North American XF-108 (F-108) Rapier

[RyanC]

Fire Control Operator (FCO) aka RIO aka GIB Seat.

 

[RyanC]

First is the Cockpit Module Mockup which contained the Pilot/FCO seats I showed earlier.

Next is a vision mockup that could swing up and down to show people how much the pilot could see at different angles of attack.

 

[flateric]

ohhh, what a beauty! thanks, thanks, thanks!

 

[RyanC]

The Turnaround Concept Art and what they thought the F-108 Simulator would be like.

I found a memo talking about the possibility of a two seat tandem TF-108 like the TF-102, and they rejected it for the following reasons:

1.) The Guy in Back or Instructor Pilot in Seat #2 would have poor visibility if they kept the basic F-108 airframe.

2.) If they redesigned it to have better visibility, either by humping the second seat or going to a tandem layout like TF-102; it would drive costs up and be essentially an all new airframe.

What they decided on was to train pilots first in the simulator, and then take them out for check rides in the actual F-108.

 

[RyanC]

J-93 display at the mockup.

 

[RyanC]

NAA Booths concerning concepts for the support of the F-108 Weapons System.

 

[RyanC]

Alternate Glamour Shot of the Mockup from a different folder from the Mockup Inspection Booklet.

Plus some art!

And with that, I'm done with F-108 pictures.

 

[circle-5]

As one of the "bunch of guys" at the archive, I want to thank Ryan for his expertise, enthusiasm and ability in finding cool pictures like these. Well done!

 

[RyanC]

*waves hand to Circle-5*

The big problem really we faced was that so much stuff was considered "Classified" and thus unavailable. For example, in my F-108 five box pull where I found this material; there were LOADS of red border "pulled notices".

 

[circle-5]

Well of course! If Al Quaeda decided to build and fly warplanes out of their caves in Talibanistan, they would obviously select a 50-year-old design that was never built. You can't be too careful.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Wow - just wow. Great pictures.

 

[shockonlip]

Thanks VERY MUCH Ryan!!
Just AWESOME!!

Larry

 

[Overkiller]

Fantastic pictures!

Many thanks for the posts, I'm preparing for an Anigrand F-108 build and those pics will be a big help with details!

cheers

Duncan

 

[Stargazer]

MAN!!!!!!!

You've gotta LOVE this place...


Thank you so, so, SO much for sharing this treasure with us! I can never tire of anything Rapier-related, and this is THE TOP!

 

[RyanC]

Then you'll like this:

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Thanks heaps, great work... I hope too see more of "Ryan's Rapier"!

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Thanks heaps, great work... I hope too see more of "Ryan's Rapier"!

You know, you *might* want to rephrase that

 

[Abraham Gubler]

Thanks heaps, great work... I hope too see more of "Ryan's Rapier"!

You know, you *might* want to rephrase that

;D

 

[RyanC]

I scanned in the entire briefing booklet for a briefing that NAA gave the USAF in 1959 or so which tried to get the F-108 restarted.

First page was fun. ;D

 

[SOC]

After looking at the image of the GAR-9 in the weapons bay, it looks like there is actually something more akin to the F-101Bs rotating pallet than an actual rotary launcher. There appears to be a central rotating cylinder with four attachment points, one of them holding the bay door. I wonder if that design would've survived through to production. The rotating door opening and closing at high speed could have some interesting stresses I'd think.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

Even if the program didn't get much farther than this mock ups, I have always been impressed that such an advance design could have been flying in the early 1960s. If the F-108 did enter service, certainly none would still be in use today, but it looks just as "modern" as many more recent designs in my opinion.

 

[Stargazer]

Even if the program didn't get much farther than this mock ups, I have always been impressed that such an advance design could have been flying in the early 1960s. If the F-108 did enter service, certainly none would still be in use today, but it looks just as "modern" as many more recent designs in my opinion.

I'm in total agreement with that. And it doesn't look any older a design than the F-111, for instance, which I consider older-looking.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

From Tony Buttler

I would like to endorse please what Circle-5 says about Ryan's help at the archive. In fact there were six of us at NARA and Ryan's scanning saved an incredible amount of time. Like all good historians he has a 'sixth sense' for finding great material.

The Sarah Clark Collection (Record Group 342) by the way has some great stuff. For example, one series of projects I came across but just did not have time to look at were several company's proposals from the late 1940s for a 600mph target drone.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

Most Excellent! Thanks much for the great postings/info.

Stuff like this along with this site - doesn't get any better than this!

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[archipeppe]

Absolutely great images.

I'm also REALLY impressed by the accuracy of the XF-108 mock-up, far more accurate than any '50s mock-up a sort of pre-prototype.

 

[elmayerle]

After looking at the image of the GAR-9 in the weapons bay, it looks like there is actually something more akin to the F-101Bs rotating pallet than an actual rotary launcher. There appears to be a central rotating cylinder with four attachment points, one of them holding the bay door. I wonder if that design would've survived through to production. The rotating door opening and closing at high speed could have some interesting stresses I'd think.

Other NAA drawings show it as a true rotary launcher, but angled such that the missile on the bottom is parallel to the line of flight for minimized air loads and stresses when launched. I'd love to see good details of that launcher so as to add it to my KPM vac-form.

 

[SOC]

If it was a true rotary launcher, what did the bay doors look like? Translating aft like the B-70, or more basic like the B-1 or YF-12?

 

[elmayerle]

ISTR that the door translated aft, but it's been a while since I've seen the illo. Still, it would be reasonable that they'd use similar mechanisms where possible.

 

[Andreas Parsch]

The Airborne Target missile.

Would have been carried in the internal weapons bay and launched to provide Mach 3+ targets with possibly programmed evasive manouvers to help train F-108 pilots in using their Radar/GAR-9s against Mach 3+ targets.

Thank you very much for this great find! One more mystery solved !

 

[Sferrin]

Thing I thought was interesting is they mentioned the possibility of shooting down ICBMs and Pluto/Slam type weapons.

 

[elmayerle]

Thing I thought was interesting is they mentioned the possibility of shooting down ICBMs and Pluto/Slam type weapons.

Would it be that much different from the Anti-ICBM weapon that was to be launched from the developed Arrow?

 

[Sferrin]

No idea. SOC has some info where they also looked at using the YF-12A Blackbird for anti-ICBM as well though I don't recall any specific missile being mentioned. Maybe an AIM-47 with a nuke? ???

 

[Rosdivan]

Thing I thought was interesting is they mentioned the possibility of shooting down ICBMs and Pluto/Slam type weapons.

Gave me the impression that they were just throwing out ideas regardless of whether they would actually work or not. I mean, seriously, throwing on a magnetometer and sonobuoy dispensers for ASW work? You've got to be kidding me.

 

[Sferrin]

Thing I thought was interesting is they mentioned the possibility of shooting down ICBMs and Pluto/Slam type weapons.

Gave me the impression that they were just throwing out ideas regardless of whether they would actually work or not. I mean, seriously, throwing on a magnetometer and sonobuoy dispensers for ASW work? You've got to be kidding me.

Hey, if the Su-34 can do it.

 

[SOC]

No idea. SOC has some info where they also looked at using the YF-12A Blackbird for anti-ICBM as well though I don't recall any specific missile being mentioned. Maybe an AIM-47 with a nuke? ???

They used the AN/ASG-18 to track Minuteman ICBMs fired out of Vandenberg. They never actually tried to shoot at one, but theoretically it was possible.

 

[Sferrin]

No idea. SOC has some info where they also looked at using the YF-12A Blackbird for anti-ICBM as well though I don't recall any specific missile being mentioned. Maybe an AIM-47 with a nuke? ???

They used the AN/ASG-18 to track Minuteman ICBMs fired out of Vandenberg. They never actually tried to shoot at one, but theoretically it was possible.

But what to shoot at it WITH is the question.

 

[SOC]

I know they never took it that far in practice, and I'm pretty sure that they never intended to do so anyway. It wasn't so much an intended capability demonstration as a technological feasibility study. Somebody got the bright idea t osee if it'd work, and it worked. With the F-12B cancelled, there was no reason to go any further with the idea anyway.

 

[Stargazer]

Ryan, you've done a marvelous job digging out these long secret/confidential documents and sharing them for all to see. I can't wait to burn a CD full to the brim with Rapier-themed material now...

 

[Abraham Gubler]

But what to shoot at it WITH is the question.

With the GAR-9 missile of course. The key thing to understand is they are talking about anti-ICBM via boost phase interception. When the missile is climbing into the air not when the RV is coming down from space. While intercepting a boosting V2 was too much for a Spitfire such an interception is not so difficult from a F-108 at over 60,000 feet with a GAR-9. Especially since the boosting ICBM is a very big IR and radar target and while rapidly accelerating is flying a non evasive course straight up towards the interceptor.

The problem with boost phase interception is having the interceptor in position within range of the launching point. But in the 1960s many ballistic missiles where only of intermediate range (a few thousand miles) and the F-108 or F-12 with their very high altitude, high speed cruise offered significant penetration capability into the enemies national air space.

So the F-108 would quite easily be able to patrol in the airspace near a launch for Soviet missiles from Cuba and SSBNs off the American coast. It could also offer patrols near similar threat areas in European Russia and the Far East from US bases near these regions.

Of course in the 1960s you would need to build a lot of F-108s to counter the Soviet’s missile buildup. You would also need to understand that you could achieve this at a higher management and command level (ie senior DoD, USAF and political leadership).

 

[Abraham Gubler]

ISTR that the door translated aft, but it's been a while since I've seen the illo. Still, it would be reasonable that they'd use similar mechanisms where possible.

I don't think that is possible with the F-108 because right aft of the missile bay is the main gear and its doors. The door on the missile bay clearly looks like the fourth position of a rotary launcher like the B-1 MPRL. So totally different to the Martin type rotary door bomb bay. In such a case the door would probably retract inwards to break the seal and then the launcher would rotate to expose a GAR-9 for launching. NAA were constantly redesigning the missile bay because Hughes were constantly changing the dimensions of the GAR-9. So it’s going to be hard to find a good configuration drawing of the bay.