the number of passengers.

C-2 allows six rows of 2+2 seating plus one row of 2, current S-3 width would give you rows of 1+1 with a slightly wider aisle and seats.

Offline _Del_

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 307
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #30 on: November 24, 2013, 04:09:24 pm »
I'm guessing the "new" Vikings would be to supplement the C-2's along with freeing up Hornets by taking over more tanking missions. So the passenger factor may not be a big issue. I'm guessing the only reason it's being widened at all is for the ramp at the tail.

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #31 on: November 24, 2013, 09:04:14 pm »
If that is still a requirement, it's an anachronism - F110 powered the F-14D which is long gone.  Engines in use by the air wing are F414, F404, J52 (vanishing), T700 and T56 (am I missing any?). 

More likely I misremembered it. But I think the requirement is to carry a spare engine, so pick the biggest engine in carrier use.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #32 on: November 27, 2013, 01:22:13 pm »
Edited image of Lockheed KC-3 Viking COD

Source:
http://ptisidiastima.wordpress.com/
« Last Edit: November 27, 2013, 02:49:13 pm by Triton »

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #33 on: November 27, 2013, 04:26:07 pm »
Thanks for that. I tried to clean up the image from the AWST article and post it here, but it came out looking lousy, so I quit.

I hope that they release some better imagery. It would be interesting to compare the old and new fuselages. Note the extensions on either side of the bottom of the fuselage. Presumably that is for the landing gear. They would have to move a lot of stuff out of the standard fuselage to get the maximum volume, since the standard S-3 fuselage includes the gear and a weapons bay. Plus, they'd have to beef up the floor. And the tailhook will have to be moved. In other words, it's not simply gutting the fuselage, but completely redesigning it.

Lockheed Martin was doing some experiments with a bizjet fuselage a few years ago. I cannot remember if they were trying to build a composite fuselage or one with standard materials, only trying to speed up the design process. I heard about it during a visit to the Skunk Works in 2011. It was an internal project and they never intended to fly the airframe, but I think that the story got reported.

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #34 on: November 27, 2013, 08:16:27 pm »
Thank you for sharing the information and the image, blackstar.

Offline zebedee

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • **
  • Posts: 123
    • Mumbling
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #35 on: November 27, 2013, 11:00:46 pm »
Blackstar... you mean the X55...?


I was just about to say the design reminds me a little of how the X55 was designed and constructed...


http://tinyurl.com/nwerl7o


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9089.0.html


Zeb
"I have often had the impression that, to penguins, man is just another penguin - different, less predictable, occasionally violent, but tolerable company when he sits still and minds his own business" Bernard Stonehouse

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #36 on: November 28, 2013, 05:17:36 am »
Thank you for sharing the information and the image, blackstar.

I didn't provide the image. I provided the AWST article.

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #37 on: November 28, 2013, 05:23:49 am »
Blackstar... you mean the X55...?


I was just about to say the design reminds me a little of how the X55 was designed and constructed...


http://tinyurl.com/nwerl7o


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9089.0.html


Thanks for that. Actually, I'm going from vague memory. I took a group to the Skunk Works in (I think) May 2011 and they talked to us about various projects they were working on. What they may have mentioned was something that was associated with the X55. I only remember that they were working with an existing aircraft, they were replacing a major part of it, and they were not going to fly it. It was a design and testing project only. So it might have been an offshoot of this work.

But you are right, the X55 seems much more relevant to this.

Offline tab28682

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 13
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #38 on: December 09, 2013, 02:41:18 pm »
If that is still a requirement, it's an anachronism - F110 powered the F-14D which is long gone.  Engines in use by the air wing are F414, F404, J52 (vanishing), T700 and T56 (am I missing any?).  I think the driver is probably the number of passengers.

C-2 allows six rows of 2+2 seating plus one row of 2, current S-3 width would give you rows of 1+1 with a slightly wider aisle and seats.

Don't forget that a useful future COD aircraft will need to be able to haul the fairly sizable P&W F135 engine for the F-35C.........

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #39 on: April 07, 2014, 07:39:15 pm »
Lockheed Martin C-3

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #40 on: April 07, 2014, 07:43:02 pm »
Lockheed Martin's proposed C-3.

I was at the Sea-Air-Space exhibition today and picked up this flyer. They also had a nice video that showed off the aircraft, carrier ops, ground handling, etc.

One neat aspect of the video was that it showed the standard S-3 Viking, and then showed it morphing into the C-3 with the larger fuselage. It was a neat bit of animation.

Part of the animation showed the aircraft operating in a tanker role, although I doubt the Navy would want to use it this way. The concept of a COD is that the plane stays on land and makes temporary visits to a carrier. It is not based there. And the Navy is trying to reduce the number of aircraft on deck. Still, this is an interesting proposal. Northrop Grumman had posters of their updated Greyhound, but I did not find any flyers detailing their proposals for it.

Offline F-14D

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1724
  • I really did change my personal text
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #41 on: April 07, 2014, 08:37:20 pm »
If that is still a requirement, it's an anachronism - F110 powered the F-14D which is long gone.  Engines in use by the air wing are F414, F404, J52 (vanishing), T700 and T56 (am I missing any?).  I think the driver is probably the number of passengers.

C-2 allows six rows of 2+2 seating plus one row of 2, current S-3 width would give you rows of 1+1 with a slightly wider aisle and seats.

Don't forget that a useful future COD aircraft will need to be able to haul the fairly sizable P&W F135 engine for the F-35C.........

Minor note:  None of the proposed new COD aicraft can carry the F135, which is a cause for concern by the USN.   A new container is being designed to address that. 

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #42 on: April 07, 2014, 08:55:49 pm »
Minor note:  None of the proposed new COD aicraft can carry the F135, which is a cause for concern by the USN.   A new container is being designed to address that.

See the flyer I posted. Lockheed Martin claims that the C-3 can carry it.

Offline Abraham Gubler

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3559
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #43 on: April 07, 2014, 10:42:36 pm »
C-2 allows six rows of 2+2 seating plus one row of 2, current S-3 width would give you rows of 1+1 with a slightly wider aisle and seats.

 
This is a great opportunity to mention that when I flew on a C-2 to and from USS Kitty Hawk the back of the seat in front of me had a massive dint in it the shape of a human head.
 
"There is a tendency in our planning to confuse the unfamiliar with the improbable." Thomas Schelling

Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2514
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #44 on: April 08, 2014, 04:23:31 am »
If that is still a requirement, it's an anachronism - F110 powered the F-14D which is long gone.  Engines in use by the air wing are F414, F404, J52 (vanishing), T700 and T56 (am I missing any?).  I think the driver is probably the number of passengers.

C-2 allows six rows of 2+2 seating plus one row of 2, current S-3 width would give you rows of 1+1 with a slightly wider aisle and seats.

Don't forget that a useful future COD aircraft will need to be able to haul the fairly sizable P&W F135 engine for the F-35C.........

Minor note:  None of the proposed new COD aicraft can carry the F135, which is a cause for concern by the USN.   A new container is being designed to address that.


The engine can be broken into modules though I believe.

Offline Richard N

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 267
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #45 on: April 09, 2014, 09:58:22 am »
From the C-3 flyer in post #29:  "Carries F135 Full Engine or Power Module"

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #46 on: April 09, 2014, 02:34:26 pm »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #47 on: April 09, 2014, 02:39:51 pm »
From the C-3 flyer in post #29:  "Carries F135 Full Engine or Power Module"

Quote
The advantage for the Navy is the C-3 would be able to carry the Lockheed F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s Pratt & Whitney F135 engine without breaking it down into modules, Cramer said.

It would also retain the S-3’s ability to act as an aerial refueling tanker—even if individual types like the Boeing F/A-18 would have to have recertified to take-on fuel from the C-3. The Navy’s Hornet fleet burns off about five F/A-18 lives per year on the tanking mission, Cramer said.

The C-3 would be able to carry 10,000 pounds of cargo or 28 passengers and features an advanced cargo handling system and loading ramp lifted directly off the company’s C-130 aircraft albeit with some modifications.

Source:
http://news.usni.org/2014/04/08/lockheed-pitching-revamped-viking-fill-carrier-cargo-tanking-roles

Offline blackstar

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1667
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #48 on: April 10, 2014, 01:30:30 pm »
The illustration shows only one F-35 refueling at a time, so presumably the C-3 cannot handle two simultaneously.

The Navy is looking for a COD aircraft. It is not looking for a tanker. I view the tanker option as a nice to have. But it would really force the Navy to make a decision to buy more C-3's and to consider basing them on carriers. Right now the plan is to base the CODs ashore and they would only visit the carrier whereas a tanker would have to deploy with the ship. And of course that would require the Navy to consider what planes to give up on deck, and to buy more planes and train more pilots.

Although I like the idea, I suspect that in this time of belt-tightening the Navy just would not go for the tanker.

Online SpudmanWP

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 905
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #49 on: April 10, 2014, 03:02:02 pm »
If it can only do 1 at a time (which makes sense given the size), then wouldn't a better solution be a pallatized hose & fuel bladder (like they tested on the V-22) coupled with external fuel tanks be a better solution?
WE4-45-1-08     OMHIWDMB
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."

Offline sferrin

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 10933
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #50 on: April 10, 2014, 03:35:20 pm »
And of course that would require the Navy to consider what planes to give up on deck, and to buy more planes and train more pilots.

Why would they have to give up anything on deck?  "Back in the day" the usual was ~90 aircraft including 2 squadrons of Tomcats and 10 S-3 Vikings.
"DARPA Hard"  It ain't what it use to be.

Offline starviking

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 915
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #51 on: April 10, 2014, 04:29:14 pm »
And of course that would require the Navy to consider what planes to give up on deck, and to buy more planes and train more pilots.

Why would they have to give up anything on deck?  "Back in the day" the usual was ~90 aircraft including 2 squadrons of Tomcats and 10 S-3 Vikings.
They might have to change the aircraft operations (movements on deck, hangar, etc.) to accomodate the tankers, which could have an effect on operations. Nothing insurmountable, but would have an efficiency impact in the near term.
It's also another plane that would have to be maintained onboard too.
 
 

Offline AeroFranz

  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2076
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #52 on: April 10, 2014, 08:34:19 pm »
I'm sure that introducing (or re-introducing?) an additional aircraft type on board has its downsides, but I always thought the F-18 has to be just about the worst tanker platform you can imagine. Really, the only reason you would shove the mission down its throat is because that's all you have and the other platforms are obsolescent.
I don't know where the breakeven point is, but I suspect a single S-3 could do the work of several F-18s.
All modern aircraft have four dimensions: span, length, height and politics.   TSR.2 got the first three right - Sir Sydney Camm

Offline RLBH

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 170
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #53 on: April 11, 2014, 05:41:42 am »
And of course that would require the Navy to consider what planes to give up on deck, and to buy more planes and train more pilots.

Why would they have to give up anything on deck?  "Back in the day" the usual was ~90 aircraft including 2 squadrons of Tomcats and 10 S-3 Vikings.
Now that the prospect of taking huge losses attacking the Soviet Union is off the table, that's considered too high to be worked efficiently. Optimum is apparently ~80 aircraft, once you go above that the extra airframes start getting in the way more than they contribute. Still plenty of room to grow the air wing a bit, though.

Offline allysonca

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • **
  • Posts: 113
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #54 on: May 01, 2014, 11:59:18 pm »
Here is an assortment of VSX proposals from Convair, Douglas and  Lockheed. There is a COD to the right that is a master wood pattern model I received from The old owner of Pac Min back in the good old days. I know that there were 7 examples made in fiberglass.  I also had (traded off) the pattern of the long and skinny utility version.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #55 on: May 02, 2014, 04:59:00 am »
Great find Allysonca.

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #56 on: September 22, 2014, 12:54:21 am »
I just realized we've got quite a few other topics on Lockheed S-3 Viking variants:

Lockheed CL-1555 : S-3 Viking based AEW
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,18058.0

S-3 AEW Version
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5696.0

Lockheed CL-1990 : Ultra-STOL S-3 Viking
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,18046.0

Lockheed "Micro" S-3 Viking variant (US Navy "Type A" proposal)
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4551.0

Lockheed Viking COD

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4313.0

NASA RevCon Program
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5698.0

VSX / TS-160: Alternatives to the S-3 Viking
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,409.0

FLIGHTS OF FANTASY: The AWACS Lockheed Viking
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,627.0
 
 
topics merged, leaving aside the "Micro S-3" and the NASA RevCon Program
« Last Edit: September 01, 2015, 02:10:28 am by Jemiba »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 7959
  • The path not taken.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2014, 04:50:23 am »
Hi,


and a Lockheed S-3 CTOL and STOVL Projects.


http://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/3.45496


Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #59 on: December 27, 2014, 03:21:47 am »
Hi,

here is Lockheed S-3 STOL aircraft with some modifications.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a084226.pdf
« Last Edit: December 27, 2014, 03:38:19 am by hesham »

Offline Triton

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 9687
  • Donald McKelvy
    • Deep Blue to Wild Blue
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #60 on: November 19, 2015, 10:27:36 am »


Offline GTX

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2514
  • All hail the God of Frustration!!!
    • Beyond The Sprues
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #62 on: January 31, 2016, 10:09:23 am »
That last one is quite interesting.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #63 on: January 31, 2016, 01:03:03 pm »
That last one is quite interesting.

Thank you my dear GTX.

Offline Bill S

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 486
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #64 on: February 10, 2016, 07:13:11 pm »
In 1989 the Advanced Concepts group at LTV studied adding additional stores capacity to the S-3B Viking.
Five new stores loads were studied including: Four AGM-88 HARM Missiles, Four AGM-84 Harpoon missiles,
Two AGM-136 Tacit Rainbow missiles, and Two AIM-9 Sidewinder Missiles.

A number of different combinations of these missiles were envisioned. The major limitation was the 2,500lb limit
to the wing pylon on the aircraft. An additional concern was the asymmetric effects caused when only one of the
two weapons on the pylon was deployed.

Here are a few drawings of the reviewed twin weapon adapters and the possible Sidewinder installation.

VAHF material

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #65 on: December 05, 2018, 04:27:45 am »
Also AIBF,ultra-STOL concept,fitted with four engines;

To assess the AIBF ultra-STOL performance  potential,the experimental data
developed by the NASA/USAF/Lockheed large-scale tests for the AIBF concept
were used for analyzing the deck performance of a typical sea-based aircraft
configuration.Figure 10 depicts this conceptual AIBF ultra-STOL configuration
which had an aspect-ratio  7.73 wing of 68-ft span and a wing area of
598 sq.ft.The power plants were four TF34-GE-2 turbofans. It was assumed
that the TF34/AIBF installation was similar to the AIBF  application scheme
shown in Figure 1b and that the flap setting for both takeoff and landing
configurations was 30 degrees.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a078909.pdf

Also from anther report;

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a089492.pdf

Offline litzj

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 166
  • BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
    • http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #66 on: December 06, 2018, 02:20:18 am »
Nice finding !

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22023
Re: Lockheed S-3 Viking Variants and Projects
« Reply #67 on: December 06, 2018, 04:40:11 am »