Various US military transport projects

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,551
Reaction score
2,755
GD Convair 1,500,000 lb gross weight nuclear-powered transport from 1967 - 4-engines, 2 reactors

NUCLEAR PROPULSION FOR AIRCRAFT
by J. M. WILD
General Dynamics/Convair
San Diego, California
AlAA Paper
NO. 67-508
 

Attachments

  • GD-Convair-nuke-1500000lb.jpg
    GD-Convair-nuke-1500000lb.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 1,095

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,219
Reaction score
1,051
Surprisingly, the US military hasn't given up on the Boeing YC-14 concept altogether. In a paper entitled Future Need for VTOL/STOL Aircraft published by the Defense Science Board Task Force in July 2007, the C-14 concept is analysed as part of a comparative study between various forms of "heavy-lift aircraft suitable for mounted aerial maneuver."

The design is compared to the unbuilt AMC-X which was supposed to replace the C-130 Hercules at one point, and the tilt-rotor, pictured in the form of a 30-ton design.
 

Attachments

  • C-14.jpg
    C-14.jpg
    122.3 KB · Views: 869
  • tilt-rotor.jpg
    tilt-rotor.jpg
    140.5 KB · Views: 836

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,380
Reaction score
995
Thanks Steph for your reply!

[quoteThe design is compared to the unbuilt AMC-X which was supposed to replace the C-130 Hercules at one point]

I don't think I have heard of this AMC-X competition/study! Do you have more on this and the designs studied? Please PM me Steph if you do :)

Regards
Pioneer
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,219
Reaction score
1,051
Here is a proposal for a small military tilt-wing assault transport (or so it seems from the image) which I haven't been able to identify.

I would be tempted to attribute it to Boeing Vertol, as it doesn't seem to resemble similar Bell projects of the same era... but I'd need some other opinions on that.

So for now it will remain in this generic topic until we know more about it. Thanks for any help on the subject!
 

Attachments

  • unidentified tilt-rotor small.jpg
    unidentified tilt-rotor small.jpg
    173.1 KB · Views: 579

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,219
Reaction score
1,051
Another view of what seems to be the same project:
 

Attachments

  • unidentified tilt-rotor 2 small.jpg
    unidentified tilt-rotor 2 small.jpg
    321.8 KB · Views: 563

yasotay

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2006
Messages
3,239
Reaction score
2,263
I agree that it is most likely a Boeing effort.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,380
Reaction score
995
Stargazer2006 said:

Thank you Stephen, you're a gentleman!!
My only concern with this concept is the United States obsession with every thing needing to be stealth!
I can understand that there would be specific times were stealth on a transport aircraft would be warranted when penetrating enemy aerospace. But this perceived need for 'everything' stealth means a quantum jump in already ridiculously expensive modern transport/cargo aircraft - aka C-17 and A400M!
How much will this obsession with stealth impact on the STOL performance of such a design? How much additional expense will be added to the maintenance and mission time for a trash hauler? And probably most important, how many actual aircraft will the USAF be able to afford to replace the venerable and simple C-130 Hercules??

Regards
Pioneer
 

Spook

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
148
Reaction score
23
Stargazer2006 said:
Here is a proposal for a small military tilt-wing assault transport (or so it seems from the image) which I haven't been able to identify.

I would be tempted to attribute it to Boeing Vertol, as it doesn't seem to resemble similar Bell projects of the same era... but I'd need some other opinions on that.

So for now it will remain in this generic topic until we know more about it. Thanks for any help on the subject!

Sir,

Can this plane be in a category for the AMC-X program, since it was a program to replace C-130, i am not quite sure this strange design could take a place and of course the payload that C-130 could carry. Would you please explain more about it?

Regards,
AK
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,219
Reaction score
1,051
I don't think it is related to AMC-X. It is a much smaller aircraft, it is armed, and is probably meant to carry assault troops.
 

Spook

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jul 6, 2012
Messages
148
Reaction score
23
Thanks a lot, but could it be another design proposal along side the other designs such as very well known V-22?
Could it be related to this topic though they designs mentioned in this article did not have a ability to carry troops.

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1309.0/all.html
Thank you,
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,219
Reaction score
1,051
The design and artwork all point to the early- to mid-1970s.

Later than LIT (Light Intra-theater Transport) but earlier than JVX... I'd say a contemporary to the Navy's Type A.
 

RAP

ACCESS: Top Secret
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Messages
738
Reaction score
678
Convair Transport System 600 proposal

Sorry for the quality of the photos, looks like the seller purposely made them out of focus.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/rare-Convair-San-Diego-1959-TURBOJET-TRANSPORT-SYSTEM-600-proposal-to-USAF-/311671751734?hash=item4891158436:g:z2gAAOSwdzVXp8Vf
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    170.2 KB · Views: 177
  • s-l1600a.jpg
    s-l1600a.jpg
    154 KB · Views: 157
  • s-l1600b.jpg
    s-l1600b.jpg
    175.6 KB · Views: 178

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
29,203
Reaction score
7,164
From NASA report 19780019103,

here is a collection of advanced aircraft studied in 1978.
 

Attachments

  • a.png
    a.png
    400.3 KB · Views: 148

Planejunk1944

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jun 22, 2022
Messages
14
Reaction score
58
Here’s the photos. I goofed.
 

Attachments

  • 8F23E1D2-6577-4010-A808-CD353E7D83BA.jpeg
    8F23E1D2-6577-4010-A808-CD353E7D83BA.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 69
  • 0787337F-4D30-4062-B5A8-3011CBFA5B6B.jpeg
    0787337F-4D30-4062-B5A8-3011CBFA5B6B.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 57
  • 1F904194-9201-4333-A8A5-7E01D11C201F.jpeg
    1F904194-9201-4333-A8A5-7E01D11C201F.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 60
  • 8C60B600-79C7-4CE9-8EC0-ACFE3F8A874E.jpeg
    8C60B600-79C7-4CE9-8EC0-ACFE3F8A874E.jpeg
    990.5 KB · Views: 56
  • 91DD0EC6-9A79-4BC3-81DC-6BA2990E4275.jpeg
    91DD0EC6-9A79-4BC3-81DC-6BA2990E4275.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 63
  • 6D485181-CD29-413F-8003-DB34DC7F1AFD.jpeg
    6D485181-CD29-413F-8003-DB34DC7F1AFD.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 75

sienar

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 8, 2009
Messages
767
Reaction score
498
This sounds like an internal Air Force study, but maybe it comes from somewhere else? The attack vehicle carried by the aircraft is strange.
sac crew rescue.png
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
29,203
Reaction score
7,164
Why you didn't mention the source,it's Flying magazine,not secret,and which year ?.
 

Similar threads

Top