Pioneer said:Please excuse my ignorance, but who was this San Diego Aircraft Engineering (Sandaire)?
Was it a subsidertary of Convair?
I would love to see more drawings/models/art work of this 'Stinger' design if anyone has them please!
Source: http://www.letsgoseeit.com/index/county/sd/san_diego/loc11/hallfame/row11/096/fink.htmFRANK WOLFE FINK
Born Philadelphia, Pa. January 13, 1905. His career in the aerospace industry began with the Curtiss Aeroplane and Motor Company. He joined Consolidated Aircraft in 1935 and was Project Engineer on the PBY Flying boat. He became known as the "Father of the B-24 Liberator Bomber" of WWII fame for his leadership in its development and high rate of production. He was Chief Engineer on the Convair 240 series transport and such famous advanced aircraft as the XFY-1 VTOL Pogo Stick, the XF2Y-1 Sea Dart water-based fighter, and many others including the early missile and electronics programs. Joined Ryan Aeronautical Company 1955 as vice president research engineering and pioneered new approaches to veritcal takeoff aircraft. In 1965 formed his own company, San Diego Aircraft Engineering, Inc. (SANDAIRE) to do engineering/consulting for the aerospace industry and the government.
Elected to the International Aerospace Hall of Fame 1968
Source: https://books.google.fr/books?id=Lmm5NwAACAAJ&dq=%22Sandaire%22+%22Aircraft%22&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0CCcQ6AEwAWoVChMIrYDIgOmoxwIVC1YaCh2_ZgheThe Stinger from San Diego Aircraft Engineering (Sandaire) was the lightest; it weighed 17,377 pounds. LTV's V-517 weighed 19,950 pounds. The Grumman heavyweight weighed in at a hefty 37,353 pounds and lacked vertical takeoff ability. As most of the designs were significantly below the gross weights of contemporary aircraft, they could easily be defined as lightweight fighters.
O'Rourke gave Sandaire some desired characteristics. He asked if the company could meet his design with an airplane using the YJ101 engine. It could not. Sandaire took the basic design of its v/stol submission and used a single engine in it, without the lift engines that were in its Stinger design (For a comparison of O'Rourke's and Sandaire's characteristics see table 7-1.) Whereas Vietnam showed that the top speeds above Mach 2 were useless, the air war showed that a supersonic cruise was a desirable trait. O'Rourke's desire for the ability to cruise in intermediate power (without afterburner) at Mach 1.6 reflects this experience. One can only speculate what the Navy Fighter Study group would have done if the Sandaire report had shown that it could meet the desired characteristics. Most likely the report would have been suppressed. After all, the purpose of the group was to defend the F-14, not create competition for it. The Sandaire design was not elevated to the level of the project created by the Naval Air Systems Command. Ernie Waller and Bob Thompson came closer to pushing their lightweight fighters into the Navy system.
Source: https://books.google.fr/books?id=Lmm5NwAACAAJA conceptual design of a CTOL SETOLS CAS aircraft has been developed. The significant design feature is the use of a Surface Effect Takeoff and Landing System (SETOLS) in lieu of a normal landing gear. The SETOLS is an integral part of the point design, thereby achieving full design compatibility. This feature provides takeoff and landing capability, on the inflated rubber fabric type trunk installed on the bottom of the fuselage, from any unobstructed area such as water, grass, soil, etc. Effective operation is thereby achieved with a Conventional Takeoff and Landing (CTOL) aircraft design in the Close Air Support (CAS) mission from forward bases where time prevents construction and repair of long, hard surface runways. Advanced state-of-the-art design, appropriate for 1995 IOC, has been incorporated. One advanced technology Pratt & Whitney STF 529 turbofan is used for propulsion and trunk pressurization. (Author).
hesham said:As I know.yes.
Riverghost said:Did this idea get applied to any other projects (this skirt concept) - i must say i am thoroughly intrigued, but would imagine it wouldn't be good for directional stability upon take-off/landing
He started his career at North American Corporation in Los Angeles and shortly thereafter, moved to San Diego to work for Ryan Aeronautical. He was the program manager for the Convair Model 48 CHARGER, also known as the COIN project at General Dynamics Convair starting in 1964. He held several other management positions in the industry before going to work for his father at San Diego Aircraft Engineering (SANDAIRE). He became the president of the company in 1974.
Air Force Investigates Air Cushion RPVs
USAF is modifying an Australian-built Jindivik drone in its search for a more-efficient recovery system
By Edward H. Kolcum
Miami Beach—U. S. Air Force is modifying an Australian Jindivik remotely piloted vehicle (RPV) with an air cushion landing system (ACLS) to determine if ACLS can overcome the inherently inefficient devices now used for RPV recovery. Full-scale ground tests of the ACLS Jindivik will begin this year leading to flight tests in 1975. Simultaneously, work will be under way by the Air Force Flight Dynamics
Laboratory to design an RPV from the start for ACLS. Details of the Jindivik program and several other applications of air cushions to the RPV were discussed at a recent ACLS symposium here sponsored by the University of Tennessee Space Institute and the Flight Dynamics Lab. At this point, ACLS for RPV is focused on the Jindivik based on studies made by Sandaire (San Diego Aircraft Engineering).