North American XF-108 (F-108) Rapier

[Sferrin]

Does anyone know why the fuselage was sort of bent/angled up as you go towards the front? Seems that the plane would have a constant very nose high attitude even at high speed and high altitude. A bent down nose like in the Su-27 (maybe not as drastic) would seem to make more sense to me, as it would smooth out airflow and allow the radar to be pitched down more.

You will notice many of the HSCT designs had this same feature. It minimizes wave drag. The F-108 was designed to cruise at supersonic speeds, the Su-27 wasn't, which is why it wouldn't be a good idea to angle the nose down like on the Su-27.

Often wondered the same thing about the Blackbird. If you raise the nose so the inlets are normal to the direction of flight (the orientation that would seem to make the most sense for a circular inlet) the nose would be high (more lift too).

 

[Sundog]

Does anyone know why the fuselage was sort of bent/angled up as you go towards the front? Seems that the plane would have a constant very nose high attitude even at high speed and high altitude. A bent down nose like in the Su-27 (maybe not as drastic) would seem to make more sense to me, as it would smooth out airflow and allow the radar to be pitched down more.

You will notice many of the HSCT designs had this same feature. It minimizes wave drag. The F-108 was designed to cruise at supersonic speeds, the Su-27 wasn't, which is why it wouldn't be a good idea to angle the nose down like on the Su-27.

Often wondered the same thing about the Blackbird. If you raise the nose so the inlets are normal to the direction of flight (the orientation that would seem to make the most sense for a circular inlet) the nose would be high (more lift too).

IIRC, the Blackbird originally had the fuselage and nacelles aligned and it didn't work so well, so they angled the fuselage up slightly which allowed the chines to develop more lift to control the AC shift, similar to what canards would do.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19580721/20/2

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Each drawings are almost same scale.
Source
http://www.alternatewars.com/SAC/SAC.htmhttps://www.the-blueprints.com/blue...anes/north-american/north-american-xf-108.png
Ventral fin shape of No.7 drawing and No.8 drawins is different. Which is correct?
Air intake shape is complicated.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/231935449533874817/

View: https://jp.pinterest.com/pin/231935449533874817/

And AIR POWER MAGAZINE.
http://airwingmedia.com/store/2004cd/#lightbox/9/Cockpit mockup picture
http://prologue.blog.naver.com/Post...wDate=&isShowPopularPosts=false&from=postView

 

[blackkite]

More large ventral fin and add wing dihedral design in 1959.(Justo-san, hesham-san and scott-san's surprising contribution!! )
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=408.0;attach=56139;imagehttp://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=408.0;attach=319657;imagehttp://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=408.0;attach=501021;image
To keep high speed aircraft directional stability is very hard and I imagine that Sukhoi T-4 and TSR2 failed to keep directinal stability at high mach number.

Crew escape system.
http://www.boeingimages.com/archive...Rapier Aircrew Escape System-2F3XC5P66II.html
I really want to see NAA's drawing for "F-108 design 1960 evolution".
Some picture here.
http://thechive.com/2015/02/01/mock-up-of-the-xf-108-rapier-29-hq-photos/

 

[blackkite]

Animation video.
http://aerocinemanew.com.s183894.gridserver.com/product/xf-108-the-rapier2.html

 

[blackkite]

Hi!

 

[Johnbr]

North American XF-108 Rapier concept art

 

[hesham]

North American XF-108 Rapier concept art

Amazing find John.

 

[Johnbr]

Two more.

 

[hesham]

From Air Pictorial 5/1956,

here is an Info about NA long-range high altitude fighter Project,maybe they meant this
XF-108,but with four GE J-79 turbojets ?.

 

[hesham]

From, Аэрокосмическое обозрение 2005-6

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Really hesham? What's the point of posting poor scans of pictures already posted in the topic? What does it contribute?

 

[hesham]

Sorry my dear Paul,

I never looked through it well.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! J93.
https://www.tumblr.com/search/xf 108 rapier

 

[hesham]

From; Rockwell The Heritage of North American

 

[blackkite]

Hi! WS-202A proposal model.
https://www.chadslattery.com/X-Planes/121

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
https://www.aflcmc.af.mil/News/Arti...plesonic-interceptors-the-f-103-f-108-yf-12a/

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
Enlarged images of XF-108 designed in May 1958.

 

[blackkite]

Hi Nose section mock up. Unknown date.
https://secure.boeingimages.com/CS.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2JRSNTDH6X_J&RW=1518&RH=694

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
http://ipmsniagarafrontier.com/Dizpatch/Sep2019/NL0919.html

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
https://www.airforcemag.com/PDF/Mag... Documents/2014/September 2014/0914rapier.pdf

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Hi!
http://ipmsniagarafrontier.com/Dizpatch/Sep2019/NL0919.html

This is just a scale model built by someone. Nice, but it doesn't belong in this topic. That's what the Modelling Forum is for. You also already posted this exact same display of century series models earlier (which I removed).

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Hi!
https://www.airforcemag.com/PDF/Mag... Documents/2014/September 2014/0914rapier.pdf

The first attachment is the article you've referenced. It's OK.

The second attachment is a PDF of an article in German compiled from WIkipedia and illustrated with various pics off the internet, none new or interesting. I don't get the point of posting it. One, it's not in the primary language of the forum. Two, it says its just a mashup of information off the internet.

Not every picture or piece of text on a topic is interesting or postworthy.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
https://modernwartech.blog.hu/2015/...a_kepes_elfogovadaszunk_3_lepesben_2_resz_146

I think this model is the official model of NAA. The overall impression of this model is similar to the May 1958 design, but only the vertical stabilizer is closer to the October 1958 design. Therefore, I think this model reflects the design made between May and October.

This blog also include good artworks for F-108. Please enjoy.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1124767184733949952

View: https://twitter.com/kancollepropa/status/1124767184733949952

http://www.webmodelers.com/wms200906/200906SHSPlane.html

 

[TomcatViP]

Does anyone know why the fuselage was sort of bent/angled up as you go towards the front? Seems that the plane would have a constant very nose high attitude even at high speed and high altitude. A bent down nose like in the Su-27 (maybe not as drastic) would seem to make more sense to me, as it would smooth out airflow and allow the radar to be pitched down more.

You will notice many of the HSCT designs had this same feature. It minimizes wave drag. The F-108 was designed to cruise at supersonic speeds, the Su-27 wasn't, which is why it wouldn't be a good idea to angle the nose down like on the Su-27.

Often wondered the same thing about the Blackbird. If you raise the nose so the inlets are normal to the direction of flight (the orientation that would seem to make the most sense for a circular inlet) the nose would be high (more lift too).

IIRC, the Blackbird originally had the fuselage and nacelles aligned and it didn't work so well, so they angled the fuselage up slightly which allowed the chines to develop more lift to control the AC shift, similar to what canards would do.

Lift will force the air upward around the leading edge. The angle of attack of the wing is then always superior to the angle of incidence (the angle b/w the aircraft reference axis and the wing root chord). On the Blackbird, the angle of incidence is more or less zero (the wing is aligned with the main axix of the fuselage).

As the aspect ratio increases, the angle difference at the leading edge get smaller (less induce drag). With a delta wing, that have a low aspect ratio, this difference is aggravated and the angle at which the airstream meet the wing is more pronounced.

Hence, this is why for any given incidence, the nacelles have to be canted downward to "face" the airstream more adequately and that is more noticeable on that aircraft.

 

[Dew]

This link should bring you to a video showing mockup and artwork from Boeing image archive
I can't find a way to link directly to the item page but this search result (at the moment) isolates it.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

https://luftfahrtmuseum-hannover.de/images/wehrmann/North American XF-108.pdf

 

[flateric]

@hesham, Article brings nothing new on a subject, more, image from it that you have posted made by Erik Simonsen, a forum member, and used in article without attribution

 

[Archibald]

You're kidding ? It's an orbital variant of the F-108, Mach 26 rather than Mach 3...

 

[FighterJock]

A Mach 26 space based Interceptor? That would have been something had it been built.

 

[TomS]

This link should bring you to a video showing mockup and artwork from Boeing image archive
I can't find a way to link directly to the item page but this search result (at the moment) isolates it.

View attachment 699380

Link to all 8 Rapier images in the Boeing Images library; the video is among them.

https://secure.boeingimages.com/CS.aspx?VP3=DamView&VBID=2JRSN2A93VQCBS&PN=1&WS=SearchResults

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
https://www.reddit.com/media?url=ht...pg?s=47f5ceaf9832f17685e6cc3d714b6c31337a0cdf

 

[archipeppe]

The first one is an artwork of mine....

 

[blackkite]

Thanks a lot archipeppe-san!!
It's a excellent and a interesting drawing.
If you have a plan view and a front view, show us please.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The first one is an artwork of mine....

That sketch of the XF-108 next to a Blackbird really drives home just how huge the XF-108 was going to be...

 

[hesham]

From Air Force 1959.

 

[Sferrin]

The first one is an artwork of mine....

That's a nice one! A MiG-31 would be a interesting addition for comparison.