MRF, JAST, Misc. Fighter studies

[flateric]

Rockwell 1996 patent of definitely something carrier-based with a middle 80th stealth technology

 

[TinWing]

This design is something of a mystery. By 1996, shortly before the Boeing takeover, Rockwell could hardly be counted as a "prime contractor" anymore.

The design itself is also hard to categorize. The details indicate that it is meant for carrier based operations, and it seems to have an afterburner as well. Although the timescale is appropriate, this doesn't seem to be a JAST/JSF proposal. Similarly, it seems to be too small - and too late - for the earlier cancelled A/FX.

Perhaps we should view this as the very last North American/Rockwell combat aircraft proposal.

 

[flateric]

And very, very, very OUTDATED

 

[Sundog]

For alot of these, I wasn't sure where to classify them since they weren't for production progam AFAIK.

1. This is from the 80's

2. This is from 1982. What's interesting is the exhaust nozzles are right behind the canard for USB, but I can't help thinking ducting losses would hurt the performance of this aircraft.

3. I think this is a generic USAF fighter. [Northrop's 1990 MRF proposal - Flateric]

4. This is a Boeing MRF design.

5. This is from a series of drawings by Keith Ferris that were made of various advanced USAF designs, I believe from the late '80s or early '90s.

6. This is a generic fighter design that I've found some PDF files on regarding advanced flight control technology. It looks to be, loosely, a single engine YF-23 type of fighter, at least that's what it reminds me of. I suppose I could put this in my tailless fighter thread since it doesn't have any vertical tails as well. [MACAIR/AFWL 1993 Aero Configuration/Weapons Fighter Technology" (ACWFT) program ACWFT 1204 Configuration - Flateric]

7,8. Here is an Oblique Wing Fighter Study

 

[flateric]

Rockwell 1992 tailless MRF study

 

[Matej]

6th is from MDD. Nice pictures however.

 

[Sundog]

Thanks for the info guys. I kind of wondered if the 3rd was a Northrop design, because it reminds me of the Northrop VSTOL single engine (JAST?) design that had a similar canard layout.

I forgot the YF-23 was a Northrop-McDD design. Considering McDD made the X-36, I should have guessed the advanced controls were from them. The PDF files I have show that layout, but instead of "dynamic (moveable) flight controls, it has the edges made of a material that I guess was similar to the YF-23's boundary layer control "material" in front of the inlets. There is some sort of mechanical system(valves?) that allow the flight control material to act solid or porous, so the airflow either thinks they're there or they aren't and by turning them "on" and "off" it allows differential lift, etc. This would allow the aircraft to fly without "moveable" control surfaces, which would enahnce it's stealthiness. I wonder if such technology would have been part of the X-44's wing?

 

[elmayerle]

I'm thinking that second design might have a reversed engine to simplify matters, though I'd expect a different inlet location if that was so. The other alternative would be something like Vought's tandem fan design that would allow some flow to be used for jet flaps on the canard and USB on the main wing.

 

[Kim Margosein]

The key is it is a patent application. It may not be to a specific requirement, but to just patent some concept.

 

[flateric]

Mystery solved

In 1994, two design studies were conducted to explore the benefits of applying AAW Technology to subsonic multi-role fighters. These studies applied AAW technology to wing designs that did not have the supersonic requirements of the earlier ATF study.

The second design study was conducted by Rockwell, North American Aircraft on the tailless multi-role fighter design, shown in Figure 11. The aircraft was a single seat, single engine design. The fighter employed thrust vectoring for low speed pitch and yaw control, and AAW technology for high speed pitch and yaw control. The wing had an aspect ratio of 4.0, 40o leading edge sweep and a 4 % thickness-to-chord ratio. The baseline non-AAW design had a TOGW of approximately 41,300 lbs. Application of the AAW concept reduced the resized fighter TOGW by 10.4%. Again, this translates into a savings of about $3.8 million per aircraft in production costs.

Miller, G.D., "AFW Design Methodology Study", Rockwell-Aerospace Report No. NA 94-1731, December 1994.

 

[AeroFranz]

looks like this aircraft's stepbrother:

http://www.google.com/patents?id=my0ZAAAAEBAJ&dq=394,039

 

[Spring]

It looks a bit like the original lockheed ATF rendering, before it was changed -due to unspecific issues-

So i would not say "outdated"

 

[JAZZ]

Part of the MRF studies by Rockwell

 

[Triton]

Larger version of previously posted artist's impression of Rockwell MRF (Multi-Role Fighter) concept.

Source: http://fire.prohosting.com/hud607/uncommon/reference/usa/concepts.html

 

[pesholito]

For alot of these, I wasn't sure where to classify them since they weren't for production progam AFAIK.

1. This is from the 80's

2. This is from 1982. What's interesting is the exhaust nozzles are right behind the canard for USB, but I can't help thinking ducting losses would hurt the performance of this aircraft.

3. I think this is a generic USAF fighter. [Northrop's 1990 MRF proposal - Flateric]

4. This is a Boeing MRF design.

5. This is from a series of drawings by Keith Ferris that were made of various advanced USAF designs, I believe from the late '80s or early '90s.

6. This is a generic fighter design that I've found some PDF files on regarding advanced flight control technology. It looks to be, loosely, a single engine YF-23 type of fighter, at least that's what it reminds me of. I suppose I could put this in my tailless fighter thread since it doesn't have any vertical tails as well. [MACAIR/AFWL 1993 Aero Configuration/Weapons Fighter Technology" (ACWFT) program ACWFT 1204 Configuration - Flateric]

7,8. Here is an Oblique Wing Fighter Study

Where is the first illustration taken from?
Thank you!

 

[Sundog]

Where is the first illustration taken from?
Thank you!

I forgot the name of it, it was that Israeli Defense magazine that was put out for a while. I have four issues around here somewhere.

 

[pesholito]

Where is the first illustration taken from?
Thank you!

I forgot the name of it, it was that Israeli Defense magazine that was put out for a while. I have four issues around here somewhere.

Both V/STOL concepts in the first picture are very interesting. The first one (I) looks like something taken out of the "Avatar" movie, but if you look carefully you can see swiveling nozzles at the end of the wings, like on a Harrier. The second one is like the predecessor of Lockheed's AJACS proposal. Thank you for the post!
Keep them coming!

 

[ouroboros]

Where is the first illustration taken from?
Thank you!

I forgot the name of it, it was that Israeli Defense magazine that was put out for a while. I have four issues around here somewhere.

Both V/STOL concepts in the first picture are very interesting. The first one (I) looks like something taken out of the "Avatar" movie, but if you look carefully you can see swiveling nozzles at the end of the wings, like on a Harrier. The second one is like the predecessor of Lockheed's AJACS proposal. Thank you for the post!
Keep them coming!

Looks like a thrust augmented lift ejector wing on the foreground concept, so perhaps this would be dated before the whole XFV-12 fiasco?

 

[Stargazer]

Initial post says 1980s, and the artwork style concurs with this, anyway.

Too bad we have no manufacturer's name for this amazing project... :-[

 

[quellish]

Rockwell 1992 tailless MRF study

Rockwell patents:
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=-GEoAAAAEBAJ
http://www.google.com/patents/about?id=my0ZAAAAEBAJ

 

[Pioneer]

looks like something taken out of the "Avatar" movie

pesholito - You took the words right out of my mouth!!

Would be interesting to findout more about this study!
It looks as if its tailplane is tilted and resting on the ground.

Regards
Pioneer

 

[hole in the ground]

Does anyone else think that it might be a "thrust augmentation wing" a la XFV-12?

Note the intakes for two turbofans (by the look of it) above the cockpit

 

[flateric]

One of Lockheed's JAST concepts

 

[LowObservable]

Most interesting - I wonder if that is related to the STOVL Strike Fighter study?

It's the only LM design that I have seen with two lift fans - gas driven I would guess.

 

[AeroFranz]

The picture shows an inlet located right behind the cockpit. Is that an auxiliary intake for hover operations?

 

[Matej]

Rockwell MRF

http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19980010494_1998044636.pdf

 

[InvisibleDefender]

One of Lockheed's JAST concepts

Actually, that is General Dynamics (Ft. Worth)

 

[Mr London 24/7]

Actually, that is General Dynamics (Ft. Worth)

Make's sense: it's planform and winglets have that GD 'Post-Model 100/Pre-ATF' windtunnel model look....

 

[fightingirish]

Tailless fighter proposal developed by Rockwell and submitted to MRF
Image courtesy JSF Program Office, 2010

Source: http://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/fighter/jsf/pics03.shtml

 

[InvisibleDefender]

Yes very much so. That is also pre-JAST.

Actually, that is General Dynamics (Ft. Worth)

Make's sense: it's planform and winglets have that GD 'Post-Model 100/Pre-ATF' windtunnel model look....

 

[Sundog]

I posted those pictures here a while back. They are from an IDF magazine that used to be sold back in the 80's. Not much info on them, other than, "Future Tech."

 

[quellish]

Some background on the relevant programs:
http://www.jsf.mil/history/his_prejast.htm