What is that STOVL aircraft

[hesham]

Hi,

I found that STOVL aircraft drawing in this site,but I ask about
if it is a real project or only created by Author.
http://www.eng.fsu.edu/~shih/eml4421/lecture%20notes/STOVL-Presentation.pdf

 

[starviking]

It looks like it's just the author's work, although it reminds me of some pre-Harrier studies...

 

[hesham]

Anther unknown STOVL aircraft,but I saw it here,where ?.


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930013291_1993013291.pdf

 

[Mike Pryce]

This is the Grumman RALS design for the US/UK ASTOVL MoU work of the late 1980s.

 

[hesham]

Thank you dear Harrier.

 

[Stargazer]

This is the Grumman RALS design for the US/UK ASTOVL MoU work of the late 1980s.

How come then it doesn't look like any of the pictures I have of the various Grumman RALS studies?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

This is the Grumman RALS design for the US/UK ASTOVL MoU work of the late 1980s.

How come then it doesn't look like any of the pictures I have of the various Grumman RALS studies?

Because its a different study to the ones you have pictures of? When did your personal picture collection become definitive?

Sometimes one bows to the knowledge of experts - in this case, Mike Pryce knows a vast amount more about the US/UK ASTOVL work than you do.

 

[Stargazer]

Because its a different study to the ones you have pictures of? When did your personal picture collection become definitive?

Sometimes one bows to the knowledge of experts - in this case, Mike Pryce knows a vast amount more about the US/UK ASTOVL work than you do.

I never pretended to know all the variants, and I do know Mike's credentials.
I was asking a simple question! Proof enough that I WAS bowing to Mike's knowledge, don't you think?
No need to get so cross about it! The fact that you're upset with me about the OBB thing just comes across so blatantly here.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Your question

"How come then it doesn't look like any of the pictures I have of the various Grumman RALS studies"

can really only be answered in two ways.

1) "Its a different study to the ones you have pictures of"
2) "Oh right, I was wrong, its actually not a Grumman RALS study"

If you expect answer 1, its a pointless question. Why is this different? Because its different.

If you expect answer 2, it means you are questioning the previous poster's identification of the model.

Possibly you actually meant

"Why is the layout of this Grumman RALS study so different from other Grumman RALS Studies?"

That is a much more interesting question, and perhaps that was the question you wanted to ask. I then misunderstood your question.

Your emotional response to my post in a subsequent public post doesn't befit a moderator - that should have been a PM. And I'm not "upset" with anyone. That would be irrational.

 

[Mike Pryce]

Stargazer,

If you mean the projects here:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3133.msg734.html

then the answer is firstly that they were 1970s designs and technology, while the US/UK MoU studies were in 1986-88.

Also the earlier Grumman studies were twin engined (plus a lift jet pre-RALS). The MoU studies specified a single engine.

Hope that helps.

 

[Stargazer]

Stargazer,

If you mean the projects here:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3133.msg734.html

then the answer is firstly that they were 1970s designs and technology, while the US/UK MoU studies were in 1986-88.

Also the earlier Grumman studies were twin engined (plus a lift jet pre-RALS). The MoU studies specified a single engine.

Hope that helps.

Yes Mike, thanks a lot!

 

[Dew]

Anther unknown STOVL aircraft,but I saw it here,where ?.


http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930013291_1993013291.pdf

in colour from GRC via NARA: