Grumman FAAV

JAZZ

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
11 March 2006
Messages
302
Reaction score
263
It has been mentioned in a previous thread, however it should have a thread of its own in this section. I have no data on the size (it seems a small aircraft 10m in length) of this aircraft. I have attached a picture which was in flight International...but have no way of knowing which one.
 

Attachments

  • US- Grumman Future Attack Air Vehicle FAAV_1.jpg
    US- Grumman Future Attack Air Vehicle FAAV_1.jpg
    16.3 KB · Views: 592
Here's the flight international article you were talking about


Here's a contractor report by NASA talking about lift fan aircraft (XV-5, X-14) and mentions the Grumman Model 755 (FAAV). Apparently Grumman built a simulator but the pilot found transitioning from flight to VTOL too cumbersome. Starts on page 11.


Wind tunnel report with some diagrams and badly scanned wind tunnel models.

 

Attachments

  • I_love_terrible_scans.jpg
    I_love_terrible_scans.jpg
    110.5 KB · Views: 443
  • g755.jpg
    g755.jpg
    98.2 KB · Views: 416
You'd think that modern control systems / automation could lower the pilot work load and make the transition relatively easy to carry out in a lift fan design (even if the transition itself was within a relatively marginal envelope).
 
Given that FAAV stood for Future Attack Air Vehicle, did Grumman's FAAV design have any provisions for armament?
 
Nice pics - where are they from?
First was from a random forum but is the same pic as post #2 (but better qual)
The others are from NASA LaRC picture archive I had from a while back but have only just got around to identifying

there is another but I can't remember where I got the file from, but it's a copy of a pic from the same report as the first :
 

Attachments

  • 887387-2.jpg
    887387-2.jpg
    32.8 KB · Views: 85
Last edited:
Great stuff, thank you. This has always been one of my favorite "mystery" Army projects for the Army's "Army After Next" era. I doubt it would have found its way into the Army inventory due to roles and mission concerns from USAF Inc., but it might have been a nice addition for the USMC who patiently wait for the Army to spend money on projects, then pick them up after the initial investment.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom