Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" variants

[hesham]

Hi,

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930084609_1993084609.pdf

 

[flateric]

Great find!

 

[Justo Miranda]

Here some Lockheed projects from "Journal American Historical Society" spring 2000

 

[Justo Miranda]

And two additional patents ...

 

[circle-5]

Before the XFV-1 received its USN BuAer designation, it was known in-house as the Lockheed L-200 study. Attached photos of L-200-1 manufacturer model show a number of differences with the XFV-1: Three tail stabilizers instead of four, four-bladed props, slimmer fuselage with underside instead of lateral air intakes, etc. Does anybody know what the "curb feelers" on the three legs are for?

 

[Sundog]

Does anybody know what the "curb feelers" on the three legs are for?

I was thinking static dischargers at first, but I've never seen those modeled on a plane model like this. Could they be antenna for some sort for a radio landing aid, giving accurate height above the ground readings, like a RADAR Alt system? That's my best guess.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

I'll second Sundog's idea.

Curb feelers - now that is funny and an apt description! All we need now are some fuzzy dice on the rear view mirror

Impressive model Circle-5 - thanks! Mark

 

[circle-5]

Thank you both -- I concur. Concept models generally don't show small details unless they illustrate unique or significant features. A special ground proximity indicator would definitely qualify in the case of this tail sitter. In addition, I believe static dischargers would have been installed parallel to the flight path.

 

[Kevin Renner]

At the time the Salmon and the Pogo were unworkable ideas. Now with modern fight control systems they could be done, but why? IMO at the time they would of better off to pursue a twin engine tilt wing with the engines buried in the fuselage

 

[Sundog]

At the time the Salmon and the Pogo were unworkable ideas. Now with modern fight control systems they could be done, but why? IMO at the time they would of better off to pursue a twin engine tilt wing with the engines buried in the fuselage

Form a weight and complexity standpoint, at least regarding aircraft performance, I doubt there would be a design that could compete, in terms of a pure vertical take-off and landing vehicle.

The drawbacks; you aren't going to be doing any rolling STOL take-offs or landings and maintenance, arming, and ingress-egress are going to be problematic without extensive ground support equipment.

 

[Triton]

Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" model

Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" model found on eBay.

Source:
http://www.ebay.com/itm/FXV-1-Lockheed-Model-Aircraft-Vintage-Navy-Officers-Estate-Item-Rare-Military-/321049558159?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ac00b7c8f

 

[Orionblamblam]

Re: Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" model

Looks like a built-up Aurora kit. Worth maybe $10.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Re: Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" model

Yup, agreed.

 

[Triton]

Re: Lockheed XFV-1 "Salmon" model

Sold for the amazing price of $26.00 with $5.00 Expedited Shipping.

I guess I can't find treasures all the time.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Greetings All -

The cover of "Western Aviation 26th Annual Directory, April 1954" had this XFV-1 artwork. Being the cover of a magazine, it hasn't fared too well with scratches and the like but nice artwork nonetheless.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[cluttonfred]

Since Mark has revived this old thread -- which would be better titled "Lockheed XFV-1 variants" -- let me point out that there is one variant pictured above that is quite striking. L-210-2 in reply #2 by Justo Miranda appears to show a STOL and not VTOL version with no less than TWELVE forward-firing guns in wing pods. Wow!

 

[circle-5]

Does anybody know what the "curb feelers" on the three legs are for?

I was thinking static dischargers at first, but I've never seen those modeled on a plane model like this. Could they be antenna for some sort for a radio landing aid, giving accurate height above the ground readings, like a RADAR Alt system? That's my best guess.

Thanks to a post by Tailspin Turtle in another thread, we now know these were retractable stoppers to rest the L-200-1 legs onto a landing net platform. The net was hydraulically pitch-compensated to cancel the ship's roll motion and had a 6-inch mesh. An additional net, mounted on a side platform, would catch one of the wingtip tanks in similar fashion, after the tank was guided in place by a wall of rubber rollers (backstop). The process of backing down into the tip net was assisted by a landing officer (LSO).

 

[hesham]

Hi,


here is the orginal model to Lockheed XFV-1,from the book;
Lockheed XFV-1 VTOL fighter,by Steve Ginter

 

[NUSNA_Moebius]

While they never got around to it, it would've been fascinating to see what kind of dogfighting performance the tailsitters had with such high thrust to weight ratios.

 

[jmnjohn]

I found this Lockheed Star news paper dated march 18, 1954 vol. 21 no.6 ....enjoy .....

 

[Steve Pace]

I just discovered this patent re the XFV-1 program. I have no idea whether this recovery system was ever installed. -SP

 

[Jos Heyman]

Interesting concept.
My information states that the first conventional flight of the XFV-1 was made on 16 June 1954 with a fixed undercarriage. VTOL was performed in flight but no actual VTOL landings or starts were performed. As such I think it is unlikely that the parachute concept was installed - and definitely not used.

 

[Jemiba]

The chute and the opening to eject it look a bit too small, to my opinion, and IIRC, the spinner
would have housed a radar in the series version. So this arrangement probably could have been
used only on the prototype either.

 

[NUSNA_Moebius]

Is there any "true" data on how fast this and the Convair XFY were? Seems I can't find any confirmed data, just projections and estimates.

It would be interesting if it really did turn out these were the fastest propeller driven aircraft ever made, even if a good deal of the thrust was from exhaust (I would figure so).

 

[Steve Pace]

Is there any "true" data on how fast this and the Convair XFY were? Seems I can't find any confirmed data, just projections and estimates.

It would be interesting if it really did turn out these were the fastest propeller driven aircraft ever made, even if a good deal of the thrust was from exhaust (I would figure so).

500 mph from either one would be about their best. The McDonnell XF-88B "Trimotor" - powered by two turbojets and a turbrprop, hit 1.12 Mach number in a dive.

 

[Stargazer]

The McDonnell XF-88B "Trimotor" - powered by two turbojets and a turbrprop, hit 1.12 Mach number in a dive.

But it had much better aerodynamics to help! None of the VTO tailsitters could have gone transonic under any circumstances.

 

[Steve Pace]

The McDonnell XF-88B "Trimotor" - powered by two turbojets and a turbrprop, hit 1.12 Mach number in a dive.

But it had much better aerodynamics to help! None of the VTO tailsitters could have gone transonic under any circumstances.

I did not say that they did. But 500 mph for The XFV or XFY isn't out of the question.

 

[Jos Heyman]

The source from which I got my information a long, long time ago did state 500 mph - I doubt if this was ever tested.

 

[Bill S]

A couple of additions to post 3 of this topic are
general arrangements of the L200-2 and L200-5.
Both from NARA II files.

 

[Bill S]

Inboard Profiles of L200-2 and L200-5
Again from NARA II research.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All!

A few recent finds in the Gerald Balzer collection for your perusal.
Note the later date (and not in the L-200 range though I am not sure it is the actual Model #).

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[circle-5]

Very nice – thank you Mark. I'm surprised to see wheels (casters) on the L-200-1 empennage. A land variant, probably ...

 

[hesham]

Nice find my dear Mark.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Good Day All!

I think the "Stripped Version" may be the prototype landing gear arrangement - the bracing wires look familiar.

One more from the Gerald Balzer Collection - Model 181-43-02 Tactical Version.

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Lockheed Model 81 VTO Fighter Display Model

Good Day All -

On EPay at the moment.... Mark

 

[hesham]

Hi,

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19540426/18/2

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 4/1954,

the journal shows a hypothetical imagine for Lockheed XFV-1,done by Air Trials magazine
in 1952.

 

[lark]

The 'Air Trails' illustration shows a Leonard concept.

(Air Trails March 1952)

 

[hesham]

The 'Air Trails' illustration shows a Leonard concept.

(Air Trails March 1952)

Thank you my dear Lark,

I suspected in it at first,but they didn't mention his name in the article.

 

[Walker]

Lockheed L-210-10 Boxart by Eugeny Knupfer.