• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

US Supersonic Transport (SST) Program 1960-1971

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
2,398
Reaction score
164
Finally Boing added horizontal tail stabilizer and front wing with flap to the SCAT15F.


Please enjoy Miss SST.
I remember Miss SST and the made for TV movie that came from. As I also recall, one way they tried to make the plane for the movie look different from the Lockheed SST was to hang a set of 747 engines off of it. I'm not sure they didn't use a L-2000 cockpit mockup for the movie set as well, though.
that would be extraordinary. Mind you, the L-2000 mockup was dumped by Lockheed to the FAA, which brought it to its Oklahoma Office headquarters and used for passenger evacuation tests. That was in the early 70's. After the tests it stayed there, dilapidated, until it was finally scrapped.

More generally the L-2000 and 2707-300 mockups got really extraordinary (if not sad) adventures long after Lockheed lost to Boeing, and then Boeing lost to Mondale and Proxmire in the spring of 1971.
Both full-scale mockups were, after all, the closest thing from a SST America ever had.

 
Last edited:

taildragger

You can count on me - I won a contest
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
203
Reaction score
27
Hi! Douglas 2229 SST model in Museum of Flying Santa Monica.

Its interesting that the Douglas 2229 looks more like the B-70 than does the NA60 from North American. I've read contemporary accounts discussing how the NA60 built on NAA's B-70 experience, but it's missing the fold-down wingtips and central engine box adopted by Douglas.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Hi! Douglas 2229 SST model in Museum of Flying Santa Monica.

Its interesting that the Douglas 2229 looks more like the B-70 than does the NA60 from North American. I've read contemporary accounts discussing how the NA60 built on NAA's B-70 experience, but it's missing the fold-down wingtips and central engine box adopted by Douglas.
Yes Douglas 2229 SST was designed based on compression lift theory same as B-70.
Fuselage tail shape of Douglas 2229 looks like North American NAC60.
I think this shape increased vertical tail stabilizer area.
 
Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Mid 1963
NASA requested Boeing and Lockheed to conduct a comparative study on the four plans SCAT17, SCAT4, SCAT16, and SCAT15.
The first Image top to bottom
SCAT4
SCAT17 later became B2707-300, L2000 and NAC60
SCAT16 later became B2707-200
SCAT15 later became SCAT15F

SCAT4 was Richard Whitcomb's idea. SCAT4 was a very advanced design.
I can see following SCAT4 shapes.
(1)Six engine type
(2)Vertical and horizontal tail stabilizer with 4 engine type

 

Attachments

Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286

Attachments

Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Hi!
NAA company showing their 1963-64 proposals.
And NAC2000 SST.


 

Attachments

Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Here is an interesting 1974 NASA report on testing a T-Tailed 733-290 like configuration, which I find even nicer than the 733-290. I believe it’s the same model as this one :

SST_model_in_Wind_Tunnel.jpg

here is the model scale plan extracted from the report:

t-tailled-733-290.png

As noted by Skybolt before in post #224, T-tail was tested for the 733 before, being rejected because of deep-stall problem, But this was re-investigated later after the end of SST program to see if CCV would solve the problem , here an interesting extract:

The present study is part of an overall effort by the NASA to provide the technology base for the development of advanced supersonic vehicles. The configuration concept which is the subject of this paper is a derivative of one studied in the National SST (supersonic transport) program (references 1 and 2) and traces its ancestry to the SCAT 16 configuration of the SCAT
(supersonic commercial air transport) studies (reference 3). As studied in the SST program, the concept exhibited one of the highest ratios of payload to gross weight of all those submitted for evaluation.
The dominant feature of the configuration is its non-integrated, variable-sweep wing. The variable-sweep feature was utilized to provide high
levels of low-speed lift, good subsonic flight efficiency, and good supersonic
cruise efficiency with a relatively small, highly loaded wing which would
involve less structural design uncertainty than would the lightly loaded, large wings of competing concepts.
The primary reason for abandoning the non-integrated, variable-sweep concept during its development was a conflict between longitudinal stability
criteria of that time, and effects of the engine exhaust on the horizontal tail. Placement of the horizontal tail in a high, or T-tail, position would have eliminated adverse thermal and acoustic effects of the jet on the tail and would have prevented a venturi-like suck-down of the horizontal tail as the exhaust jet streamed between it and the ground during takeoff rotation, both of which were problems for a low-tail configuration.
However, a T-tail was generally known to produce a deep-stall problem as the tail dropped into the wake of the stalled wing and became ineffective. Because "stick pusher"
or attitude-limiting systems, which are dependent upon attitude and pitch- rate sensing, were not then considered permissible in commercial aircraft, the contractor conducting the SST study ultimately took the alternate route of integrating the wing and horizontal tail, and suspending the engine nacelles from the latter, before abandoning the variable-sweep approach altogether. Since that time, developments in stability criteria and in aero- electronic technology and an increased emphasis on CCV (control-configured vehicles) have opened the path to serious study of a T-tail solution of the problems of the variable-sweep SST.
 
Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Oh super!! Thanks a lot.
This tail shape was same as B727, but engine lcation is diffenent.

press この動画はyoutubeでご覧下さい。

 
Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286

Attachments

Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
"[B]Chris Sloan[/B]‏ @[B]airchive[/B] Original Boeing 2707 SST model in the 1964-68 AstroJet livery on display at the American Airlines Annual Leadership Conference Expo courtesy of the C.R. Smith Museum."

D0VdjMPWkAAhUkr.jpgD0VdjMPXgAIuFjq.jpg

Btw, I (we :) ) keep posting stuff in this monster thread, but if modos find it inapropriate i'll stop. For sure the thread is a wealth of infos on the SST, excellent reference, but it's also getting difficult to follow due to size and images posted 2 or even 3 times in the thread (my bad too...).
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
galgot-san!
How about Douglas 2229 official models?
There are three models, each models have little different shape?

 

Attachments

Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
I think its the same design. Only , one model shows it in cruise supersonic configuration ( wing tips moved down like XB-70, and windshield in up position), while the others are in lower speed configuration.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Left side model's cockpit upper fuselage is rounded and canard seems to be small. And fuselage each side windows are 71 where other two windows are 84/85.
Left side model is short. It's a long range version same as L2000-7A?
 

Attachments

Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Left side model's cockpit upper fuselage is rounded and canard seems to be small. And fuselage each side windows are 71 where other two windows are 84/85.
Left side model is short. It's a long range version same as L2000-7A?
Ah yes ! didn't noticed that. Would be nice to know what is writen of the coper plates on the stands... if they have something different from each other.
EDIT : seems its all writen "Douglas SST" ...

Btw, never really checked Douglas 2229 history. Wikipedia page is quite detailled :
"...After studying the design, Douglas concluded that the SST would not work economically, and declined to enter the Model 2229 in the National Supersonic Transport (NST) program in 1963."
Wise guys :)...
 
Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286

Attachments

Last edited:

taildragger

You can count on me - I won a contest
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
203
Reaction score
27
Btw, never really checked Douglas 2229 history. Wikipedia page is quite detailled :
"...After studying the design, Douglas concluded that the SST would not work economically, and declined to enter the Model 2229 in the National Supersonic Transport (NST) program in 1963."
Wise guys :)...
[/QUOTE]
R.G Davies, who worked in marketing at Douglas, based a book on why SSTs would never make sense.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
A renowned Japanese scholar said: “Stupid people and engineers want to make fast and big things.”:D


Engineers are really hard work.
First he needs to have enough talent.
If he doesn't show his originality, he can't satisfy his customers.
His proposal is the best of all proposals and must be feasible.
Careful attention is required so as not to make mistakes.
He must study every day to get the latest information.
His work is really sober(Planning, Calculation, Development, Integration, Simulation, trade off study and make Fabrication/testing sequence), and he has to work hard until late at night.
Sometimes he has to sacrifice his weekend fun.
If something happens, he first thinks it is his responsibility.
 
Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
I’m looking for infos about the wing fixed part leading edge of model 733-197.
On the plan sold at:
One can see this :
197LE.png
and also on this image :
197wing.png
from this document:

My question is , how can the leading edge go from sharp edge to "bulbous".
I don’t understand how the section can go from sharp to round…
Only found this illustration of something a bit similar (changing the LE section) , some complicated Krueger flaps ?
slide-13.jpg
I don’t even understand exactly how these work, as the skin lay flat when closed, then its curved when opened…
Could it be this kind of thing on the 733-197 wing ?

Edit:
Ok, the example above show 747 Krueger flaps, here better image :
710x528_14060637_8167925_1461357208.jpg.gif
Patent here :
Still, don't think it would work on the -197 drawing, as it would have to bend the surface much more.
Plus it looks completely closed on the underside on the -197 drawing.
So maybe something like that :
733-197KruegerflapsMaybe.png
 
Last edited:

TomcatViP

Hellcat
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
860
Reaction score
42
Look at section f-f (LERX) and think at the sweep angle of blended section. The extended part is just hidden inside the outer shape and deployed to increase alpha tolerence before flow separation.

On the mig, the flap is rotated from a tangent recessed position. Nothing prevent you to carve a volume on the underside to have that flap tip bulbous.

 
Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
While googling , the search engine presented me a small image preview included in this document :
25 $ to download ! :(

anyway here is the small image :
IMG_4042.PNG
Think is 733-636. Funny, I thought all arrow wings models would be numbered 969-xxx.
Looks like a -300 with delta wing swapped to a arrow wing.
 

Johnbr

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
736
Reaction score
78
Fast airplanes also have to fly well at low speeds to take off and land. Here, a technician is installing the nose landing gear on a proposed High-Speed Civil Transport model to prepare it for high-angle-of-attack tests in the 14- by 22-Foot Tunnel. The test section walls were in their closed position for these tests.
sst.jpg
 

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Fast airplanes also have to fly well at low speeds to take off and land. Here, a technician is installing the nose landing gear on a proposed High-Speed Civil Transport model to prepare it for high-angle-of-attack tests in the 14- by 22-Foot Tunnel. The test section walls were in their closed position for these tests.
Aie !! My hears ! No shouting please ... :)

This one is from after 1971, not sure if it's Boeing or MDD.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Hi!

Wing is very large. Perfectly different dimension.
 

Attachments

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Hi!
I compare Boeing B2707-300 prototype and operational.
Operational model is about 3.5m longer than prototype model.Wing front view slightly changed. Horizontal tail stabilizer moved higher position.
Outboard aileron area enlarged.
Operatinal model fuselage shape looks like L2000-7B.
Prototype model range : 3575nm, Operational model range : 3530nm

Source : Aireview magazine and...
 

Attachments

Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Hi Blackkite San,
Sorry , i this one shows the -300 as intented as in late 1968 / early 1969, not specifically the prototype.
See configurations released by Boeing to the press at the period, and published with the very detailled cutaway plan in several magazines at these times, namely Interavia, AviationMagazine,
Flight International and Japanese AirReview (i think...).
Then in Late 1969 another configuration is released, with a new tailplane geometry. One short 280 ft production model, then a 286 ft prototype and a 298 ft Production model.
See the following montage, I love SST ornithology :
-300 evolution.jpg
 
Last edited:

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
5,802
Reaction score
286
Ummm..........very difficult.;)
Horizontal tail stabilizer shape!!
Boeing planned domestic version and intercontinental version same as Lockheed L2000-7A and 7B?(Same as Douglas 2229?)
 
Last edited:

galgot

CLEARANCE: Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
486
Reaction score
198
Website
galgot.com
Ummm..........very difficult.;)
Horizontal tail stabilizer shape!!
Boeing planned domestic version and intercontinental version same as Lockheed L2000-7A and 7B?(Same as Douglas 2229?)
I don't know for the 2707-300, but back on the 733-290 yes, I saw two versions intended mentioned on the same Boeing 733-290 presentation.
One domestic and one intercontinental. Same dimensions but different weight (fuel and pax capacity I suppose).
Sorry don't have the numbers, documents are not mines.

Edit : got the infos , here you go,
planned was 733-290 "Intercontinental" with
230 pax
500000 lbs Max ramp weight
219900 lbs operating empty weight
320000 lbs Max Ldg weight
264180 lbs Fuel capacity
16-40" main gear tires size

And 733-291 "transcontinental" (domestic) with
209 pax
425000 lbs Max ramp weight
205900 lbs operating empty weight
302000 lbs Max Ldg weight
204100 lbs Fuel capacity
16-38" main gear tires size

Both same external dimensions/shape and same GE4 engines.
 
Last edited:
Top