- Joined
- 27 December 2005
- Messages
- 16,454
- Reaction score
- 19,154
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.pdf253.6 KB · Views: 42
-
Fairchild Hiller News, Page5, 1969-11-01.pdf161.3 KB · Views: 22
-
Fairchild Hiller News, Page6, 1969-11-01.pdf169.7 KB · Views: 18
-
Fairchild Hiller News, Page7, 1969-11-01.pdf146.6 KB · Views: 18
-
Fairchild Hiller News, Page8, 1969-11-01.pdf35.8 KB · Views: 16
-
Fairchild Hiller News, Page9, 1969-11-01.pdf44.6 KB · Views: 21
Last edited: