Evolution of the Eurofighter Typhoon: TKF-90, AST 396, AST.403 and more

Foo Fighter

I came, I saw, I drank some tea (and had a bun).
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
2,444
Reaction score
1,407
Is there anything to stop the fitting of a variable nozzle like other recent aircraft?
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
7,949
Following on from Hood's excellent post of AST 396 projects, Tony Buttler has something to add:

Hi Everyone.
The attached comes from a file in the National Archives at Kew and shows the list of 28 designs that were submitted to Phase I of the AST.403 competition. Doing the advertising bit, a good number of these will feature in the revised British Secret Projects: Jet Fighters, which has just been delivered to the publisher.
The AST.403 Phase II studies by the way essentially took the most favoured half dozen of these designs with the intention of assessing them in much greater depth, although there were some changes in due course.
Hope you find this of interest.

Very best wishes, Tony.
 

Attachments

  • DEFE 72-104.jpg
    1,020 KB · Views: 181

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,793
Reaction score
1,512
Is it me or doestate that look a bit like the USSR's MFI ?
Convergence perhaps?
 

Sundog

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,945
Reaction score
506
zen said:
Is it me or doestate that look a bit like the USSR's MFI ?
Convergence perhaps?
I guess in basic layout they're similar but almost every country with an aerospace industry was investigating the canard, delta wing, and ventral inlet configuration at the time. However, this predates the USSR MFI, since this is from 1982 so it would be more correct to say the MFI looks like it may have referenced this research. Also, it should be noted that the MFI was a much larger aircraft.
 

butch4343

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Dec 5, 2008
Messages
9
Reaction score
3
Folks,

Not sure if this is the right place to ask the question, please enlighten me if not.

In the early days of the AST.403 project the RAF were looking to replace the Jaguar fleet and the Phantom fleet with what became Typhoon, as such the Typhoon was to have "an austere air to ground capability", I wonder has anyone ever heard of the intention of Typhoon to carry nuclear weapons?

Jaguar could, therefore it would seem logical that its replacement would also be so capable.

I know also that history meant the RAF lost its free-fall nuclear weapons by 1998, but I wonder if typhoon was ever intended to carry them in the early days.

Regards

Butch
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,301
Reaction score
6,292
I would like to compare the TKF-90 with the Mirage 4000. Does anybody knows about the dimensions of the ILA 78 / ILA 80 mockup ?
 

zeroc

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Apr 20, 2010
Messages
90
Reaction score
23
From Interconair, 1980.
 

Attachments

  • scansione0099.jpg
    scansione0099.jpg
    852.7 KB · Views: 1,329

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,301
Reaction score
6,292
Wunderbar ! There was clearly two different Dassault designs. One is a direct offspring of the Mirage 4000, with different air intakes closer from the future Rafale.
The other is the intriguing pre- Rafale concept with the two tails fixed mid-way of a delta wing (a radical design, the definitive ACX had a single tail like the 4000)

I did some calculations about the TKF-90. Considering a RB-199 engine bay is 1 meter in diameter, two of them would give a 2 m wide fuselage. I get a wingspan of 12 m (2X 5 m wings plus the 2 m wide fuselage) and a length of 16 m.

For the sake of comparison, Germany benchmark was the F-18L, which has similar wingspan but is a little longer. The Mirage 4000 has similar span but is quite more longer (19 m) since the M53 was far bigger than the RB199. Overall, TKF-90 has a wider span than Rafale or Typhoon (11 m) but the length is the same, 16 m.
 

ursrius

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
69
Reaction score
6
Some questions on Hoods superb EAG list:

Are any of the EAG studies tied to BAC P.63, P.64 and P.69 through P.74, which all relate to AST.396 issue 1 (according to the NA index, DEFE 72/12 refers to AST.396 issue 1)

There are two distinct series: EAG.8*** and EAG.4***. Is there any significance between the two? The EAG.4*** series turns up in BSP 4 and 5 as Warton P.42 studies and other hypersonic/space studies.
 

Deltafan

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,274
Reaction score
965
zeroc said:
From Interconair, 1980.
Thanks zeroc.

As said by Archibald, very interesting, indeed. But maybe the drawings are a little too "flat". I am not sure that the proportions are respected for the two Dassault designs.

Archibald said:
There was clearly two different Dassault designs. One is a direct offspring of the Mirage 4000, with different air intakes closer from the future Rafale.
The other is the intriguing pre- Rafale concept with the two tails fixed mid-way of a delta wing (a radical design, the definitive ACX had a single tail like the 4000)
As far as I remember, the two tails Rafale was not choosen because of "aeroelastic contraints" that it could not overcome.

The second one profil seems to look like (but not exactly) a photo that Matej gave us a few years ago.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,345.0.html
 

Attachments

  • Dassault Rafale-ACX monodérive.JPG
    Dassault Rafale-ACX monodérive.JPG
    54.1 KB · Views: 857
  • Dassault Rafale-ACX monodérive profil.jpg
    Dassault Rafale-ACX monodérive profil.jpg
    134.9 KB · Views: 858

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,681
Reaction score
3,234
ursrius,
The document did not give any P.7x designations, but the new edition of Tony Buttler's BSP:2 gives the following tie-ups:
EAG 8404 = P.70
EAG 8413 = P.71
EAG 8461 = P.71
EAG 4678 = not specifically mentioned but seems to fit with P.72, Tony identifies EAG 8479 as one of the P.72 studies.

I've double-checked the source and EAG 4678 seems correct and is not a typo. I don't know enough about Warton's EAG numbering system to give further advice on that.
 

ursrius

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
69
Reaction score
6
Hood,

Thanks - I really should look at the new edition of Tony's book a little better!!
 

litzj

BLOG : http://jaesan-aero.blogspot.com/
Joined
Feb 4, 2012
Messages
276
Reaction score
73
Website
jaesan-aero.blogspot.com
Few papers related to the aerodynamics of Eurofighter

2nd paper show how they determined control surface configuration in Canard-Delta Wing
(due to high AoA stability of aircraft)

1st paper show how they used complex vortex configuration of forebody via CFD
 

Attachments

  • CEAS2015_119.pdf
    2.9 MB · Views: 74
  • ICAS-80-13.1.pdf
    403.7 KB · Views: 72

RAP

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
706
Reaction score
521
Couple of images from AWST.
 

Attachments

  • rtisfkj.png
    rtisfkj.png
    684.3 KB · Views: 754
  • dtulod.png
    dtulod.png
    964.4 KB · Views: 816

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
7,949
I have a vague recollection of doing the drag analysis for this.....and thereafter most probably the mission and flight performance sums. Also a vague recollection of the full scale mock-up....was it just a half model.....in the hangar at a time when we had a proliferation of mock-ups. P103 was quite a complex beast....and led to stuff like RALS etc. Just a passing phase as my main task was P106.

Paul Chapman, British Aircraft Designs & Prototypes

 

Attachments

  • 62508101_2177463202289471_8416810941403889664_o.jpg
    62508101_2177463202289471_8416810941403889664_o.jpg
    86.3 KB · Views: 228
  • 64587452_10214440594750164_30355896840224768_n.jpg
    64587452_10214440594750164_30355896840224768_n.jpg
    60.7 KB · Views: 310

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
7,949
I joined Warton in 79 following a stint in Aero Projects and SAD at RAE where I was doing multivariate optimisation of fast jets...the first job was joining Brian Young's team for the Anglo German ECF where eight of us and eight of the best of MBB under Martin Friemer hammered out the canard delta that ultimately became Typhoon. I was returned to Roy Boot's FPO and soon became engaged with LCA projects...mostly the sizing and performance optimisation of the P106 where Dave Whalley led the drawing side. My boss, John Platt, pulled us together, especially on the propulsion side, and was the link to the higher paid help. I always preferred P106....80% of ECF/ECA/P110/ACA for 60% of the cost. There was a lot of international interest....and a very marked similarity to the JAS.39 project.

Those intakes....we were forever playing with different schemes. It would generally end up as a Friday afternoon project where Dave and I would cut up sections, paste them onto card and build a 3D eggbox which would then be filled in with Plasticine. Then we would very proudly show it to John Platt....and soon after start all over again. Towards the end (I left in '84') we developed the optimiser software to spit out 3D wireframes which invariably brought on derision (in a nice way) from Dave. He was a superb draftsman with a mass of experience.

Paul Chapman, British Aircraft Designs & Prototypes

 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
28,549
Reaction score
6,281
From L+K 2/1984.
 

Attachments

  • 1   2-1984.png
    1 2-1984.png
    34.7 KB · Views: 259
  • 2   2-1984.png
    2 2-1984.png
    48 KB · Views: 247

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
28,549
Reaction score
6,281
From L+K 15/1986.
 

Attachments

  • 1   15-1986.png
    1 15-1986.png
    121.5 KB · Views: 204

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
28,549
Reaction score
6,281
This report displayed before by dear Blackkite,

but so weird,the MBB design maybe associated with McDonnell-Douglas ?,it very close to
AFTI concept ?.

Super Fighters at Warton 1948-1972
Tony Wilson – Heritage Department, BAE Systems Warton
19 April 2016
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    107.5 KB · Views: 222
  • 160419 Warton Superfighters.pdf
    2.8 MB · Views: 11

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
7,949
This report displayed before by dear Blackkite,

but so weird,the MBB design maybe associated with McDonnell-Douglas ?,it very close to
AFTI concept ?.

Super Fighters at Warton 1948-1972
Tony Wilson – Heritage Department, BAE Systems Warton
19 April 2016
I’ve discussed this before, it’s not at all weird. MBB worked with McDonnell-Douglas on advanced fighter concepts while Dornier worked with Northrop.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,680
Reaction score
7,949
P.103 post from Aircraft that Never Were and What Ifs Facebook Group https://www.facebook.com/groups/264095303761165

P103. Although I was in Roy Boot's FPO, I was not on the P103 design team so can't really comment on it except that at one point I was asked to do the drag analysis and then the mission and point performance calculations. The supersonic drag analysis involved developing cross -sectional area plots resolved according to the Mach number and, in this case, there was magic involved in the way I dealt with the nacelles and associated stream tubes. I think this was also an opportunity to test several alternative drag models. In fact I was a great believer in applying as many methods as possible, particularly when the configuration deviated from conventional since that way would highlight possibly suspect methodologies. At the time it was the thing to hand calc these things and if the modelling was within 5 or 10% you knew you were ok. Oh, the days spent planimetering and punching numbers into the reverse Polish notation calculator.....and when all was ok, setting up the JCL, purging the company mainframe and running the calcs overnight. Later, and when they made the full size mock-up there was only enough room in the shed for a one-winged wonder. I never saw the nacelle tilt.
 

Attachments

  • 93880081_2804888792880239_5347950598165626880_o.jpg
    93880081_2804888792880239_5347950598165626880_o.jpg
    368.4 KB · Views: 112

Similar threads

Top