Register here

Author Topic: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)  (Read 25203 times)

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« on: September 10, 2006, 10:23:55 am »
Hallo,
it is good field to start serearch about new projects.
in 1954 NATO issue a competition for lightweight strike fighter,all the
members submitted a proposals,such as:
Italy Fiat G-91
France Breguet BR-1001 Taon
Germany Messerschmitt P.1225

                   can you complete ?.

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7924
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #1 on: September 10, 2006, 11:33:15 am »
Regarding this document shown in J.C.Fayer "Vols d'essay", the Folland Gnat, the Avro 727
and the Dassault Mystere XXVI (led to the Etendard VI) were considered.
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #2 on: September 10, 2006, 12:50:36 pm »
Thanks Jemiba,

but there were anther projects from other countries as I know,such as
Belgium.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #3 on: September 12, 2006, 08:59:44 am »
Hi,
during 1960s the NATO wanted a new long range maritime patrol aircraft,
manufacturers from Belgium,France,Canada,Germany,Italy,the Netherlands,
UK and USA submitted proposals.
for example Avro-745 was too big to the task,Nord N----? was too small
to the task,and the competition was won by Breguet Br.1150 Atlantique.


         can anyone know the other proposals ?.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #4 on: September 13, 2006, 09:59:46 am »
Hi,

no one know them !!!

Offline Jemiba

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 7924
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #5 on: September 13, 2006, 11:55:33 am »
A competitor ro the Dassault Breguet Atlantic, very similar to it, is shown by Cuny, in
the 2nd volume, but without designation .
It takes a long time, before all mistakes are made ...

Offline boxkite

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 791
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #6 on: September 13, 2006, 03:43:27 pm »
In the brand-new book „Zeppelins Flieger“ (= Zeppelin’s aircraft) I read today that the Dornier Do P 340 was another competitor for the long range maritime patrol aircraft, but unfortunately I found only a Xerox copy with a model picture in Hans-Jürgen Becker’s “Wasserflugzeuge” (“Die deutsche Luftfahrt” volume 21), so the scan is of poor quality.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2006, 08:08:52 am »
Hi,

in NATO requirement NBMR-4 for military transport aircraft which led to
develope Fiat G-222 and  Dornier Do-31E,what are the other contenders ?.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #8 on: September 23, 2006, 10:01:05 am »
Hallo my dears,

if any member know the contenders in that competition please tell us.

Offline elmayerle

  • Aerospace Engineer
  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1227
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #9 on: September 24, 2006, 02:01:43 am »
NBMR-4 also led to the BAC-222 and the HS.681.

McColm

  • Guest
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #10 on: July 16, 2009, 02:40:43 am »
Hi guys,
Did they ever build a four engined Br1150? I know there was talk of having jet podded engines fitted to the Atlantic MKIII for the RAF proposal to replace the Nimrod and I have used the SEARCH button to find other links, but to no avail.

Offline Nordman

  • CLEARANCE: Restricted
  • Posts: 3
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #11 on: July 16, 2009, 06:19:32 am »
Do any of you guys have a illustration of the Germany Messerschmitt P.1225??

Would very much like to see it since I can not find anything about it on the net...

Offline Skybolt

  • Top Contributor
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 2288
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #12 on: July 16, 2009, 06:41:37 am »
There was sometthing on Interavia. Unfortunately I'll not be able to look at my collections till thye end of the month.. If some other member has accessto Interavia 1960-1964...

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #13 on: May 08, 2010, 05:32:58 am »
By the  Way,

the English Electric P.36 was a V/STOL transport and freighter
aircraft for the NATO NMBR.4.

And that makes the contenders for NMBR.4 as following;

Shorts PD.55,Agusta A.118 & A.119,BAC-224,SIAI S.201,Aerfer-2102,
AW.681,EE P.36,Fiat G-222 V/STOL,Avro-783,Bristol-208,DH-129
Dornier Do.31E and Breguet Br.941.

Offline Maveric

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1731
  • Fight for yor Right!
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #14 on: May 08, 2010, 10:43:06 am »
...mmmhhh BAC-224,SIAI S.201,Aerfer-2102 are new for me. If you can please post 3views and technical data...

THANKS :D
I see you on the dark side of the moon.

Offline Apophenia

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #15 on: May 08, 2010, 10:54:42 am »
... And that makes the contenders for NMBR.4 as following;

Shorts PD.55,Agusta A.118 & A.119,BAC-224,SIAI S.201,Aerfer-2102,
AW.681,EE P.36,Fiat G-222 V/STOL,Avro-783,Bristol-208,DH-129
Dornier Do.31E and Breguet Br.941.

The tilt-wing Canadair CL-62 should be added to that list.

Offline Colonial-Marine

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 579
  • Fighting the UAV mafia.
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #16 on: January 03, 2011, 02:49:29 pm »
Would anybody happen to comprehensive list of NBMRs and the designs proposed in response to these? While I've seen many references of NBMR-1 and 3 and their influence on certain aircraft, I have been unable to dig up much on the actual requirements themselves. Were these "unofficial" competitions or was there an expectation to achieve some sort of NATO standardization in aircraft?
« Last Edit: January 03, 2011, 02:51:05 pm by Colonial-Marine »
"Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy."

Offline PaulMM (Overscan)

  • Secret Projects Forum Founder
  • Administrator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • *****
  • Posts: 10879
  • Paul Martell-Mead
    • Secret Projects
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #17 on: January 03, 2011, 05:48:30 pm »
This book - Friendly rivals: bargaining and burden-shifting in NATO By Wallace J. Thies

seems to have an excellent summary of the process - view on

Google Books
"They can't see our arses for dust."
 
- Sir Sydney Camm

Offline Nico

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 261
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #18 on: January 06, 2011, 04:50:10 am »
Regarding this document shown in J.C.Fayer "Vols d'essay", the Folland Gnat, the Avro 727
and the Dassault Mystere XXVI (led to the Etendard VI) were considered.
I can add the ill-known SIPA S.800
My complete lits, the, is:
Avro Type 727
Breguet Br.1001 Taon
Dassault Etendard XXVI
FIAT G.91
Folland Fo.141 Gnat
SIPA S.800
In the same timeframe, but not directly answering the NBMR-1 there were the:
Aerfer Sagittario II
Bpulton Paul P.111A
Nord-SFECMAS N.1402 Gerfaut
Nord-SFECMAS N.1502 Griffon
Sud-Est SE.212 Durandal
Sud-Est SE.5000 Baroudeur
Sud-Est SO.9000 Trident and probably some others...

Nico S

Offline Nico

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 261
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #19 on: January 06, 2011, 04:57:19 am »
Sorry, I forget the Messerschmitt entry ( I don't have any information about it).
Could be of interest remember that the others NATO Basic Military Requirements are:
NBMR-2: Maritime Patrol Aircraft, won by Breguet Br.1150 Atlantic
NBMR-3: V/STOL combat aircraft, split in two requirements:
AC.169a for a Mach 2 fighter
AC.169b for a subsonic fighter-bomber (both V/STOL)
NBMR-4: Tactical Transport (V/STOL)
NBMR-22: I don't have exact datas but I think was an evolution of NBMR-4
Nico S


Offline Pioneer

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1572
  • Seek out and close with the enemy
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #20 on: February 26, 2011, 03:42:44 pm »
Hi,
during 1960s the NATO wanted a new long range maritime patrol aircraft,
manufacturers from Belgium,France,Canada,Germany,Italy,the Netherlands,
UK and USA submitted proposals.
for example Avro-745 was too big to the task,Nord N----? was too small
to the task,and the competition was won by Breguet Br.1150 Atlantique.


         can anyone know the other proposals ?.

So gents, out of curiosity, did we ever find what this NBMR designation was i.e NBMR-?

Regards
Pioneer
And remember…remember the glory is not the exhortation of war, but the exhortation of man.
Mans nobility, made transcendent in the fiery crucible of war.
Faithfulness and fortitude.
Gentleness and compassion.
I am honored to be your brother.”

— Lt Col Ralph Honner DSO M

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #21 on: February 26, 2011, 05:12:04 pm »
So gents, out of curiosity, did we ever find what this NBMR designation was i.e NBMR-?

Regards
Pioneer

It stood for NATO Basic Military Requirement.

Three examples:

NBMR.3 was for a Supersonic VSTOL strike fighter (1961)
Designs submitted to NBMR.3 were as follows:
  • Hawker P.1150/3
  • Hawker P.1154
  • Mirage IIIV
  • Fokker-Republic D.24 Alliance
  • BAC Weybridge 585 (design)
  • BAC Warton (English Electric) P.39 (design)

NBMR.4 was for a Tactical V/STOL fighter
Designs submitted were as follows:
  • B.A.C. 224 (design)
  • D.H. 129 (design)
  • English Electric P.36 (design)
  • English Electric P.41 (design)
  • English Electric P.44 (design)
  • L.T.V. (design)
  • Breguet (design)
  • De Havilland of Canada (design)

NBMR.22 was for a V/STOL transport
Designs submitted were as follows:
  • B.A.C. P.43 (design)
  • Fiat (design)
  • Dornier (design)
« Last Edit: February 26, 2011, 05:24:24 pm by Stargazer2006 »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #22 on: February 27, 2011, 04:46:06 am »
Hi,

the NBMR.3 contenders were;

   Hawker P.1150/3
   Hawker P.1154
   BAC/Vickers 583
   BAC/Vickers 584
   BAC/Vickers 585
   Armstrong-Whitworth AW.406
   Shorts PD.45
   Shorts PD.49
   Shorts PD.56
   BAC/English-Electric P.39
   Mirage IIIV
   Fokker-Republic D.24 Alliance
   Fiat G95/4
   Breguet Br.122
   Nord N.4400
   EWR VJ.101
   Focke-Wulf FW.1262
   Lockheed CL-704
   
   

Offline Apophenia

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #23 on: March 08, 2011, 01:44:44 pm »
NBMR.4 was for a Tactical V/STOL fighter
Designs submitted were as follows:
  • B.A.C. 224 (design)
  • D.H. 129 (design)
  • English Electric P.36 (design)
  • English Electric P.41 (design)
  • English Electric P.44 (design)
  • L.T.V. (design)
  • Breguet (design)
  • De Havilland of Canada (design)


NBMR.4 was, of course, for a V/STOL tactical transport aircraft.

Stéphane: do you have a ref for a DHC entry? I am aware that Canadair put a lot of work into their CL-62 concept for NBMR.4. What was DHC working on?

Offline Skyblazer

  • Global Moderator
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ****
  • Posts: 13244
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #24 on: March 08, 2011, 03:21:44 pm »
NBMR.4 was, of course, for a V/STOL tactical transport aircraft.

 :o :o :o I KNOW!!! I realize I typed "fighter" instead of "freighter"... How could I be so absent-minded?? ???

Stéphane: do you have a ref for a DHC entry? I am aware that Canadair put a lot of work into their CL-62 concept for NBMR.4. What was DHC working on?

Actually I do. This is from an old listing published in a British aviation magazine (I believe it was Air Pictorial). I'm attaching a copy for reference.

Offline Apophenia

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #25 on: March 08, 2011, 10:28:52 pm »
Thanks Stéphane! Very intriguing, now we just need to figure out what DHC was proposing  ;)

Offline Pioneer

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1572
  • Seek out and close with the enemy
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #26 on: March 10, 2011, 11:38:41 pm »
So gents, out of curiosity, did we ever find what this NBMR designation was i.e NBMR-?

Regards
Pioneer


Quote
It stood for NATO Basic Military Requirement.

No sorry Stéphane, what I meant was what was the NBMR designation for what would become the Atlantic ASW/MP aircraft.........NBMR??

Regards
Pioneer

And remember…remember the glory is not the exhortation of war, but the exhortation of man.
Mans nobility, made transcendent in the fiery crucible of war.
Faithfulness and fortitude.
Gentleness and compassion.
I am honored to be your brother.”

— Lt Col Ralph Honner DSO M

Offline Nico

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 261
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #27 on: March 13, 2011, 12:53:06 am »
So gents, out of curiosity, did we ever find what this NBMR designation was i.e NBMR-?

Regards
Pioneer


Quote
It stood for NATO Basic Military Requirement.

As you can see in my post on January 6, the Basic Military Requirement for Atlantic (see Pioneer's request) was NBMR-2.
In fact, other than the quoted NBMR-1 for the light fighter, NBMR-2 for the maritime patroller, NBMR-3/169a for the V/STOL supersonic fighter, NBMR-3/169b for a subsonic V/STOL fighter-bomber, NBMR-4 for a V/STOL tactical transport and NBMR-22 for a tactical transport, I can suppose that there were others (perhaps between -5 and -21) but I lack any info about.
Moreover there were also other important requirements involving the Eiropean NATO members  but I don't know the official designations.
The first I can remember was the 1949 evaluation following the requirement for an all-weather interceptor fighter. The winner was the deHavilland DH.112 Venom NF Mk.51, with a target of building 1,000-1,100 aircraft with licence to various European industries. Washington suspended the program in July 1952. On January 22, 1953, for the same requirement USAF proposed a simplified version of the F-86D (originally intended as a two-seater) and the result was the F-86K Sabre Jet. Then F-86K, built under licence by FIAT for NATO countries, could be considered the winner of the first NATO contest (but I don't know the official designation of the requirement). One of possible contestant was the Gloster Javelin.
Not really a NATO contest was the 1958 German program for a military transport aircraft replacing the Nord N-2501 Noratlas. The result was an international requirement with several candidates, won by Arbeitsgemeinschaft Transporter Allianz C-160 Transall, but most NATO countries preferred the Lockheed C-130 Hercules and only France, Germany and Turkey bought the C-160 (also South Africa, onviously not a NATO member). Perhaps one of the losers was Armstrong-Siddeley AW-681.
Another important NATO requirement was the May 1956 one for the F-86K replacement, won, as we know, by Lockheed F-104G Starfighter that was built  by a "production ring" including Messerschmitt, Dornier, Heinkel, Siebel, Fokker, Aviolanda, HFB, SABCA, Avions Fairey, FIAT Aviazione and Aermacchi for airframes and final assembly.

Nico




No sorry Stéphane, what I meant was what was the NBMR designation for what would become the Atlantic ASW/MP aircraft.........NBMR??

Regards
Pioneer



Offline boxkite

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 791
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #28 on: March 13, 2011, 05:07:36 am »
Actually I do. This is from an old listing published in a British aviation magazine (I believe it was Air Pictorial). I'm attaching a copy for reference.

Stéphane, actually it was published in Aeromilitaria (The AIR BRITAIN Military Aviation Historical Quarterly) No. 1/1997.

Offline JFC Fuller

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 3103
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #29 on: March 13, 2011, 07:00:32 am »
1953 mass NATO (US funded) aircraft purchase: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/SID-285B69DB-59222616/natolive/opinions_17376.htm

Link also mentions the F-86D to be built in Italy which as Nico states took the place of the DeHavilland Venom. Scanning the google books search results for "Supermarine Swift NATO 1952" it seems like the Swift was originally going to take the role of the Hunter as a pan-European (except for France) and low countries produced aircraft until about 1953 when the swap was made.
« Last Edit: March 13, 2011, 07:19:45 am by sealordlawrence »

Offline PMN1

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 667
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #30 on: May 10, 2013, 08:59:18 am »
Global Security seems to have a list
 
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/nbmr.htm
 
 
NBMR-1lightweight strike fighter(1953) FIAT G.91
NBMR-2NATO Maritime Patrol Aircraft
NBMR-3V/STOL strike reconnaissance aircraft
NBMR-4V/STOL medium range transport aircraft
NBMR-5long-range shipborne ASW weapon system
NBMR-6counter-fire locators
NBMR-7air/air missile (collision course)
NBMR-8?????
NBMR-9land mine warfare
NBMR-10armor-plated transport vehicle
NBMR-11medium-arranges ship/air missile for small ships (short term)
NBMR-12?????
NBMR-13close-arranges ship/air missile for small ships (short term)
NBMR-14?????
NBMR-15?????
NBMR-16?????
NBMR-17data-handling for equipment small ships (naval units)
NBMR-18close-range ship/air missile for small ships (long run) (1973)
NBMR-19?????
NBMR-20?????
NBMR-21long-range shipborne ASW weapon system (1966)
NBMR-22V/STOL short range transport aircraft
NBMR-23establishing needs in the field of night vision
NBMR-24low altitude surfaces/air weapon system
NBMR-25?????
NBMR-26"Calculators for terrestrial forces (1965)"
NBMR-27"information matériel on the battle field"
NBMR-28recoverable exercise groundmines
NBMR-29medium-arranges ship/air missile for small ships (long term)
NBMR-30"system of identification of submerged submarines (1967)"
NBMR-31long-range shipborne ASW weapon system (1970-1975)
NBMR-32main battle tank
NBMR-33combat infantry armored vehicle
NBMR-34for an armored vehicle of transport
NBMR-35?????
NBMR-36"systems of identification of the friendly planes" (long term)
NBMR-37material for NBC defense
NBMR-38system of machines for fast patrol boats
NBMR-39"short range artillery support matériel 1970-1975"
NBMR-40 system of engines for fast patrol boats
 
For nearly half a century following the Second World War, the military establishments of West Europe and the United States spent most of their resources preparing for a massive war with the Soviet Union, in the hopes that preparation would prevent such a cataclysm from actually occurring. As the allied forces prepared for war in the Central European theater, it became increasingly obvious that the logistics of conducting such warfare would be vastly simpli?ed if forces ?ghting side by side could use the same type of fuel, ammunition, and even parts. As weapons systems grew more costly and complex, it also became apparent that greater economies of scale could be obtained from longer production runs, which argued for common weapons systems among allies.
 
For the countries of the Warsaw Pact this standardization was largely fulfilled through the common use of Russian weapons.
 
For logistical and deployment reasons a similar standardization was necessary within NATO. A first step along this path was the effort of various NATO groups to agree on the development of common military equipment via the NATO Basic Military Requirement (NBMR) procedure in the late 1950s. In 1953, NATO issued a requirement designated "NATO Basic Military Requirement 1 (NBMR-1)" for a "light weight tactical strike fighter" (LWTSF).
 
The North Atlantic Council established an ad-hoc working group to structurally reorganize cooperation in research, development, and production of militaryequipment. The joint working group submitted a report that was adopted by the Council on 4 November 1959. This document - C-M(59)82 - would bethe basis for cooperative efforts over the next seven years. The procedure consisted of seven steps in the development of new military equipment, starting with research and the formulation of basic military requirements, to testing and evaluation, to a production program. The procedure became known as the NATO basic military requirement (NBMR) approach. A basic military requirement was "an indication in general terms of the kind and type of equipment required, and also of the quantities needed and the date when it was desirable that the equipment should be in service."
 
By 1962 there was only one success, NATO's Breguet Atlantique maritime patrol aircraft, a project in which five nations participated. Several other projects awaited decisions. By 1963, it had become clear that realizing cooperative efforts in research, development, and production was very difficult. Expectations lowered, and cooperative efforts continued at a slower pace.
 
The requirements for artillery, for instance, were laid down in fundamental concepts in the "NATO Basic Military Requirement (NBMR 39)" in mid-1963. This document proposed that future artillery generations have a tube and a rocket weapon (with a range of around 30km) which could engage hard targets with direct fire. In working up the detailed individual requirements (operational characteristics) for NBMR 39, the NATO group established the 155-mm tube artillery as the standard caliber. In contrast to ballistics and ammunition, however, NATO partners could not agree on a common artillery piece, because of different tactical requirements. Both versions of the 155-mm caliber (the wheeled and the self-propelled) were needed - for a field piece and for an armored howitzer.
 
After less successful NBMRs on aircraft, in 1967 NATO established the Conference of National Armament Directors (CNAD), which is the primary policy-making body in NATO for procurement. It was intended to encourage greater standardization andinteroperability of weapons systems, and to stimulate joint programs for research, development,and production of weapons systems.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #31 on: August 25, 2013, 05:49:49 am »

And that makes the contenders for NMBR.4 as following;

Shorts PD.55,Agusta A.118 & A.119,BAC-224,SIAI S.201,Aerfer-2102,
AW.681,EE P.36,Fiat G-222 V/STOL,Avro-783,Bristol-208,DH-129
Dornier Do.31E and Breguet Br.941.


Also;


EE P.41 & P.44,Canadair CL-62,Breguet Br.943 to Br.947,LTV ? and DH Canada Caribou II.

Offline MIRAGE 4000

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 151
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #32 on: September 05, 2013, 09:52:10 am »
Sud Aviation proposed a project for NMBR4 (loock like the Do 31) :)

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #33 on: September 05, 2013, 09:57:57 am »
Hi Mirage 4000,


can you tell us about what was that Sud Aviation proposal,info or drawing ?.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #34 on: February 15, 2015, 07:27:20 am »
Hi,


we can add Ryan and two Belgium companies to NBMR.3 contenders;


 - Ryan M-209D (maybe)
 - Avions Fairey ?
 - SABCA S.?
 - Hawker P.1150/3 & P.1154
 - BAC/Vickers Type 583,584 & 585
 - Armstrong Wgitworth AW.406
 - Shorts PD.45,PD.49 & PD.56
 - BAC/English Electric P.39
 - Dassault Mirage IIIV
 - Fokker-Republic D.24
 - Fiat G95/4
 - Breguet Br.122
 - Nord N.4400
 - EWR VJ.101
 - Focke Wulf FW.1262
 - Lockheed CL-704
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 05:06:39 am by hesham »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #35 on: February 16, 2015, 05:29:37 am »
Hi,


for NBMR.4,the Focke Wulf submitted a proposal for V/STOL transport aircraft with twelve
RB.162s in two wingtip pods and Douglas also submitted a proposal but maybe in conjunction
with Piaggio.


Now we can say the the tenders were;


Shorts PD.55,Agusta A.118 & A.119,BAC-224,SIAI S.201,Aerfer-2102,AW.681,Fiat D-222 (V/STOL),
EE P.36,P.41 & P.44,Bristol-208,Avro-783,DH-129,Dornier Do.31E,Breguet Br.941,Br.943 to Br.947,
Canadair CL-62,LTV V-?,Focke Wulf ?,Douglas D-? or Model-1xxx,DHC-4 Caribou II and Ryan,
for Ryan I suggest the designation was Model-2108,or as my dear Skyblazer suggest,it was
Model-210B.

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8065
  • The path not taken.
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #36 on: February 16, 2015, 07:29:45 am »
According to this 1975 paper, there were in total 49 NBMRs formally issued before the system was abandoned in 1965.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #37 on: February 16, 2015, 07:54:54 am »
According to this 1975 paper, there were in total 49 NBMRs formally issued before the system was abandoned in 1965.


Great find my dear Grey.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #38 on: February 16, 2017, 05:04:29 am »
we can add Ryan and two Belgium companies to NBMR.3 contenders;

 - Ryan M-209D (maybe)
 - Avions Fairey ?
 - SABCA S.?
 - Hawker P.1150/3 & P.1154
 - BAC/Vickers Type 583,584 & 585
 - Armstrong Wgitworth AW.406
 - Shorts PD.45,PD.49 & PD.56
 - BAC/English Electric P.39
 - Dassault Mirage IIIV
 - Fokker-Republic D.24
 - Fiat G95/4
 - Breguet Br.122
 - Nord N.4400
 - EWR VJ.101
 - Focke Wulf FW.1262
 - Lockheed CL-704

We can add; Canadair CL-72
« Last Edit: February 16, 2017, 05:06:54 am by hesham »

Offline Apophenia

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #39 on: February 16, 2017, 12:49:51 pm »
Re: NBMR-4. Anyone know what the HSA.129 was? I'm assuming a  Hawker Siddeley Aviation project but am having trouble visualizing it.

Quote
However, sideways mounted engines with sideways facing intakes have also been proposed as in the HSA.129 submission for the NATO NBMR 4 military transport aircraft.

The Aerodynamics of V/STOL Aircraft, May 1968, 'Paper E: Turbo-Jet/Turbo-Fan Aircraft' by John Williams [Aerodynamics Department, RAE, Farnborough], AGARDograph 126, AD 688921, pg 293

BTW, 'Caribou II' wasn't a DHC-4 ... it was the original, working name for the DHC-5 Buffalo  ;)

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22549
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #40 on: February 16, 2017, 12:58:04 pm »
My dear Apophenia,

it was Hawker Siddeley was HS.129 (De Havilland division,originally DH-129).

Offline Apophenia

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2048
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #41 on: February 16, 2017, 02:47:49 pm »
Ah, thanks Hesham. So those "sideways mounted engines with sideways facing intakes" refers to the podded (and vector-nozzled) lift-jets. Now I get it.

To increase the nozzle vectoring range and also reduce the transition pitching moment and hot gas ingestion in ground effect, the jet lift units were laid horizontally ...

Addendum to AGARD Report No.710 Special Course on V/STOL Aerodynamics: An Assessement of European Jet Lift Aircraft, RS Williams, BAe Kingston, 5.3 Subsonic Transports, pg. 3 http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a155604.pdf

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 510
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #42 on: June 03, 2017, 07:13:24 am »
NBMR.4: Chris Gibson's On ATLAS Shoulders.

The good reason for contradictions in tales of all NBMRs is that we approach them assuming today's processes of priced open tenders, but t'was not thus, then. CJG enhances our access to interplay between National and NATO Requirements.

You will find other persons writing that HS681, Do.31 and others were "designed to NBMR.4".

Nothing was "designed" to NBMR.4; little was "designed" to NBMR-anything. The enormous lists of NBMR.3 and 4 "submissions" here in Designation Systems are misleading. NATO had no money, no Procurement Executive, no decision-making Authority. Its Nations did/do. Its Experts in Working Groups "promulgated" NBMRs. None was ever funded. NATO guessed that NBMR.3 (VTOL strike) would lead to 800 sales...to Nations. Until the AWACS/Geilenkirchen Unit, NATO itself had nothing: it was a Battle Manager, not a procurer.

This is what happened on the Light Tactical Transport: it lost its verticality and was renamed C-130.

UK Theatre Transport OR.351 issued 3/61; 5/61 bids included HS681, "selected" 12/61, not then funded: STOL vectored Pegasus+ VTOL Option RB.162 pods.
NBMR.4 issued early-1961; responses in 22/11/61: Light VTOL Transport. People sent in slim marketing brochures, not Bids - no prices, because NATO was interested, not in R&D but in the art of the techno-possible. So: tiltwings, folding rotors, turboprop...surprised no Wing-in-Ground-Effect. Geek heaven. Abandoned 11/62.
Firms competed against themselves - Dornier on BAC.208 as well as an outline of their then-thinking on schemes begun in 1959. Shorts were in 3 brochures: one was an Unlight variant of Belfast. HSAL with DHCanada (to be Buffalo), plus sending in a copy of a HS681 brochure, although evidently non-compliant with Light, and a DH/Bell/Nord Avn./Avs.Fairey scheme, HS129, which Brits report as "winner". BAC also failed to understand Light and put in a blown flap licenced C-130, competing with a collaborative new scheme.

Redefined Lighter, Shorter as NBMR.22, brochures submitted, process abandoned 6/3/63. Italy solo 5/63 funded its perception of the "winner" as FIAT G.222 (Darts+RB.162 pods). That is not the machine eventually morphing into C-27J.

FRG funded Dornier Do.31 2/62. UK/FRG made a Memorandum of Understanding 13/4/64, pooling all extant V/STOL (rigs, schemes). Its Report, 11/65 melded Do.31 and HS129 as DoHS-1 (2xSpey, 12 or 14 RB.162), then DoHS-2 (Spey+ 12 RB.189/XJ99). Lapsed. Dornier/FRG persevered with schemes as Do.131, Do.231.

VFW eventually won FRG's Light VTOL Transport, with CH-53G; RAF won the Chinooks it had sought since 1961.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2017, 09:52:01 am by alertken »

Offline alertken

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 510
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #43 on: June 06, 2017, 05:30:15 am »
NBMR.3: Flight 7/6/62 has contenders by then reduced to Mirage IIIV, Fokker/Republic D.24, BAC 584, P.1154. Others have it that by then the Reqt. had been split, with NBMR.3a (supersonic) "won" by Mirage IIIV and P.1154; NBMR.3b by VAK-191B (melded from FW1262 and FIAT G.95/6).

While HSAL's 10/1/62 P.1154 Bid was a weighty 3 volumes...there was nothing there, nor in any other "Bids", on which a Public Procurer could base a price or time. Decisions in those days were made on WAGs (wild-ass guess) until JFK's Sec.Def McNamara (RSM) introduced such novel notions as fixed prices. UK's Defence Chief Scientific Advisor would write of frustration, trying to interest RSM in P.1127, though he “never received a real plan (how it) was being managed (e.g: engine) overhaul (life. He) was not going to (buy without) the kind of detailed plan he was demanding” S.Zuckerman,Monkeys,P268.

Then and as the Donald has declared, now, US was/is NATO's paymaster. In 1962 RSM had less interest in NBMR.3 “bids” than in getting more bang for his buck at home. So he chose: 3/62: USN/USAF common F-4s, 12/62: F-111s; chop for B-70, B-58B, Skybolt, (12/63) X-20 Dyna-Soar. NATO inc. USAFE were well kitted through 1970 on F-4C/F-104G. So he took no* interest in VTOL until 2/65, when he funded a share of EWR/Republic AVS, seen as their candidate successor.

With no magic NATO/US money tree, France persevered with Mirage IIIV, solo, to 11/66; UK, P.1154A to 2/65; FRG, VJ101D to 4/64, then joint AVS to 1/68 (RSM's last deletion); FRG/Italy, VAK-191B to 2/68. So, why were they all chopped?

NATO Ministers made 2 acts of faith and hope:
- that runways would be dibbed by HE, not deleted by AW. So: admit Long-TOL Tornado, F-111E/F; and:
- that CTOL types could become reliable, operable by conscripts/Reservists, such that affordable quantities could be bought - impossible with, say AVS: VG+VTOL.

(7/6/17: * "no" interest is unfair: 21/5/62 he agreed to part-fund R&D, and 16/1/63 to buy a share of 1965's Kestrel TE Sqdn; he allowed MWDP to part-fund BS.100 R&D, 6/61-12/63).
« Last Edit: June 07, 2017, 01:32:26 am by alertken »

Offline Grey Havoc

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 8065
  • The path not taken.
Re: NATO Basic Military Requirements (NBMR)
« Reply #44 on: January 16, 2019, 03:42:01 am »
NBMR 25 was according to Friedman the NATO requirement for a short range ASW escort, at least 24 knot top speed with an operational radius of 3,000 nautical miles at 18 knots.
The sole imperative of a government, once instituted, is to survive.