Vought V-381 A3U Attack aircraft

[Andreas Parsch]

V-381 1952 Appareil embarqué d'attaque - Origine du XA3U-1

What is an "XA3U-1"? The same as ...

V-455 1962 Conception d'une variante d'assaut A3U du Crusader

... this attack variant of the F8U?

 

[devi]

I think, what Vought V-381 ---XA3U-1 competitor of Douglas XA4D-1 (Douglas Model
D-6??)

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

Vought 381, courtesy of what appears to be a collection at the National Archives of George Spangenberg's papers. It was postulated to BuAer as the A3U, the AU being an F4U variant and the A2U, derived from the F7U. It was another attempt at variable geometry. The wing tips could be tilted in flight to increase/decrease the aspect ratio/wing area as desired. More later.

 

[robunos]

Have to say, the fuselage looks very Grumman-like...


cheers,
Robin.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

I think, what Vought V-381 ---XA3U-1 competitor of Douglas XA4D-1 (Douglas Model
D-6??)

It was an unsolicited proposal in 1952 like the XA4D-1 (which had just then been put on contract), compared to it by BuAer, and rejected in early 1953.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

Two-Position Tip Concept Benefits:

 

[Stargazer2006]

V-381 1952 Appareil embarqué d'attaque - Origine du XA3U-1

What is an "XA3U-1"? The same as ... this attack variant of the F8U?

V-455 1962 Conception d'une variante d'assaut A3U du Crusader

Bernard Millot doesn't say that V-381 was actually the XA3U-1. In fact he says quite the contrary here:

V-381 1952 carrier-based attack aircraft, prefigures the XA3U-1 project
V-455 1962 A3U projected assault version of F8U

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

V-381 1952 Appareil embarqué d'attaque - Origine du XA3U-1

What is an "XA3U-1"? The same as ... this attack variant of the F8U?

V-455 1962 Conception d'une variante d'assaut A3U du Crusader

Bernard Millot doesn't say that V-381 was actually the XA3U-1. In fact he says quite the contrary here:

V-381 1952 carrier-based attack aircraft, prefigures the XA3U-1 project
V-455 1962 A3U projected assault version of F8U

I'm not sure what you are driving at here. Vought and/or the Navy referred to the V-381 informally as the A3U as indicated by the following George Spangenberg note. It is true that, unlike the A2U presentations, the designation A3U appears nowhere in the V-381 presentations and reports available to me.

The Navy's airplane suppliers would sometimes refer to a proposal by the designation that it would be assigned if a contract resulted. There was a Grumman "A2F" proposal, for example, that was a variant of the F11F. If the proposal was unsuccessful, then the prospective designation might be recycled for the next one. In the case of the "projected assault version of F8U", I've heard that it was referred to internally at Vought as the A3U, but the proposal brochure refers to it as the "Attack Crusader" and not A3U, although this was probably because the new DoD designation system was then in effect.

 

[Bill S]

I concur with Tommy. After looking thorough quite a number of Vought documents I have not seen the designation A3U used. The last A_U I have seen was a presentation for a family of A2U Cutlass designs starting with A2U-1 and ending with A2U-3. That presentation was Report No. 8690 "Presentation on "A2U" (F7U) Attack Airplane" dated August 27, 1952 and no doubt the one referenced in the Spangenberg notes provided previously in this topic.


The Crusader designs leading up to the A-7 were called "Attack Crusader" and did not put a designation old or new system in the documents.


For your viewing pleasure I am attaching a photo of the V-381 exploded view drawing from NARA II Spangenberg-Proposals files.


bill