Many thanks my dear Paul.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    305.6 KB · Views: 1,486
  • 2.png
    2.png
    297.2 KB · Views: 1,368
  • 3.png
    3.png
    336.8 KB · Views: 1,283
  • 4.png
    4.png
    326.6 KB · Views: 1,207
  • 5.png
    5.png
    311.6 KB · Views: 1,158
That looks like a fighter canopy, not something you'd see on a bomber. ???
 
sferrin said:
That looks like a fighter canopy, not something you'd see on a bomber. ???

Well, B-47 and XB-52 had fighter-looking canopies too... and B-57, IIRC...
 
Well, you may say as well the the F-111B was a fighter (sort of) with a bomber canopy... :)
 
I'm trying to find info on the B-1 space launch vehicle proposal. It was a B-1 carrying a rocket with satellite underneath. I know I've seen it somewhere, possibly on this board, but I can no longer find it. Any help would be appreciated.
 
Nope, sweeping the wings all the way back to 90 degrees turning you to a lifting body was a 'thing' for a while. This model locates the pivots outboard to make it work.
 
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Nope, sweeping the wings all the way back to 90 degrees turning you to a lifting body was a 'thing' for a while. This model locates the pivots outboard to make it work.

I particularly liked the scissor-wing, low-altitude, lifting body bomber.
 
Also found at NTRS -timeframe (1966) suggest that it was LAMP-AMP-AMPSS program related. My previous thoughts of TFX were re-thought:)
Too late and unusual for TFX. Beat me if I'm wrong.
TomS just pointed this one out from my verbal description in the oblique wing thread. There used to be a 1/48th scale (probably) model of this atop a cupboard in the flight controls office at BAE Systems Rochester. It had definitely been there since the GEC/GEC-Marconi Avionics days, and potentially all the way back to Elliott Avionics. It disappeared one weekend during some renovations (around about the millennium?) and hopefully it ended up in the Rochester Archives, not the skip, but I don't know.

My recall, and obviously I haven't seen it in 20 years and even then it was atop an 8' cupboard, is that the wing, fuselage and tail matched the picture flateric posted, but that the nose was a horizontal flattened wedge. But after 20 years I could be wrong.

The existence of the model at Rochester does seem to imply that the project was advanced enough to be talking to potential systems sub-contractors.
 
I'd always wondered how much cross pollination there was between Boeing's AMSA work and the 2707 SST. Scott's line drawing bears a strong resemblance to the Model 733 design from about 1964 or so, but there was an AWST article from '65 or '66 that mentioned specifically that there was little commonality between the Boeing AMSA design and the SST program other than a variable sweep wing. The USAF stated that there was little to gain on AMSA from the SST flight test program as there was a need to have the AMSA design frozen well before the SST would make its maiden flight.

Interestingly the Boeing historical archives has material on a 1964 briefing on the SST given at SAC Headquarters in Omaha and a later 1966 briefing given to the Pentagon's Weapons System Evauation Group (WSEG).
 
From Пономарев А. - Авиация на пороге в космос - 1971.
 

Attachments

  • a.png
    a.png
    40.6 KB · Views: 401
  • b.png
    b.png
    197.2 KB · Views: 332
Of course I read it my dear Flateric,

but there was no exactly identification precisely.
 

Attachments

  • AMSA-1967-speculative concept.png
    AMSA-1967-speculative concept.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 380
OK everyone.... here is one I just acquired. A General Dynamics AMSA proposal. Only needed a little paint touch up to make him all pretty. About 22 inches in length and of wood construction. Wings do their thing too...... enjoy.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7274.jpg
    IMG_7274.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 357
  • IMG_7273.jpg
    IMG_7273.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 345
  • IMG_7275.jpg
    IMG_7275.jpg
    2.4 MB · Views: 397
amsa_1s-jpg.57331


americas-most-studied-aircraft-jpg.138490


North American AMSA design took some inspiration from this I think?
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom