• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

AMSA Program & B-1 Bomber projects

thefrecklepuny

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
64
Reaction score
2
Was it to fly with its wings as swept back as that? A smooth ride at low level, yes. But also crash prone surely?
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,658
Reaction score
242
I think the model is wrong, maybe somebody destroyed the pivots...
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,631
Reaction score
1,161
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.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
24,320
Reaction score
1,091
My dear Flateric sent it before,but a clearer view;

 

Attachments

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,340
Reaction score
433
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.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,031
Reaction score
205
 

jsport

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
43

The USN could use a F-111 replacement for the deck. Retiring that maintainence heavy craft ;} is just a mistake. Bones could help w/ the Pacific range problem
. Current and near future Carrier based craft carry is conspicuiously low.
A long range, near recoiless. gun suspended from a Bone could surpress IADs from distance.
 

DWG

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
466
Reaction score
138
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.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
1,450
Reaction score
95

Sentinel Chicken

American 71 Heavy, contact departure 126.47
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Messages
586
Reaction score
19
Website
theavgeeks.com
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).
 
Top