Advanced Medium STOL Transport (AMST) and its predecessors

[dan_inbox]

The C-17 was derived from the YC-15, and Boeing's submission for the C-X competition, the Model 1050, was derived from the YC-14.

as seen at https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/cargo-experimental-c-x-program-designs.2706/

 

[Sferrin]

Not sure if this has been answered already, I've read the specs and know they both met Air Force requirements, but is there any evidence they preferred one over the other (YC-14 and YC-15)?

The C-17 evolved from the YC-15, which might be indicative.

Both were McDonnell Douglas products. It would be strange for McDD to develop the C-17 from the YC-14. (Did Boeing have a C-17 competitor?) That said, I could swear I've seen somewhere where the YC-14 was liked more, or showed itself superior, to the YC-15.

The C-17 was derived from the YC-15, and Boeing's submission for the C-X competition, the Model 1050, was derived from the YC-14.

The C-17 requirement was for a longer-legged, higher capacity airplane and I suspect that the YC-15 configuration scaled up better than that of the YC-14. Boeing's C-17 entry was awkward looking and placed a 3rd engine above the tail cargo ramp.

They should have gone with four engines above the wing like this: Maybe there would have been a drag penalty though.

 

[Pioneer]

They should have gone with four engines above the wing like this: Maybe there would have been a drag penalty though.

Agree!

Regards
Pioneer

 

[taildragger]

They should have gone with four engines above the wing like this: Maybe there would have been a drag penalty though.

Agree!

Regards
Pioneer

There must have been some drawback to adding engines outboard of the existing 2 since it's the obvious approach, assuming that an engine of appropriate thrust was available. 3 engines vs 4 brings savings but I wouldn't think that alone would be sufficient to justify placing an engine in the tail above cargo operations. If we discount the MD-11 as a development of the DC-10, it may have been the last clean-sheet big tri-jet design..

 

[Sferrin]

They should have gone with four engines above the wing like this: Maybe there would have been a drag penalty though.

Agree!

Regards
Pioneer

There must have been some drawback to adding engines outboard of the existing 2 since it's the obvious approach, assuming that an engine of appropriate thrust was available. 3 engines vs 4 brings savings but I wouldn't think that alone would be sufficient to justify placing an engine in the tail above cargo operations. If we discount the MD-11 as a development of the DC-10, it may have been the last clean-sheet big tri-jet design..

Could have used four F117s, or even just four of the engines the YC-14 used. There were plenty of engine options. It's a head scratcher.

 

[Deleted member 2278]

Tiny snippet of French interest in the YC-15 and the possibility of SNECMA powerplants:
https://archive.org/details/StateDeptcable1976-344441/page/n5/mode/1up

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1972.

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1973

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1974.

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1975.

 

[Orionblamblam]

D'oh! I just bought the actual original of this Bell AMST concept, a C-130 with four turbojets.

 

[Orionblamblam]

And it has arrived.
https://up-ship.com/blog/?p=49239

 

[a flower]

And it has arrived.
https://up-ship.com/blog/?p=49239

Just to ask, but where did you find these paintings (I also realised you purchase another of an STOL takeoff platform? machine)

Were they from a specific seller on eBay you could recommend? Or were they "scattered" and could only be found after doing some "digging"?

 

[Orionblamblam]

And it has arrived.
https://up-ship.com/blog/?p=49239

Just to ask, but where did you find these paintings

The source for all good things these days: Ebay.

Were they from a specific seller on eBay you could recommend? Or were they "scattered" and could only be found after doing some "digging"?

The AMST and AATS paintings came from one seller, the Hughes hot cycle painting from another, the Lockheed stowed-rotor painting from another. In all cases, they came to my attention almost through sheer dumb luck.

 

[litzj]

is there any design consideration in c17 or amst to prevent fod issue on engine?

 

[Boxman]

is there any design consideration in c17 or amst to prevent fod issue on engine?

At least one measure I am aware of on the C-17A is that its thrust reversers direct flow only upwards and forward, so as to mitigate any additional dust and debris from being kicked up by the reversers and ingested into the engines on rough/unprepared airstrips. Another is the nose gear doors splay open outwards almost (but not quite) horizontally to prevent any dust, gravel, etc., kicked up by the nose gear wheels from being ingested by the engines.

Here's some footage that demonstrates both features nicely.
YouTube: AiirSource Military - "C-17 Globemaster III Reverse Thrust Stunt - Short Field Landing & Backing Up"

 

[Eagle2009]

From my own collection, one of the YC-14 demonstrators at its current residence at the Pima Air & Space Museum.

Picture taken in April 2022.

 

[TMD]

More photos of the YC-14 (sans engines) at Pima Air Museum. One engine (GE CF6-50D turbofan) is displayed beside the aircraft
GE CF6-50D turbofan. And a single photo of the other YC-14 at Davis-Monthan AFB (AKA "The Boneyard") taken during a tour.

 

[bercr]

PLANE CJ MCDONNELL DOUGLAS COMMERCIAL VERSION YC-15 - ART BY GEORGE AKIMOTO

On Flickr by ausdew.

https://flic.kr/p/2q3nqJr

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ausdew/53848068517/

 

[apparition13]

There's a two engined variant?

 

[taildragger]

Early concept model of what became the YC-14 recently acquired on eBay. In addition to the recontoured nose, different glazed areas and slanted inlets, the general proportions of the model seem different than for the aircraft as actually built. The tailplane seems smaller and the aft fuselage longer - I'd have thought that these dimensions would have been fixed very early in development.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Early concept model of what became the YC-15 recently acquired on eBay.

YC-14.....

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Your model appears to be the Boeing 953-280 AMST proposal.

Don't forget the AMST requirements were fairly loose and the proposal limited to 50 pages, like the LWF.

 

[barrett]

Asuka, Japan's STOL experimental aircraftAsuka, Japan's STOL experimental aircraft
https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/飛鳥_(航空機)

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sz-fQnAntJE


Application：STOL research machine
Classification: Research aircraft
Manufacturer: Kawasaki Heavy Industries
Operator: National Aerospace Laboratory of Japan
First flight: October 28, 1985
Number of aircraft produced: 1
Operational status: Retired
Prototype: C-1

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

This topic is about the Advanced Medium STOL Transport (AMST) program, so posts about the C-1 don't belong here.

 

[taildragger]

YC-14.....View attachment 746923
View attachment 746924

14, 14 1/2, whatever it takes

 

[bercr]

From SAFRAN Media Library Patrimoine

McDonnell Douglas YC-15 with one CFM56 jet engine
https://heritage.medialibrary.safran-group.com/Heritage/search.do?q=YC

 

[Mark Nankivil]

From the late Gerald Balzer Collection.... Mark

 

[VictorXL188]

Perusal of the November 1974 issue of Air International produced this little snippet regarding the YC-14. Although previous posts have illustrated the tanker variant, I wonder if anyone has any pictorial evidence for the gunship version mentioned within the text

 

[moin1900]

gunship version

Sounds interesting.
Boeing YC-14 Gunship with four side firing GAU-8 gatling guns.
Part of Advanced Gunship AC-X Program?

 

[fightingirish]

Hello folks,
here are a few pictures showing the model of the "McDonnell Douglas Jet Trader II", a civilian proposal based on the McDonnell Douglas YC-15.
Sources:
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/17443750
https://catalog.archives.gov/id/17443716https://catalog.archives.gov/id/17443745https://catalog.archives.gov/id/17443747

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

I went to an estate sales this morning - a Col. C.A. Scolatti. A friend had sent me a link to the company handling it and there were a number of models that looked interesting and now that I am retired, why not go! I picked up 3 models and literally missed getting another by 5 seconds. The man who got the one I missed let me take a few pics of it. When I saw it in the teasers for the sale, I thought it looked like a Convair design but it turns out to be a Boeing design. Though slightly damaged, I bought the 4 engine design and realized both have the same fuselage and cockpit window design so it is a Boeing design too.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[fightingirish]

Hello folks,
here’s a painting of a civilian proposal based on the Boeing YC-14, recently added to the SDASM Flickr archive.
Link:

https://flic.kr/p/2rSVApa

View: https://flic.kr/p/2rSVApa

 

[hesham]

Hello folks,
here’s a painting of a civilian proposal based on the Boeing YC-14, recently added to the SDASM Flickr archive.
Link:

https://flic.kr/p/2rSVApa

View: https://flic.kr/p/2rSVApa

Nice find my dear Rolf.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Perusal of the November 1974 issue of Air International produced this little snippet regarding the YC-14. Although previous posts have illustrated the tanker variant, I wonder if anyone has any pictorial evidence for the gunship version mentioned within the text

Huh. 4x GAU-8s, when the AC130s were running 2xM61 and 2x Bofors 40mm (or 1x Bofors and 1x 105mm). I could see 2x GAU-8s and 1x 105mm.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Perusal of the November 1974 issue of Air International produced this little snippet regarding the YC-14. Although previous posts have illustrated the tanker variant, I wonder if anyone has any pictorial evidence for the gunship version mentioned within the text

As usual, source is Aviation Week and Space Technology (September 2 1974)

Tactical gunship version of the Boeing YC-l4 advanced medium STOL aircraft is being studied by the manufacturer and the Air Force. The aircraft would be armed with four side-firing General Electric GAU-8 30—mm. guns. Company study indicates that when fully loaded the aircraft would be able to out-climb and out-turn the USAF/ Fairchild A-10.

No pictures, its just a brief mention in "Industry Observer". The AIAA monograph on YC-14 references this AWST article in its bibliography but not the main text.

 

[VictorXL188]

As usual, source is Aviation Week and Space Technology (September 2 1974)


No pictures, its just a brief mention in "Industry Observer". The AIAA monograph on YC-14 references this AWST article in its bibliography but not the main text.

Thanks Paul!

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All -

A friend went to the estate sale about an hour after I was there and found a bundle of photos that were not with the rest of the aviation stuff. He bought this photo which ID's the model I missed out on. The weather here last weekend was so poor that the 2nd day of the sale is now this Saturday so I'll go back and see what is left to peruse.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[H_K]

A friend went to the estate sale about an hour after I was there and found a bundle of photos that were not with the rest of the aviation stuff. He bought this photo which ID's the model I missed out on.

So this is Boeing model 953-230.

Looking at post #129 earlier on this thread, the model you got looks like 953-233, but without the swept wing... so perhaps yours might be numbered 953-231 or 953-232??
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...ort-amst-and-its-predecessors.512/post-234292

 

[Mark Nankivil]

So this is Boeing model 953-230.

Looking at post #129 earlier on this thread, the model you got looks like 953-233, but without the swept wing... so perhaps yours might be numbered 953-231 or 953-232??
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...ort-amst-and-its-predecessors.512/post-234292

The 4 nacelle model I bought has a no sweep along the trailing edge so not -233. Need to get my ASP Airlifters Vol 1 & 2 and see what they say.

Enjoy the Day! MarkN