Fairchild FX fighter project (rival to the McDonnell-Douglas F-15)

November 1969 is an F-15 themed issue...
THE DIE IS SET By Edward G. Uhl, President
“It Is Vital That The Nation Get The Finest Aircraft Possible"


In the next few days, by January 1, the United States Air Force will choose a contractor to build the F-15 air superiority fighter.

It is vital that the nation get the finest aircraft possible. The United States simply cannot afford to risk the security of the country or the lives of its airmen in any “second best” machine.

I would like to take this opportunity to say a sincere ‘Thank You! to all who have put their minds and hearts into winning this competition since Fairchild Hiller first began intensive studies for the program in 1965.

Whatever the outcome, win or lose. I know you have done your very best. Competition is the American way. There can be only one winner.

Regarding Fairchild Hiller’s F-15. I have never seen a design as good as the one we arc proposing. I believe we have offered the United States Air Force the best F-15 and the best production proposal.

Our three body concept is simple, easy to build and it will assure maximum airframe / engine performance in the toughest maneuvers ever imposed on a fighter plane. Our designers have learned well the requirements for survivability— taught by combat against Soviet fighter aircraft over North Vietnam; for example, the necessity for a simple, rugged aircraft that will absorb battle damage, bring the pilot back safely, and possess the capability to be repaired in the field to fight again.

We have all the facilities needed to build the F-15. Our production space is more than twice what it was when we were rolling out F-105s one-a-day.

We can honestly say that the F-15 is the company’s highest priority project. This means that our top management will be able to concentrate on the program and respond quickly to Air Force requirements rather than spreading its attention over many large projects requiring constant supervision.

We have the right people. All of the supervisory boxes of the F-15 organization charts are filled already with experienced people who have been engaged continuously in Mach 2 fighter development since 1952.

We have the best avionics subcontractor — the Hughes Aircraft Company — which has its best men on the program.

We have the financial resources and all the cash needed to finance the production program.

Fairchild Hiller is a Maryland corporation and F-15 program management will be in Maryland. However, our approach to the F-15 program has been national and not restricted to a single geographic area. Potential subcontractors have been solicited from twenty-nine states. There is strong nation-wide participation in the program.

For example, for each billion dollars of F-15 funding, approximately 12 per cent will go to Maryland. Some 29 per cent will funnel to California. Approximately 10 per cent will go to Georgia. Another 27 per cent will accrue to New York where our F-15 division will be responsible for part of the airframe structures as well as system integration. The remainder will go to subcontractors in other states, with substantial amounts to Ohio or Connecticut, depending on the choice by the Air Force of the engine manufacturer.

One of our strong attributes is that the Fairchild Hiller approach of organizing the program by demonstration milestones has been accepted and is now being used by all the competitors. Our proposal breaks down by steps the work of producing an operational prototype. As development progresses, unforeseen technological or cost problems can be identified and reviewed so that a go or no-go decision can be made. From the corporate point of view, I want the protection of the milestone approach since it assures that production commitments are made only after proper technical confidence has been attained.

Winning the F-15 program will, of course, have an immediate, substantial impact on the company's sales and earnings. Exactly how much will depend on how the government funds the project. Nonetheless, should the award go to another company, we foresee continued growth for Fairchild Hiller during 1970. We currently are budgeting for a five per cent increase in pre-tax earnings independently of any F-15 business.

In addition, we have gained a wealth of engineering and technological experience which enhances our ability to compete for other major aerospace programs down the road. In a recent Senate speech. Senator John L. McClellan declared his confidence in the competence, experience and technical knowledge of the Air Force experts now evaluating the competing designs.

Further, he said, “it is imperative that the civilian officials in the Pentagon select the aircraft which is best suited to do the combat job required, and that no consideration of any kind other than merit and capability be used to determine the award winner.’* Fairchild Miller agrees completely. In 1970 the company starts its fiftieth year as an aircraft manufacturer. We look forward with confidence to marking the anniversary by building the F-15 for the United States Air Force

F-15 The Engineering Approach
Dr Norman Grossman, Vice President F-15 Program

Three Body Concept Yields Benefits In Aerodynamics, Production, Growth


The proposed Fairchild Hiller F-15 design has evolved over a period of four years During this time extensive trade off studies were performed to determine the best combination of engines, wing plan form, payload-radius, maneuverability, take off gross weight. avionics relationship and cost to provide the United States Air Force with the most efficient air-to-air fighter for the 1975-1985 time period.

In the spring of 1965 the concept of separating the engines in podded nacelles was first proposed by the company’s preliminary design group. During ensuing design and parametric analyses this innovative design approach commonly referred to as the three body concept proved significantly superior to all the other competitive designs.

The F-15 design group began investigating the three body concept because of the known difficulties experienced in the recent installation of high performance engines in the fuselage where unfavorable flow disturbances adversely affected efficient engine operation at critical flight conditions. This consideration plus the promise of reduced wave and aft end drag at high speed provided the initial impetus; however, it was soon evident that this unique design also offered sizable savings in weight because of its inherently efficient structural arrangement.

As the design investigations continued, the technical superiority of the three body concept in the critical areas of propulsion compatibility, aerodynamic efficiency and minimum structural fraction were further enhanced by certain practical operational and cost fallouts peculiar to this design approach.

By separating the engines and housing them in pods, the degree of survivability was markedly increased in three key areas, namely, completely separated and redundant primary control surfaces, complete separation of the fuel tanks from the hot sections of the engines, and true twin engine reliability.

Minimum cost for future system growth was possible because the three body concept could accept changes in engine dimensions with minimum disruption to the structure arrangement.

Production cost savings were possible because the F-15 design concept and the inherent producibility of the three body configuration lent itself to simple subassemblies. Each module could be built up and stuffed with the necessary electrical, fuel and hydraulic systems and checked prior to splicing. This approach makes it possible to assemble in the field a complete fighter frnm combat damaged aircraft.

In September 1968, the Air Force asked industry for definitive design solutions. By this time Fairchild Hiller’s F-15 team was convinced that the three body design approach represented the happiest marriage of technical innovation, minimum risk and operational suitability.

With the award of a Phase IB contract in January of 19.69, the final competitive stage of the F-15 program began. During the next six months extensive wind tunnel testing was conducted which thoroughly substantiated the aerodynamic and propulsion efficiency assumptions for the three body concept. Concurrent with the test program, all the basic elements of the proposed F-15 Fighter Weapon System were defined together with all the necessary plans for development, test and production.

I sincerely believe the F-15 Proposal submitted by Fairchild Hiller is an outstanding one. I believe this because it represents a total effort by the most experienced fighter design group in the country. Meticulous attention has been given to every aspect of the program whether it be a design consideration such as the fuel system, a support problem the training area, a category I or II test milestone or a production plan. Whatever the item, it has received serious attention from an experienced expert. Although this across the-board attention by experts is an essential ingredient of the proposal, it alone does not make an outstanding proposal. The experts must have a design concept within which to work. It is. easy to propound the routine and familiar or the exotically impractical. It is professionally demanding to successfully accomplish the difficult blending of theory and practice so that your design concept for solving an operational problem pushes the state of-the-art within the bounds of acceptable technical risk.

In my judgment the three body concept as defined in our proposal raises fighter state-of-the-art technology to a new conceptual plateau. All the essential elements that contribute to making the most superior air-to-air fighter are realized in this design approach. The long chord inboard wing-nacelle configuration provides the lowest drag and highest propulsion efficiency attainable throughout the flight envelope of the F-15. This is accomplished while maintaining highly desirable stability, control, buffet stall and spin characteristics. The fallout inherent in the design without penalty to the
air-to-air performance has been thoroughly exploited by the F-15 group. This includes survivability, maintainability, growth, weapons flexibility, producibility and cost realism (minimum technical risk).

Regardless of the outcome of this competition, I would like to extend a sincere well-done to all members of the Fairchild Hiller organization who have contributed to the program. You can be justly proud of the results of your endeavor which is representative of the highest professional and critical skills in the fighter business. I am confident that such an effort can only receive the most serious consideration by the United States Air Force.
F-15 The Marketing Goal
Tom Turner Coperate Vice President, Marketing
Total Corporate Capability Committed To Deliver Superior F-15 To USAF


Throughout the intensive F-15 competition the marketing goal has been to tell the Fairchild Hiller story as it is, to tell about the excellence of its fighter design team, its people, its resources, its production records and its superior aircraft — past, present and future.

Fairchild Hiller is inextricably linked with aviation progress. Since the company built the world's first enclosed cabin airplane, it has produced some 40,000 aircraft — including some 25,000 fighters in which three generations of Air Force pilots have maintained air superiority in three wars. The company's list of achievements in innovative aerospace technology and efficient production is long and still growing.

The company has the very best fighter design team in America today. For corroboration, ask the Red River Rats who outstripped Soviet-built fighters over North Vietnam or the four star general who recently said our F-105 is probably the best aircraft ever put together.

In marketing it is vital to believe in your product and the need for it. This country has been so successful in gaining air superiority in the past that it has been sometimes taken for granted that we always would be able to defeat enemy aircraft in air-to-air combat in the future.

Fifteen years have passed, however, since this country designed and built its last air-to-air fighter. In the same period, the Soviets have introduced a new fighter about once every two years. Since the Soviets always have optimized their fighters for air-to-air combat, there is good reason for concern over the competitive status of the United States Air Force with the Soviets. During the Korean war, the margin of victory of United States over Soviet aircraft was 12 to one. More recently over Southeast Asia the result has been a virtual one-to-one standoff.

Right now the MIG-21, which is about six models old, is a match for the best air superiority fighter in our inventory and this will continue to be the case until the mid 1970s. The country's disadvantage in this area is further compounded by the fact that the Soviets appear to have built competitive prototypes and tested them, something that budget constraints have prevented here. Since the purpose of the F-15 is to assure air superiority against the Soviets, it is absolutely essential that the United States Air Force get the superior aircraft of the three designs offered in the current competition.

The Air Force source selection procedures have been carefully structured to achieve that end. The Air Force evaluators are disciplined and professional. Contractors are kept at arms length. Gone are the days of lavish entertainment and golf course selling. The aerospace industry and the taxpayers are better off for it. I am convinced that the Air Force selection process is as fair as it is possible to make it. Nor do I know of any recent programin which the competition has been so intense and above board.

At first glance, the source selection procedures might appear to negate the need for marketing. Not so, for the corporate effort has been aimed at dispelling any misunderstanding of Fairchild Hiller’s capability to manage a program of this magnitude and to deliver the best air superiority machine to the Air Force.

Just as the F-15 program has been a total corporate effort, so has the marketing approach. Fourteen months ago a task force was assembled of the best available manpower in the company. The field officers were brought in and a formalized marketing information and reporting system was established.

The scene during this time has been played against a backdrop of rising public and congressional debate of the defense effort. Fortunately, Congress and the Office of the Secretary of Defense have recognized the urgent need for the F-15 program.

One of the most difficult tasks has been to extract the important characteristics of the air vehicle and its supporting elements from the large proliferation of constantly changing data produced by the engineering team working under Dr. Grossman. Much effort has gone into translating this data into briefcase briefings aimed at dispelling any misunderstanding of Fairchild Hiller or the F-15 program, whether technical or general in nature. Three major documentary movies have been produced to the same purpose.

The Fairchild Hiller F-15 design has some very distinct advantages over its competitors.

These include:

The configuration has outstanding flying characteristics validated in the wind tunnels over the entire flight envelope. It makes the pilot's job as easy and safe as possible.

Past survivability lessons learned in combat have been applied to the new design. This means redundant controls, redundant control surfaces as well as the simplest, rugged structure that can absorb battle damage.

Flexibility and growth are essential. Our three body design with its independent engine nacelles allows for easy adaptability to engine growth and has high speed growth validatedby wind tunnel test up to almost twice its design speed.

The three body concept is not only the aerodynamic solution but the survivability solution and the production solution as well.

Our effort has been helped and company proposals given great credibility by the outstanding performance of the F-105 Thunderchief in Southeast Asia.

We have built aircraft for the Tactical Air Command since its beginning. If we are fortunate enough to be selected to build the F-15, I am sure that we will build an aircraft that will be even better than the F-105.
WHAT MAKES THE MOST SUPERIOR AIR TO AITR FIGHTER?

  • PERFORMANCE IN COMBAT
    • LOW DRAG AT HIGH LIFT
    • LOW BASE DRAG
    • HIGH THRUST EXCESS OVER DRAG ( PROPULSION EFFICIENCY)
    • ENGINE / AIRFRAME COMPATIBILITY
  • PILOT EFFECTIVENESS IN COMBAT
  • GOOD STATIC STABILITY - ALL AXES
  • GOOD DYNAMIC STABILITY - ALL AXES
  • POSITIVE FLIGHT CONTROL POSITIONING
  • GOD CONTROL EFFECTIVENESS ( ESPECIALLY AT LIMITS)
  • MINIMUM INERTIA COUPLING
  • REDUCE PILOT DISTURBING EFFECTS
    • ABSENCE SEVERE TRIM TRANSIENTS WITH MACH NUMBER
    • ABSENCE SEVERE TRIM CHANGE WITH ARMAMENT LAUNCH
    • ABSENCE S EVERE TRIM CHANGE WITH OPERATION OF SPEEDBRAKES AND MANEUVERING DEVICES
    • BUFFET FREE MANEUVERING
    • MINIMUM C.G. SHIFT WITH F UEL EXPENDED
  • IF PILOT EXCEEDS AIRCRAFT LIMITS
    • LOW SPIN RATES
    • NON OSCILLATORY SPIN
    • POSITIVE AND IMMEDIATE SPIN RECOVERY
    • SAFE POSTSTALL HANDLING CHARACTERISTICS
  • WEAPONS FACTORS
    • FLEXIBLE MISSION/ WEAPONS CAPABILITY
    • MISSILE TARGET ACQUISITION AND LOCK PRIOR TO LAUNCH
    • SMOOTH MISSILE TRAJECTORY AT LAUNCH
    • GOOD GUN LOCATION
    • MISSILES AND GUNS MAXIMUM DISTANCE FROM ENGINE INLETS
 

Attachments

  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page1, 1969-11-01.pdf
    253.6 KB · Views: 39
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page5, 1969-11-01.pdf
    161.3 KB · Views: 21
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page6, 1969-11-01.pdf
    169.7 KB · Views: 17
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page7, 1969-11-01.pdf
    146.6 KB · Views: 17
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page8, 1969-11-01.pdf
    35.8 KB · Views: 15
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page9, 1969-11-01.pdf
    44.6 KB · Views: 20
Last edited:
Company Accelerates F-15 Design Efforts

Company efforts to win the designand production contract for the new Air Force F-15 air superiority fighter continue to accelerate with the Contract Definition phase competition now past the half way mark.

Assigned the highest priority by Fairchild Hiller, the F-15 has focused on it the talents of hundreds of engineers, management and design specialists.

The company’s design proposal must be submitted to the Air Force by June 30 with supporting cost data to follow not later than 31 July.

Evaluation of contractor proposals is expected to, take several months. The Air Force has announced that it will select a contractorfor the F-15 by the end of the year.

Other Developments

Meanwhile, there were these other significant developments in the F-15 program.

• Colonel Robert White, Air Force SPO, and a team of experts assigned to the System Program Office completed the first Program Review at Republic Aviation Division. A Program Review is just what its name implies. Company progress is checked to determine which program areas require management attention.

• Air Force officials delineated the differences between the Air Force F-15 and Navy F-14 fighter programs and scotched reports that efforts were being made to have the F-14 adopted as an all-service fighter.

• Edward G. Uhl, Fairchild Hiller President, told Republic Division employees: “We are Air Force contractors and very proud of it. Our Republic Division has
supplied the Air Force with over 25.000 fighters. We have the people. We have the resources. We have what I believe is the best F-15
design.”

• The Air Force announced that responsibility for F-15 logistics management has been assigned to Air Forcc Logistics Command’s Warner Robins Air Material Area (WRAMA) in Georgia.

Discount Rumors

• Dr. Norman Grossman, Fairchild Hiller Vice President and F-15 Program Manager, said the Long Island. N. Y., location of the Republic Division plant is no handicap to Fairchild Hiller efforts to win the F-15.

He discounted rumors concerning possible reluctance to award the Air Force fighter to Fairchild Hiller simply because Grumman Aircraft Engineering Company, also based on Long Island, has a contract to build the Navy’s F-14 fighter.

The Air Force has emphasized that what it wants is to get the best fighter possible and that it would be unwise to put contractor selection on any other basis, Dr. Grossman pointed out.

Long Island has the skilled labor force required as well as a tradition of building outstanding fighter aircraft for the military services, he said.

Highest Priority

Development of the F-15 has been given the highest Air Force priority. The Air Force has described it as a highly maneuverable, single place, twin engine, jet fighter to become operational in the mid-1970s.

Its purpose will be to gain air superiority over the enemy and absolute supremacy over the battlefield, according to Gen. J. P. McConnell, Air Force Chief of Staff.

The Air Force has assigned a group of fighter pilots to its System Program Office at Wright Patterson AFB to help design the new fighter. The office is headed by Col. Robert White.

Republic designed and built the last fighter designed solely for the Air Force. That was the F-105 Thunderchief which has earned a reputation in Southeast Asia as ‘the finest aircraft in the war." The F-105 is considered the Air Force’s No. 1 fighter-bombcr.
Fairchild Hiller News April 1969
 

Attachments

  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page1, 1969-04-01.pdf
    255 KB · Views: 15
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page2, 1969-04-01.pdf
    289.1 KB · Views: 14
Last edited:
Skilled Fighter Team Directs Company’s F-15 Design Effort

Farmingdale — On a door of the office of the Air Force Chief of Staff is a red. blue and gold sign which defines (he purpose of the Air Force in one sentence: “The mission of the United States Air Force is to fly and fight and don’t you ever forget it.” Initially it was the motto of the F-105 Thunderchief - equipped 388th Tactical Fighter Wing based ( at Korat. Thailand. Today it guides the efforts of the skilled Fairchild Hiller fighter team designing the next Air Force lighter, the F-15. to outfly and outfight anything that may fly against it.

Several members of the F-15 design team at the company’s Republic Division had major roles in the development of the F-105, which General William F. Momyer. Commander Tactical Air Command and former commander of the Seventh Air Force in Vietnam, called “the finest aircraft in the war.” “The combat experience we have gained with the one-oh-five is going directly into the F-15 design." Dr. Norman Grossman, Fairchild Hiller Vice President and F-15 Program Manager, said recently.

Combat Experience

“Flight characteristics and oper ational reliability of a new aircraft are most dependent on combat experience. The engineers and designers of the F-15 must have in their background the experience of having developed a modern combat-tested airplane. There no substitute.”

Like Dr. Grossman. several members of the Fairchild Hiller design team have been involved continuously in Air Force fighter development for more than 25 years.

Leaders of the F-15 design and engineering effort include John M. Williamson, System Engineering Director; Vincent J. Tizio. Manager Air Vehicle Design Department; Bert E. Sealander. Chief. Avionics Sub-systems; John Lyttle, Propulsion System Manager and Gordon Rosenthal, Chief. Air Vehicle Configuration.

James W. (Bill) Stroud is Manager of Integrated Logistics and Stanley Granowetter is Pro gram Administrator and Control Department Manager.

Two world renowned aeronautical engineers are principal advisors to the group. They are John Stack, Fairchild Hiller Vice President, who directed much of the research which led to supersonic flight, and Alexander Kartveli. the Russian born aircraft designer who created the P-47 Thunderbolt, the F-84 series Thundcrjct, Thunderstreak and Thunderflash, and the current F-105 Thunderchief.

Intense Study

The F-15 has been the subject of intense study by the company for more than five years, and Dr. Grossman has been directly involved. He joined the company’s Republic Aviation Division in 1943 as a research engineer in the P-47 program.

Subsequently he was Assistant Project Engineer on the F-84 jet aircraft series and during the development of the F-105 he was responsible, as Chief Equipment Engineer, for the Thundcrstick automatic flight control, navigation and bomb delivery system, at that time acknowledged as the most advanced of any fighter aircraft.

Tough Aircraft

John Williamson is another of the Fairchild Hiller F-15 team whose experience spans Air Force lighter development since World War II and the P-47. Mr. Williamson, who has had direct responsibility for many of the combat tested modifications to the F-105. said, “We have always been credited
with building tough aircraft. Combat experience with the F-105 has proved that the survivability of an aircraft and pilot can be appreciably improved and that experience is going into the F-15 design.”

Modern Fighters

Another who has been involved in building combat performance into modern fighters since 1945 is Vincent J. Tizio. He is recognized as an authority on supersonic and hypersonic vehicles.

“Since the F-15 air superiority goal demands the best match of pilot and aircraft, airframe design demands maximum agility,
maneuverability and high energy acceleration,” Mr. Tizio explained.

Inlet Design

John Lyttle is the design ten member responsible for the compatibility of engine, inlet and airframe, perhaps the most important geometry consideration for a modern fighter. Airframe and inlet in match so that the flow of air inlet experiences minimum distortion. This is essential to minimise compressor face distortion and prevent compressor stall — one of the problems that has confronted several new aircraft. Another detail in engine installation is that engine nozzles must be matched to the aft fuselage to minimize base drag

Electronic Systems

Bert E. Scalandcr, Chief, Avionics Sub-systems, joined the company in 1946 and has earned industry-wide reputation for the design and integration of sophisticated electronic flight control, navigation and weapons delivery systems. Since the Air Force Force requirement is for a single seat fighter, Mr. Sealander has primary concern that the myriad of complex and demanding tasks confronting the pilot of an advanced high performance aircraft are kept as few and straightforward as possibie.

High Speed

Gordon Rosenthal, a Canadian by birth, is the engineer responsible for the aerodynamic configuration of the Fairchild Hiller F-15. He has been primarily concerned with high speed aerodynamics and aircraft configuration since joining the company in 1958.

One of the most important and complex tasks in developing a new weapon system is Integrated Logistics Support. This phrase covers a mvriad of detail and for the F-15 responsibility has been assigned to James W. (Bill) Stroud, a former Air Force maintenance officer who joined the company in 1961.

For the program to move ahead on schedule, management vision must focus on each of the thousands of separate tasks and trade studies involved. Stanley Granwetter, who was a staff engineer during the F-105 program, keeps the Program Manager apprised of the progress being made on each [area?]
Company Reports Sharp Gain In First Quarter Earnings
[...]
“Our most significant long range accomplishments during 1968 resulted from our teamwork with Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp. on the
Navy F-l4 and the Air Force F-15 air superiority fighters.
We assisted Grumman in their winning of the F-14 and will manufacture a substantial
portion of the airframe as their teammate. In turn, they have assisted us in winning a contract definition phase award for the F-15 — obtained early in 1969 — and if we win the production contract, they will be a major subcontractor.”

Mr. Uhl was confident that the company would win the competition because he said “we have the best design and a great engineering team experienced in combat fighter design. Moreover, our cooperation with Grumman on the F-14 and F-15 will save the U.S. a considerable amount of money across both programs"

Fairchild Hiller News May 1969
 

Attachments

  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page1, 1969-05-01.pdf
    283.4 KB · Views: 15
  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page2, 1969-05-01.pdf
    264.9 KB · Views: 15
Last edited:
Deadline Nears For Proposal On AF Fighter

Farmingdale—With the detailed and comprehensive second F-15 Program Review successfully completed, the hundreds of engineers, management and design specialists who comprise Fairchild Hiller’s F-15 team are totally engaged in finalizing details of the company’s proposal.

June 30 is the deadline for submission of the company’s bid to design and produce the new air superiority fighter which has been given the highest priority by the Air Force. Supporting cost data must follow by July 31.

The Air Force SPO (System Project Office) team headed by Col. Robert White conducted the Program Review May 13 through 15 at Republic Aviation Division, focal-point of Fairchild Hiller’s company-wide involvement. The Review was termed “successful and on track” by company officials.

Challenging Requirement

Magnitude of the demanding requirement challenging the technical publication specialists on the F-15 design team is the sheer physical volume of the complex proposal.' There are 375 separate, bound documents comprising 22,000 pages in one complete proposal. Each includes approximately 5,400.000 words with 18.000 pages of text and 4,000 pages of illustration. Some 3,300 individual documents, each of which is a part of the total proposal, will be distributed to the .Air Force specialists who have the evaluation responsibility. Evaluation will take several months. The Air Force has announced it will select a contractor by the end of the year.

Fairchild Hiller News June 1969
 

Attachments

  • Fairchild Hiller News, Page1, 1969-06-01.pdf
    250.5 KB · Views: 23
So we now know that Fairchild Hiller (Republic Avation division) worked with Grumman on the F-14, and Grumman in turn helped on the Fairchild Hiller F-15.

You can see similarities.

design-303-60-edit-jpg.127161




Grumman's own FX design was Model 399.

grumman-model-399-jpg.5270

fairchild-fx-vg-jpg.5248


fx-6-jpg.166568

fx-8-jpg.166570


fairchildf-15b-gif.75880

fairchild-hiller-f-15-model-01sml-jpg.154943
 
Last edited:
Robert Sanator interview about Republic is interesting. He briefly discusses the F-15 program and the belief within Republic that they had technically the better plane, and McDonnell-Douglas came in at the last minute and won on Air Force confidence in their management and company to deliver.

View: https://youtu.be/4YdG7A8sJpU
 
Robert Sanator interview about Republic is interesting. He briefly discusses the F-15 program and the belief within Republic that they had technically the better plane, and McDonnell-Douglas came in at the last minute and won on Air Force confidence in their management and company to deliver.

View: https://youtu.be/4YdG7A8sJpU
Robert Sanator also co-authored "Investigation of Airframe-Inlet Interaction for Supersonic Tactical Fighter Aircraft", where the FX-8 configuration that the Fairchild F-15 was based on was shown. (DTIC AD0512542)

 
Last edited:
Thanks Overscan, an awesome find and contribution!!

Regards
Pioneer
 
I wonder how well Fairchild's design fare against McDonnell's in the wind tunnel testing. I assume it would have higher drag since it has a separate engine location but drag is not the only factor to consider no?

Also, I must say that the cranked delta wings on this plane looks really good.
 
I wonder how well Fairchild's design fare against McDonnell's in the wind tunnel testing. I assume it would have higher drag since it has a separate engine location but drag is not the only factor to consider no?

Also, I must say that the cranked delta wings on this plane looks really good.
The podded engines would have caused lower aft end drag, which was a significant issue with the McDonnell-Douglas submission.

It's a shame we don't have more technical information (e.g. wing sections, planform dimensions) so drag calculations could be done somewhat accurately.
 
If anyone can get this ?.
 

Attachments

  • 10.png
    10.png
    59.7 KB · Views: 54
  • 11.png
    11.png
    79.7 KB · Views: 69
There is a three-view arrangement in Reply #35 ("FX-6").
The FX-6 is not quite the same. The model I'm referring to (post #1) shows double vertical stabilizers but no horizontal stabilizers. The second drawn picture seems to confirm the lack of horizontal stabilizers.

Overscan (paulmm), do you still have this model? Would you be willing to take more pictures or even part with it for some amount of money?
 

Attachments

  • 2119-0abf669204a2c52696400e1e5152da07.jpg
    2119-0abf669204a2c52696400e1e5152da07.jpg
    19.4 KB · Views: 92
The picture is from an article by Tony Buttler ('Steps to the Big League') in Air Enthusiast November/December 2005. I seem to have mislaid my copy.

His book American Secret Projects - Fighters and Interceptors 1945-1976 has 3 black and white photos on page 177 and another colour view with wings swept back on page 221. Unusually, the pictures aren't credited.

I can ask Tony - he normally credits the owner of the model, so possibly these were just scanned photos.
 
Last edited:
The model has no horizontal tails, and it doesn't show any signs that it used to. This is pretty unusual for a VG design, though there were a few British VG designs with no horizontal tails. It does seem to have two flaps between the engines and possibly wingtip devices of some kind?
 
Very interesting, thank you for posting the pictures. I really appreciate it. And all the information guys.
 
Rear flap=Camber Variation = moment shift.

Move the flap down, the camber is increased, the moment shift forward. The nose goes down
Move the flap up, the camber is decreased, the moment shift backward, the nose goes up.

It's a bit counterintuitive (if you don't fly) but something we've got the get used with the 6th Gen tailless fighters (if they indeed end up looking like the renders).
 
Last edited:
It's definitely a very different looking aircraft, I wonder if underside looks much different from the other variants that we've been able to see.
 
The first thought through my mind was, "oh, Macross Veritechs!"
That's kind of what started me down this path. The distinct lack of horizontal stabilizers and over all shape definitely gave off veritech vibes. But also the fact that my grandpa may have helped out in some way, just makes it that much cooler.
 
Who was your grandpa? Did he work at Republic / Fairchild?
Ben Rudnick, he worked at Republic Aviation long before the merger and my dad's birth, at the long Island site. My dad (born in 45) can remember watching with a crowd as a young boy that could only be the Gatling gun from the A10 warthog was being fired at a shack and exploding with only a small "burp" sound. The patent drawing I found for his process of photo engraving templates for body panels has him listed as Benjamin but that's actually not his name. He also pioneered a recording method with mirrors to watch pilots train with the cockpit instruments as well as the pilot's face in view.

He was a cool dude. I wish I could have met him more than a handful of times.
 
Overscan (paulmm), do you still have this model? Would you be willing to take more pictures or even part with it for some amount of money?

I can ask Tony - he normally credits the owner of the model, so possibly these were just scanned photos.

Tony Buttler says "I am pretty sure it was in the collection at the Cradle of Aviation Museum. The photos are my own, taken in 2005".

He says he may have some more pics he could share.

Or you could contact https://www.cradleofaviation.org and see if you can take your own photos.
 
Tony Buttler says "I am pretty sure it was in the collection at the Cradle of Aviation Museum. The photos are my own, taken in 2005".

He says he may have some more pics he could share.

Or you could contact https://www.cradleofaviation.org and see if you can take your own photos.
I really appreciate you taking the time to talk to Tony Butler, I will try to contact the cradle of aviation museum through the email you gave me. If I get a lead on anything or more pictures I will post them here of course.
 
@cogashuko Tony Buttler rummaged around in his archive and came up with these awesome photographs he took.

Model span is 12in swept, 17.5in forward, length is 25in.

Thanks, Tony!
 

Attachments

  • Republic V-G F-X design01.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design01.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 46
  • Republic V-G F-X design02.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design02.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 51
  • Republic V-G F-X design03.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design03.jpg
    960.5 KB · Views: 52
  • Republic V-G F-X design04.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design04.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 49
  • Republic V-G F-X design05.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design05.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 45
  • Republic V-G F-X design06.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design06.jpg
    1.4 MB · Views: 45
  • Republic V-G F-X design07.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design07.jpg
    1.3 MB · Views: 43
  • Republic V-G F-X design08.jpg
    Republic V-G F-X design08.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 47
@cogashuko Tony Buttler rummaged around in his archive and came up with these awesome photographs he took.

Model span is 12in swept, 17.5in forward, length is 25in.

Thanks, Tony!
OMG thank you again for contacting him. And thank you Tony for finding that stuff, I'm know going through old archive stuff can be hard to find what you need. Speaking of which, I'm going to look for my grandfather's patent and find a good place to post it here on the forums. I kept hearing from my father about the shack being destroyed by what I can only imagine is an A10 warthog. But for the longest time I thought he said he saw an old real/8mm of it. Unfortunately I believe he was just there in person so I don't think I can dredge up any old footage. Sorry about that one guys.
 
Hey all. So my father worked for Fairchild Hiller Republic Aviation at the time of the F-15. My mother had mentioned that there was an article written about him in a paper on Long Island (or nearby) as he was the youngest designer to work on such a project(?) In any case, his name is Thomas M McCarthy. If anyone happens to run across anything about him I would appreciate it so much if you could pass it along to me. Thank you!
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom