photogator said:Hi guys! First post. Here are some drawings of the Vought V507 with GE engines from the Vought archives. I checked all that I could find on this site for image size guidelines and did not find them. I hope the images are not too large.
QUANTUM1 said:Another source is Francillon's book on McDonnel Douglas. There is some basic info on the design. According to Francillon, the design was judged outstanding, very close to the winning one.
Matej said:Ouha. Do you really want this? If I start to post this stuff, nobody will stop me! ;D
photogator said:Thanks for the kind words. I got the during a visit to the Vought Archives.
They were from an executive brief on the program along with weapons loadout
configs and the same three views with Pratt engines.
I will try to be mindful of the posting sizes, thanks!
KJ_Lesnick said:What was the reasons that Rockwell's (who had the only fixed-wing design) competitor was rejected?
BTW: If anybody knows, why did McDonnell Douglas' model 225 -- which was an outstanding design allegedly -- lose?
F-14D said:Only McDonnell's and Grumman's designs were able to meet the Navy requirements, and McDonnell's only barely. Grumman's design was head and shoulders above everyone else's.
KJ_Lesnick said:F-14D said:Only McDonnell's and Grumman's designs were able to meet the Navy requirements, and McDonnell's only barely. Grumman's design was head and shoulders above everyone else's.
What qualities made McDonnell and Grumman's design able to meet the USN requirements, and what characteristics put Grumman's design "Head and Shoulders" above everybody else?
BTW: Can you clarify the question I asked earlier: When you said the F-100 got better only when the F-110 was competing with it, do you mean when the F-401 and F-100 were being developed? Or do you mean when the F-15C was being built in the late seventies and the new F-100 designs featured the revised electronic fuel control which made for nearly surge-free operation even in trouble-areas of the engine's performance envelope? If the former, how much of a thrust difference was there between the F-401 and F-100? And if the latter, why didn't the USN just use the F-100 with the necessary modifications?
I apparently asked that question in a different post not forum
Was the F-100 able to fly at a higher mach number than the F-401 (due to it's lower bypass-ratio)? Because, from what I remember, the F100 (and the plane that it propelled) was supposed to be able to achieve the same mach-numbers the MiG-25 could fly at...