Hi All. Went to the Heathrow Air Fair on Sunday at Kempton Park Racecourse and picked up the attached. It is the artwork for the Douglas D-855 COIN aircraft - twin engine turboprop. Hope it proves of interest. Very best wishes, Tony.
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Wasn't Super COIN another name for Phase I of the AX program? When the United States Air Force was interested in a replacement for the Douglas A-1E Skyraider with a new aircraft with the notional designation A-8A circa 1966? Should we move this post to the AX program thread?hesham said:Hi,
I don't know if that USAF SOR-222 contest emerged from LARA or not,it was a
Super COIN proposed for a strike recce and utility transport counter insurgency,
here's all details I have,who know more ?.
Flying Review 1/1966
That NA300/301 is all kinds of cool...Might make a great little brother for the modern Shorts 330/S-23. More information would be great.Nico said:Hi boys,
searching the previous posts about the LARA/COIN requirement (one of my favourite matters, for various and complex reasons) I found that some pictures I Have were never enclosed.
Two of them are particularly intriguing as I cannot say if are pure fiction or some real projetcs. The pictures are clipping (without any note about the subject) from two different advertisings; i think from an aircraft engine manifacturer and published on 'Aviation Week' circa 1967.
One other is the full scale mock-up of the Martin entry (rarely seen and still without known designation, I think).
The last is a cutaway drawing of the transport version of North American Na-300 (NA-301?).
Hoping you enjoy all
Post #4 (Overscan quoting the Wikipedia):Wahubna said:Maybe I missed it, but could some explain why they are all twin engine and why they are all stubby in span & length? Was there a stipulation on number of engines & overall dimensions?
I did not read anything in there stipulating such short lengths and short wings. As the flight test report of the Charger indicates, the compact dimensions compromised the handling. The closest requirement I just read states they should be capable of carrier ops. So I guess the carrier elevator limited the span & lengths? But then, why not have a folding outer few feet of wing? They all seem far shorter in length than a beast like the F-4, F-8, or A-7.Avimimus said:Post #4 (Overscan quoting the Wikipedia):Wahubna said:Maybe I missed it, but could some explain why they are all twin engine and why they are all stubby in span & length? Was there a stipulation on number of engines & overall dimensions?
Now, of course, there is the question of whether follow-on requirements were as strict and if there were any appeals to have part of the requirement waived.
After all, the original LARA requirement was built around a recoilless rifle and was quite a bit smaller than the Ov-10 turned out to be.
That makes sense. Pretty amazing the USMC contemplated that requirement considering how much it can harm an aircraft designed for STOL.PaulMM (Overscan) said:Wingspan was limited to about 20 ft by an initial Marines-only requirement (L2VMA - Light Light Marine Attack Aircraft) to use roads as airstrips. This was subsequently removed in the tri-service LARA requirement and NAA went for much larger wings with the OV-10, while others including Convair stuck to their initial short-span concept.
Here's a photo of the D-855 partial mockup.PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Just to add to my previous post. The V-458 got as far as wind tunnel testing, still looking to see if a formal proposal was assembled or submitted. Vought photosBill S said:Vought V-458 Low Speed Wind Tunnel Model Drawings
I am pretty sure this design was considered for the LARA,
as the drawing is from 2/63 and in the title block of some
of the detail drawings has "COIN aircraft".
Source: Vought History Collection