McDonnell-Douglas Model 199 FX - design and development of the F-15

McDonnell-Douglas Tailed delta (this was the leading candidate design for sometime, and the final version with rhomboid wings came top in the parametric evaluation; the wing was designed using "designer's intuition" to a more conventional shape).
 

Attachments

  • tailed-delta-1967-68b.jpg
    tailed-delta-1967-68b.jpg
    66.7 KB · Views: 2,665
  • tailed-delta-mid-1968b.jpg
    tailed-delta-mid-1968b.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 2,538
  • Jan-1969-Deltab.jpg
    Jan-1969-Deltab.jpg
    56.6 KB · Views: 2,482
Winning design.

A 2D "rocker ramp" exhaust which allowed thrust reversal (the central paddle split to form a V shape) was considered.
 

Attachments

  • F-15-ventraltail-b.jpg
    F-15-ventraltail-b.jpg
    53.5 KB · Views: 2,495
  • Winning Design.jpg
    Winning Design.jpg
    70.4 KB · Views: 2,414
  • F-15-Mockupb.jpg
    F-15-Mockupb.jpg
    70.5 KB · Views: 1,317
  • rocker ramp.jpg
    rocker ramp.jpg
    63.5 KB · Views: 1,385
Nice copy of early F-15 artwork via flateric
 

Attachments

  • F-15med.jpg
    F-15med.jpg
    146.6 KB · Views: 1,254
McDonnell-Douglas FX studies and early F-15.


Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4C-56648.jpg
    xD4C-56648.jpg
    122.8 KB · Views: 1,999
  • xD4C-56650.jpg
    xD4C-56650.jpg
    132.6 KB · Views: 1,712
  • xD4C-69619.jpg
    xD4C-69619.jpg
    168.8 KB · Views: 1,142
  • xD4C 63455 June-69.jpg
    xD4C 63455 June-69.jpg
    135.4 KB · Views: 1,769
  • xMcDonnell VFX fixed wing proposal.jpg
    xMcDonnell VFX fixed wing proposal.jpg
    93.5 KB · Views: 1,185
At what point did the F-15 design get the inlets that the F-15 was ultimately fitted with (you know with the inlet lips that can droop down at low speed, and high-AoA's, and droop up for high speed flight...)?

KJ Lesnick
 
...probably since the beginning since they were using variable geometry inlets well before that, at least with the F-4.
 
Just Call Me Ray,

I'm just curious because the drawings depicted do not appear to posses it
 
Just an assumption, that they just didn't bother to show that level of detail.

Actually the second to last picture seems to have nascent detail of a VG ramp.
 
I'll agree with that - they are artwork and usually dress over the little details such as panel lines, antennas, vents and the like. Those little details usually don't look too pretty in an advertising campaign ;D

My 2 cents worth - Mark
 
4 different intake ramp designs were studied prior to the final FX submission. The selected configuration (4) was the lightest and best performing up to Mach 2.2. Inlet (3) was better above Mach 2.2 but heavier.

So its quite likely that these early designs might have used one of the other inlet designs.
 
Overscan,

If I may ask, do you have any diagrams of the different inlet ramp designs?
 
No drawings. They are verbally described in F-15 PROPULSION SYSTEM DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT (AIAA 75-1042); the same basic inlet but different ramp arrangements and fixed capture area/variable capture area.

Development Program for the F-15 Inlet (AIAA 74-1061) has detailed information on the actual inlet design and its features and benefits.
 
Hi All -

A couple of pages out of the McAir Report "Design, Integration and Testing of the F-15" dated Sept. 1974
from the Greater St. Louis Aviation Museum Archives.

Enjoy the Day! Mark



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • McDonnell Douglas F-15 Configuration Evolution.jpg
    McDonnell Douglas F-15 Configuration Evolution.jpg
    92.9 KB · Views: 2,522
  • McDonnell Douglas F-15 - Wing Wind Tunnel Analysis .jpg
    McDonnell Douglas F-15 - Wing Wind Tunnel Analysis .jpg
    83.7 KB · Views: 1,758
Hi All -

Some artwork from the Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum archives showing the design evolution of the McDonnell Douglas F-15.

Based on the photo print numbers, this appears to be a decent timeline at what was transpiring.

I have some more to scan from this set but those pretty much fit into the final design layout though you'll see some of the details disappear or morph into what we all know as the Eagle.

Enjoy the Day! Mark



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4C 51839 Feb-19-68.jpg
    xD4C 51839 Feb-19-68.jpg
    178.6 KB · Views: 1,593
  • xD4C 51202.jpg
    xD4C 51202.jpg
    223.7 KB · Views: 1,044
  • xD4C 51203 Mar-7-68.jpg
    xD4C 51203 Mar-7-68.jpg
    302.2 KB · Views: 1,697
  • xD4C 51204.jpg
    xD4C 51204.jpg
    179.9 KB · Views: 1,065
  • xD4C 58890.jpg
    xD4C 58890.jpg
    168.4 KB · Views: 2,061
  • xD4C 58894.jpg
    xD4C 58894.jpg
    176.5 KB · Views: 1,826
...and a few more...



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4C 78537 Jan-13-71.jpg
    xD4C 78537 Jan-13-71.jpg
    216 KB · Views: 1,633
  • xD4C 78363 Jan-7-71.jpg
    xD4C 78363 Jan-7-71.jpg
    217.8 KB · Views: 1,203
  • xD4C 59529 Mar-13-69.jpg
    xD4C 59529 Mar-13-69.jpg
    216 KB · Views: 1,176
  • xD4C 59406.jpg
    xD4C 59406.jpg
    231.3 KB · Views: 1,079
Was dreaming to see 'em in color till got my first Warbirdetch on F-15...and dreams come true. Thanks, Mark!
 
That is very interesting Mark, I will try to reconcile with the timeline I put together before.
 
Also note xD4C 58890 and xD4C 58894 show the same design with wingtips that I guess fold down in high speed flight (judging by the engine intake position) - but what is up with the engine nozzles? They appear to be extended rearwards with a gap in the second picture?
 
Wonderful stuff you've been scanning from the McDonnell Douglas archives Mark. It all makes me dream of a coffee-table style book that would feature 200 pages worth of full-page paintings... What a treat it would be!
 
Hi All -

A few more McDonnell Douglas bits of art showing the evolution of the FX/F-15. Note on some of the drawings that there is a fence on the upper outboard edge of the intake - I had not noticed that before.

Enjoy the Day! Mark



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4C 70835 Mar-23-70.jpg
    xD4C 70835 Mar-23-70.jpg
    145.6 KB · Views: 705
  • xD4C 70678 Mar-16-70.jpg
    xD4C 70678 Mar-16-70.jpg
    131 KB · Views: 2,223
  • xD4C 69619 Oct-28-69.jpg
    xD4C 69619 Oct-28-69.jpg
    158.9 KB · Views: 670
  • xD4C 67402 Nov-5-69.jpg
    xD4C 67402 Nov-5-69.jpg
    200.3 KB · Views: 826
  • xD4C 63546 Jun-17-69.jpg
    xD4C 63546 Jun-17-69.jpg
    151.2 KB · Views: 788
  • xD4C 63545 Jun-17-69.jpg
    xD4C 63545 Jun-17-69.jpg
    170.4 KB · Views: 817
  • xD4C 63454 Jun-16-69.jpg
    xD4C 63454 Jun-16-69.jpg
    234.6 KB · Views: 885
  • xD4C 60442 Apr-7-69.jpg
    xD4C 60442 Apr-7-69.jpg
    166.7 KB · Views: 1,141
...and a few more...



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum Archives via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4E 511037 Jul-3-69.jpg
    xD4E 511037 Jul-3-69.jpg
    230.7 KB · Views: 556
  • xD4E 511036 Jul-3-69.jpg
    xD4E 511036 Jul-3-69.jpg
    136.1 KB · Views: 534
  • xD4E 511035 Jul-3-69.jpg
    xD4E 511035 Jul-3-69.jpg
    279.2 KB · Views: 540
  • xD4E 511033 Jul-3-69.jpg
    xD4E 511033 Jul-3-69.jpg
    190.4 KB · Views: 644
  • xD4C xxxxxx.jpg
    xD4C xxxxxx.jpg
    197.5 KB · Views: 662
  • xD4C 82414 May-17-71.jpg
    xD4C 82414 May-17-71.jpg
    412 KB · Views: 697
  • xD4C 76152C Dec-15-70.jpg
    xD4C 76152C Dec-15-70.jpg
    199 KB · Views: 2,294
  • xD4C 76151 Oct-8-70.jpg
    xD4C 76151 Oct-8-70.jpg
    171.8 KB · Views: 739
Great stuff as usual Mark.

With regard to the dates and numbers, where do these come from? The sequence of numbers and the dates are slightly inconsistent.
 
Hi Overscan -

The file names are the numbers stamped (and sometimes dated) on the back of the print. I agree on the inconsistencies but hope to find at some point a master list which we can them use to Id them and see what else they tie to. 'Til then....

HTH! Mark
 
xD4C 70835 Mar-23-70.jpg really looks like an early study - it seems out of place in 1970. The wings and intakes are quite different. Possibly its related to the fence on the intake on the other contemporary pics - clearly struggling with some aerodynamic issue there - perhaps they reconsidered the wing shape and cut back the intakes as alternative?
 
Greetings All -

I found a few more prints in the Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum archives of early F-15 display models.

Enjoy the Day! Mark


Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xD4C 83937 Jul-1-71.jpg
    xD4C 83937 Jul-1-71.jpg
    316.7 KB · Views: 576
  • xD4C 81882 Apr-23-71.jpg
    xD4C 81882 Apr-23-71.jpg
    309 KB · Views: 586
  • xD4C 81878 Apr-23-71.jpg
    xD4C 81878 Apr-23-71.jpg
    354.1 KB · Views: 664
Greetings All -

A recent find in the Museum archives was a brochure with artwork of the upcoming F-15 in an earlier form. Note the small fences on the outboard edge of the intakes, the shape of the vertical fin and the ventral fins still part of the design. At some point I'll scan the whole brochure and post a link where you can download it from.

Enjoy the Day! Mark



Source:
Greater St. Louis Air & Space Museum via Mark Nankivil
 

Attachments

  • xF-15 early design cutaway.jpg
    xF-15 early design cutaway.jpg
    322.6 KB · Views: 2,745
McDonnell Douglas F-15 litograph (ca.1970)
 

Attachments

  • mhp1357.jpg
    mhp1357.jpg
    62.7 KB · Views: 682
I have separated out the various FX contenders from other companies from the McDonnell-Douglas FX design, as significant information on the evolution of the McDonnell-Douglas FX design has become available.


Here's some new information on the earliest origins of the F-15 configuration.


Source:
Gerald Balzer Collection via Mark Nankivil.
 

Attachments

  • FX Fighter Studies & Tests-a.jpg
    FX Fighter Studies & Tests-a.jpg
    121.8 KB · Views: 829
Here is the podded engine VG configuration 199-100-1 and fuselage engine VG configuration 199-102-1. These are from a report dated 31 May 1968.



Source:
Gerald Balzer Collection via Mark Nankivil.
 

Attachments

  • McAir Model 199-100-1 General Arrangement-a.jpg
    McAir Model 199-100-1 General Arrangement-a.jpg
    239.1 KB · Views: 1,096
  • McAir Model 199-102-1 internal arrangement-a.jpg
    McAir Model 199-102-1 internal arrangement-a.jpg
    372.5 KB · Views: 1,004
Some of the F-4 Phantom II (Model 98) variants listed in the drawing above...
 

Attachments

  • Model98EA.jpg
    Model98EA.jpg
    33.1 KB · Views: 1,158
  • Model98ED.jpg
    Model98ED.jpg
    37.9 KB · Views: 1,091
overscan said:
Interestingly the drawings don't match the VG artwork we have to date:

I can see why the second one picture is different, but what about the first and third? To my (perhaps untrained) eyes they look remarkably similar to the aircraft in the cutaway view... :(
 
Side by side - you may be correct. Intake looks different, fixed wing root sweep a bit wrong, but the rest is close. Perhaps the vertical tails are different and a fraction further forward in the artwork too.
 

Attachments

  • FX VG.jpg
    FX VG.jpg
    94.3 KB · Views: 744
Just at a glance, the intakes are different, as is the leading edge of the swept-back wing. Also, the tail booms extend back further beyond the nozzles in the drawing than in the painting.
 
Greetings All -

A visit to Gerry Balzer last week and a review of his folder of F-15 photos and documents uncovered the following drawings of designs and configurations during the development process. Interestingly, the initial starting point according to one of the documents was a variable sweep wing and podded engines. I wonder if that was the case with the loss of the F-14 contract to Grumman and whatever came out of the Model 225 development. Regardless, it wasn't long before the swing wing went away and the fixed wing ruled.

Enjoy the Day! Mark
 

Attachments

  • zMcAir FX Study Configurations.jpg
    zMcAir FX Study Configurations.jpg
    425.8 KB · Views: 908
  • zMcAir FX - Podded Engine Optimization.jpg
    zMcAir FX - Podded Engine Optimization.jpg
    213.1 KB · Views: 878
  • zMcAir Model 199-100-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-100-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    227.1 KB · Views: 723
  • zMcAir Model 199-101-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-101-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    229.3 KB · Views: 631
  • zMcAir Model 199-102-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-102-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    228.5 KB · Views: 650
  • zMcAir Model 199-102-1 Interior Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-102-1 Interior Arrangement.jpg
    338.3 KB · Views: 631
  • zMcAir Model 199-104-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-104-1 General Arrangement.jpg
    213.4 KB · Views: 1,102
  • zMcAir Model 199-104-1 Interior Arrangement.jpg
    zMcAir Model 199-104-1 Interior Arrangement.jpg
    330.9 KB · Views: 923
Cool stuff. So what we had was indeed the Model 199-102. The leading edge was probably straight in the painting because of the angle of view; the extending booms may have been a mistake by the artist.
 
overscan said:
Side by side - you may be correct. Intake looks different, fixed wing root sweep a bit wrong, but the rest is close. Perhaps the vertical tails are different and a fraction further forward in the artwork too.

Interesting, it looks like some early western speculation about the Ram K/Su-27 prototypes based upon satellite photos.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom