Northrop A-9 AX Design Evolution

Regarding the A-X/N-308/Turbo-pusher, do we have any performance figures? Speed, altitude, endurance, agility, G limits, etc? I've seen a few pictures but not numbers.
 
Northrop YA-9 photographs on the Flickr stream of

Keith Svendsen​

("Retired USAF flight test engineer and test program manager.")

Most of them taken at Edwards Air Force Base in 1972.

Nice photos of cockpit and front panel also.

[Note: for those interested, Keith has also many photos of other hot aircraft like F-20 Tigershark, AFTI/F-16, F-16XL in his Flickr stream (a few of them also visible in Tony Landis book about F-16XL).]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/147861202@N07/albums/72157692844053244/
 
Last edited:
Was it true that when the Su-25 was refered as the mirror image of the A-10 they were actually refering to the A-9? Something that has been bugging me for years. :confused:
 
bercr said:
Northrop YA-9A Cobra photo.
Click to expand...
The YA-9A never had any "popular" name at all.
Besides, "Cobra" was already actively in use for another Northrop product, the YF-17A.
 
Last edited:
Plus there was already a Cobra on active duty anyways.

AH1 Cobra.

The military generally tries to avoid having two peaces o gear call the same name after the M1 fun.
 
I know that picture showing the first Northrop YA-9 prototype (S/N 71-1367) was taken in November 1998, so I wonder what the actual restauration status at Edwards AFB is today? Here another picture from April 2006.
According to Google Maps and Microsoft Bing, it and its wings are still hanging there around at the scrapyard at Edwards AFB.
Link (Google Maps):
https://maps.app.goo.gl/nvrQVEshUr29JHZX6
 
Last edited:
fightingirish said:
According to Google Maps and Microsoft Bing, it and its wings are still hanging there around at the scrapyard museum outdoor storage yard at Edwards AFB.
Click to expand...
A/C 1 was originally on display at the Castle AFB museum; then later disassembled and relocated to Edwards.
A/C 2 was originally on display at the March Field museum and remains there today, albeit at the new museum location outside the fence.
 
zjz said:
Considering its age, I think the airframe looks to be in good condition .... no rust or whatsoever, maybe because of the dry weather?
Click to expand...
Yep, that part of California is a long way away from the ocean, so no salt air and very little humidity. It's why the big tank boneyard is in that part of California, and Davis-Mothan and Pima are in Arizona.
 
Filip7370 said:
Question here Northrop never considered placing a bid to the navy for navalised A-9.
Here is a drawing by Darthpanda in FD scale.
https://www.deviantart.com/darthpandanl/art/Northop-A-9A-357984012
Click to expand...
I'd guess that only the USMC would be interested in such a plane, and already had Harriers to do the job.

Where did the YA-9 keep the 30mm? same place as the A-10, so the nosegear needs to be off-center? That would interfere with the ability to launch from a carrier, and even as big as an LHD is, I don't think you could fly a loaded A-9 off the deck.
 
From Worthpoint
 

Attachments

  • 1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4.jpg
    1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4.jpg
    55.3 KB · Views: 76
  • 1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (1).jpg
    1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (1).jpg
    55.3 KB · Views: 70
  • 1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (2).jpg
    1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (2).jpg
    50.7 KB · Views: 60
  • 1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (3).jpg
    1_5afc9c449598475c9e802351d624acb4 (3).jpg
    66.3 KB · Views: 55
  • 1_b48923107bf7a40dbb3e79592868a509.jpg
    1_b48923107bf7a40dbb3e79592868a509.jpg
    63.9 KB · Views: 67
  • 1_b48923107bf7a40dbb3e79592868a509 (1).jpg
    1_b48923107bf7a40dbb3e79592868a509 (1).jpg
    69.5 KB · Views: 80
Filip7370 said:
Question here Northrop never considered placing a bid to the navy for navalised A-9.
Click to expand...

A bit of a late reply from me, but that's not how procurement works in the modern era. Contractors don't get to propose aircraft against a non-existent requirement and have a realistic chance of getting them adopted. The Navy had no requirement for a dedicated CAS aircraft in the 1970s, and no budget for one either.
 
TomS said:
A bit of a late reply from me, but that's not how procurement works in the modern era. Contractors don't get to propose aircraft against a non-existent requirement and have a realistic chance of getting them adopted. The Navy had no requirement for a dedicated CAS aircraft in the 1970s, and no budget for one either.
Click to expand...
Plus, they had A-7s, which did a really good job at every CAS type mission but loitering (and delivering 30mm cannon fire).
 
Scott Kenny said:
Plus, they had A-7s, which did a really good job at every CAS type mission but loitering (and delivering 30mm cannon fire).
Click to expand...
And, may I add, protection of both airframe and pilot; as well as redundancy.

Regards
Pioneer
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom