Wingless Jet VTOL Transport Aircraft

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
26 May 2006
Messages
32,887
Reaction score
12,280

Attachments

  • 1.JPG
    1.JPG
    21.7 KB · Views: 404
  • 2.JPG
    2.JPG
    20.5 KB · Views: 364
  • 3.JPG
    3.JPG
    18.2 KB · Views: 353
  • 4.JPG
    4.JPG
    17.8 KB · Views: 345
  • 5.JPG
    5.JPG
    25.6 KB · Views: 340
Last edited:
Apparently it was to be sustained by the array of side jets... and geared through various shifts of the same... You could pay me a million bucks and I still would NOT climb into one of these if they existed!
 
...Why is it that when I saw that, the first thing that popped into my mind was "No bucks, no Buck Rogers...literally!"?
 
Hi,

also a wingless transport VTOL aircraft.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19750011151_1975011151.pdf
 

Attachments

  • Wingless.JPG
    Wingless.JPG
    31.4 KB · Views: 70
Hi,

http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/12-Foot_Low_Speed_Tunnel
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    24.8 KB · Views: 86
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    20.9 KB · Views: 82
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    22.7 KB · Views: 71
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    21.6 KB · Views: 102
Wasn't there a wingless jet aircraft design nicknamed the "Flying Pig"?

I remember reading about that somewhere.
 
Stargazer2006 said:
Apparently it was to be sustained by the array of side jets... and geared through various shifts of the same... You could pay me a million bucks and I still would NOT climb into one of these if they existed!

There isn't any indication of intermediate gearing, or are you referring to the turn tables themselves? My guess, like many early VTOL projects is they had the number of engines they had such that the loss of one or more of the engines wouldn't be catastrophic. Still, that many engines seems risky for the time. However, given the reliability of today's engines, I could see this as doable. But, there are probably better layouts for the lift system with today's powerplants. Such as, just having two engines on each side of the fuselage, an F-35 lift-fan type system, but that would take up so much fuselage volume, I don't know that it would be worth it. Having said that, I find this design very cool, especially how well it compares to a standard aircraft in the low altitude regime it is meant to fly in.
 
Regardless of any safety/reliability issues, just imagine the kind of specific fuel consumption this thing would have (think: guzzling JP4 like a hole in the ground......), relying as it apparently does on direct jet lift. And ground erosion? Ground erosion would dig the above-mentioned hole in the ground for you. And judging from the shape, there's not much chance of body lift, even at speed.

But all the same, pretty cool.

Regards & all,

Thomas L. Nielsen
Luxembourg
 
Hi,

as I know also a lighter transport Project was considerable.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom