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

Douglas XA2D-1 Skyshark

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
13
Looks like SkyRAIDER developments, leading to the SkySHARK.
 

Antonio

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,454
Reaction score
185
Many thanks hesham, great discover again. I've read about that but never saw the drawings before :)
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
The Douglas XA2D-1 Skyshark was a turboprop-powered attack aircraft built by the Douglas Aircraft Company for the United States Navy. The requirement to operate from Casablanca-class escort carriers dictated the use of a turboprop instead of jet power. The aircraft first flew on May 26, 1950.

Unfortunately, the Skyshark had an "Achilles heel," that being the main bearing of the Allison engine, which was basically two J-40 turbojets linked by this main bearing to provide power to the contra-rotating propellers. Allison seemed unable to overcome the problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A2D_Skyshark
http://modelingmadness.com/reviews/korean/cleavera2d.htm
http://home.att.net/~jbaugher4/a2d.html


Photographs of Douglas XA2D-1 Skyshark.
 

Attachments

  • a2d-5.jpg
    a2d-5.jpg
    31.4 KB · Views: 109
  • a2d-7.jpg
    a2d-7.jpg
    36.7 KB · Views: 104
  • a2d-3.jpg
    a2d-3.jpg
    41.1 KB · Views: 95
  • a2d-1.jpg
    a2d-1.jpg
    33.6 KB · Views: 148
  • Ga2d-2.jpg
    Ga2d-2.jpg
    49.6 KB · Views: 153
  • 800pxa2dskysharkpo5.jpg
    800pxa2dskysharkpo5.jpg
    37.7 KB · Views: 462
  • douglasskyshark.jpg
    douglasskyshark.jpg
    20 KB · Views: 474
  • Douglas XA2D-1 Skysharklarge.jpg
    Douglas XA2D-1 Skysharklarge.jpg
    42.6 KB · Views: 502

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
Thanks! Great pics of a fascinating bird... Here's my contribution to the thread:
 

Attachments

  • Skyshark1a.jpg
    Skyshark1a.jpg
    378.4 KB · Views: 169

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
695
Reaction score
77
Website
www.tommythomason.com
Triton said:
Unfortunately, the Skyshark had an "Achilles heel," that being the main bearing of the Allison engine, which was basically two J-40 turbojets linked by this main bearing to provide power to the contra-rotating propellers. Allison seemed unable to overcome the problem.

The engine was a T40 turboprop, which was comprised of two XT-38 turboprop power sections, not J40 turbojets (which was another and even bigger disappointment). The link was a combining gearbox that wasn't quite up to the power going into it. The T40 also contributed to the failure of the A2J program but can't really be blamed for the FY/FV's lack of success. Some R3Ys seaplane transports were built and put into service but after incidents caused by engine failures, they were grounded as well.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
General characteristics

* Crew: 1
* Length: 41 ft 3 in (12.58 m)
* Wingspan: 50 ft 0 in (15.24 m)
* Height: 17 ft 1 in (3.68 m)
* Wing area: 400 ft² (37 m²)
* Empty weight: 12,900 lb (5,864 kg)
* Loaded weight: 18,700 lb (8,500 kg)
* Max takeoff weight: 22,960 lb (10,436 kg)
* Powerplant: 1× Allison XT-40-A-2 turboprop, 5,100 shp (3,800 kW)

Performance

* Maximum speed: 435 kn (501 mph, 813 km/h)
* Range: 1,900 nmi (2,200 mi, 3,520 km)
* Service ceiling: 48,100 ft (14,664 m)
* Rate of climb: 7,290 ft/min (37 m/s)
* Wing loading: 47 lb/ft² (230 kg/m²)
* Power/mass: 0.27 hp/lb (440 W/kg)

Armament

* Guns: * 4 × 20 mm (0.79 in) T31 cannon
* Other: 5,500 lb (2,500 kg) on 11 external hardpoints
 

Attachments

  • tumblr_kpgpcdPjLf1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    tumblr_kpgpcdPjLf1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    69.1 KB · Views: 89
  • tumblr_kpgpaoEKGu1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    tumblr_kpgpaoEKGu1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    19 KB · Views: 101
  • tumblr_kpgp8hfqWj1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    tumblr_kpgp8hfqWj1qzp3pqo1_500.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 110

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
Oh wow. OBB has come up with another killer blueprint! Looks like the son of a Skyshark and a Skyknight...
 

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
116
Tailspin Turtle said:
Triton said:
Unfortunately, the Skyshark had an "Achilles heel," that being the main bearing of the Allison engine, which was basically two J-40 turbojets linked by this main bearing to provide power to the contra-rotating propellers. Allison seemed unable to overcome the problem.

The engine was a T40 turboprop, which was comprised of two XT-38 turboprop power sections, not J40 turbojets (which was another and even bigger disappointment). The link was a combining gearbox that wasn't quite up to the power going into it. The T40 also contributed to the failure of the A2J program but can't really be blamed for the FY/FV's lack of success. Some R3Ys seaplane transports were built and put into service but after incidents caused by engine failures, they were grounded as well.
The T56 developed out of the problems with the XT38 and did well. I get the impression the US armed services were not at all confident that Allison had resolved the problems with the XT40's gearbox, since the equivalent T54, using two T56 power sections does not appear to have made it to the "metal cutting" stage.
 

Tailspin Turtle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2007
Messages
695
Reaction score
77
Website
www.tommythomason.com
I hadn't heard of the Westinghouse X25D2 turboprop and in Googling it, discovered a 1946 Aircraft Power Plants report that I wasn't aware of before:

http://www.governmentattic.org/vonK/AcftPwrPlants_VKarman_V6.pdf

The X25D2 engine was projected to provide 3,300 horsepower and 980 lbs of thrust at sea level, 0 knots.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
X25D2 was an inhouse designation at Westinghouse. It could very well have been the DoD designated T54 or a variant of the T40. Can anyone confirm that?
 

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
116
Stargazer2006 said:
X25D2 was an inhouse designation at Westinghouse. It could very well have been the DoD designated T54 or a variant of the T40. Can anyone confirm that?
I'd say it's unlikely since both the XT40 and the T54 were Allison products.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
ARGH! :eek: I can be so idiotic at times reading too fast... :-[

Of COURSE it is Allison... The plagued T40... The Westinghouse turbine may have received a designation in the same range of numbers, but I don't have them all in my list (T41 to T48, T52 and T56 are missing).
 

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
116
Well, http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/engines.html can probably fill in some holes. A very useful set of engine listings.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
Gosh! I didn't remember that Andreas' site had ALSO the engines... There's stuff there that complements my own lists... but I also have sub-variants that I think are missing there, so I'll double check and write Andreas about it some time. Thanks for reminding me!
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,719
Reaction score
501
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Additional photographs and line drawings of Douglas XA2D-1 Skyshark.
 

Attachments

  • a2d1_23.JPG
    a2d1_23.JPG
    32.7 KB · Views: 279
  • a2d1_03.jpg
    a2d1_03.jpg
    92.2 KB · Views: 306
  • a2d1_12.jpg
    a2d1_12.jpg
    36.9 KB · Views: 243
  • a2d1_36.jpg
    a2d1_36.jpg
    65.8 KB · Views: 229

Abraham Gubler

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,555
Reaction score
161
Why doesn't someone put a T56 in this and bid it for the USAF light attack (OA-X) requirement? A Sandy for 21st century wars...
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
The logo... (from Ginter's NAVAL FIGHTERS #43 cover)
 

Attachments

  • Skyshark-logo-improved.gif
    Skyshark-logo-improved.gif
    101.2 KB · Views: 72

Jos Heyman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
13
The A2D evolved from the BT3D studies and two examples of the XA2D-1, which were temporarily designated as AD-3, were ordered on 25 September 1947 with serials 122988/122989. The first flight took place on 26 May 1950. The engine consisted of two coupled XT38 engines which drove a common gear box. The second aircraft was later re-engined with a XT40-A-6 engine.
Production of 349 A2D-1 production aircraft was ordered but eventually only 6 with serials 125479/125484 were built. The remainder, with serials 125485/125488, 127962/128042, 132793/133042 and 134438/134445, were cancelled, although 125485/125488 were completed. The cancellation of the programme was due to the difficulties encountered with the coupled engines as well as the advent of the A4D jet aircraft.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
More great stuff from the Ginter Naval Fighters book, an absolute must have packed with diagrams, plans and photos!
 

Attachments

  • profiles.gif
    profiles.gif
    85 KB · Views: 132

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
... and also the sole surviving A2D as it appeared in the 1960s. Quite a different looking bird without the props and with the different color scheme...
 

Attachments

  • 1960s.jpg
    1960s.jpg
    180.8 KB · Views: 168

CFE

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 1, 2007
Messages
259
Reaction score
3
It would be interesting to see if anything would have come from the Skyshark had a more reliable powerplant in the same performance class been available (the T56-A425 of the E-2 Hawkeye comes to mind.) But the Skyshark is a conspicuous example of a technical development that was overcome by events. By the time the Skyshark was flying, Ed Heinemann and co. had secured approval for an aircraft that was the antithesis of the Skyshark's complexity: the A4D Skyhawk. The A4D's simplicity, superior speed, and nuclear weapons capability sealed the fate of the intriguing Skyshark.
 

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
116
Stargazer2006 said:
... and also the sole surviving A2D as it appeared in the 1960s. Quite a different looking bird without the props and with the different color scheme...
IF I'm not mistaken,hasn't the prop spinner been replaced by the nose of a Skyhawk?
 

saturncanuck

Any landing you can walk away from, is a good one.
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
299
Reaction score
6
Website
www.aerofile.ca
Tailspin Turtle said:
Triton said:
Unfortunately, the Skyshark had an "Achilles heel," that being the main bearing of the Allison engine, which was basically two J-40 turbojets linked by this main bearing to provide power to the contra-rotating propellers. Allison seemed unable to overcome the problem.

The engine was a T40 turboprop, which was comprised of two XT-38 turboprop power sections, not J40 turbojets (which was another and even bigger disappointment). The link was a combining gearbox that wasn't quite up to the power going into it. The T40 also contributed to the failure of the A2J program but can't really be blamed for the FY/FV's lack of success. Some R3Ys seaplane transports were built and put into service but after incidents caused by engine failures, they were grounded as well.

In my research I have yet to find ANY aircraft that was successful with the T40.

It seems that as soon as they assinged the engine to an aircraft, it was doomed.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,235
Reaction score
454
Absolutely right. The T40 was plagued and every aircraft that had the misfortune to be associated with it had its doom sealed from the start... The number "40" must have been something of a jinx because the J40 turbojet didn't fare much better either...
 

Steve Pace

Aviation History Writer
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Messages
2,268
Reaction score
35
Corky Meyer - the only person to fly the J40-powered XF10F-1 Jaguar, said the airplane "could barely get out of its own way."
 

elmayerle

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2006
Messages
1,344
Reaction score
116
XB-70 Guy said:
Corky Meyer - the only person to fly the J40-powered XF10F-1 Jaguar, said the airplane "could barely get out of its own way."
*wry chuckle* I once drove a rental car like that, a 1976 Mercury Bobcat MPG with an automatic transmission; if floored, it might get out of its own way.
 

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,213
Reaction score
1,861
Some additional info -Post-1
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0006.jpg
    Escanear0006.jpg
    309 KB · Views: 241
  • Escanear0005.jpg
    Escanear0005.jpg
    281.8 KB · Views: 208
  • Escanear0004.jpg
    Escanear0004.jpg
    247.1 KB · Views: 241
  • Escanear0003.jpg
    Escanear0003.jpg
    405.6 KB · Views: 296
  • Escanear0002.jpg
    Escanear0002.jpg
    435.8 KB · Views: 257

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,213
Reaction score
1,861
Some additional info -Post-2
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0012.jpg
    Escanear0012.jpg
    423.5 KB · Views: 182
  • Escanear0010.jpg
    Escanear0010.jpg
    433.5 KB · Views: 146
  • Escanear0009.jpg
    Escanear0009.jpg
    224.9 KB · Views: 202
  • Escanear0008.jpg
    Escanear0008.jpg
    495.7 KB · Views: 152
  • Escanear0007.jpg
    Escanear0007.jpg
    102.2 KB · Views: 183

Justo Miranda

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
4,213
Reaction score
1,861
Some additional info -Post-3
 

Attachments

  • Escanear0013.jpg
    Escanear0013.jpg
    558.3 KB · Views: 124
  • Escanear0014.jpg
    Escanear0014.jpg
    92.3 KB · Views: 140
  • Escanear0015.jpg
    Escanear0015.jpg
    330.3 KB · Views: 168
  • Escanear0016.jpg
    Escanear0016.jpg
    258.7 KB · Views: 216
  • Escanear0017.jpg
    Escanear0017.jpg
    449.6 KB · Views: 150

saturncanuck

Any landing you can walk away from, is a good one.
Joined
Jan 14, 2009
Messages
299
Reaction score
6
Website
www.aerofile.ca
Stargazer2006 said:
Absolutely right. The T40 was plagued and every aircraft that had the misfortune to be associated with it had its doom sealed from the start... The number "40" must have been something of a jinx because the J40 turbojet didn't fare much better either...

A lot ot "paired" or "twinned" engines and aircraft never did well.

Remember the He 177?
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,222
Reaction score
929
At least the Fairey Gannet with its Bristol Siddeley Double Mamba
could be regarded as a proof, that it isn't the basic concept, that
is flawed.
 

AeroFranz

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,259
Reaction score
158
there are scores of PT6T 'twinpacks' that work pretty well too :)
 

airman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Messages
1,214
Reaction score
82
Website
zeef.com
Yes, i remember , ::) the genealogy of Skyraider and than Skyshark, had started with Northrop BT1 ( source Aerei - Delta Editrice - i am not remember year and month )
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
26,670
Reaction score
3,463
Hi,

the XA2D-1 Skyshark developments;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4197.0/highlight,skyshark.html
 

Similar threads

Top