Your ultimate "What-if"

thefrecklepuny

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Messages
87
Reaction score
24
View attachment 656837


After its first flight in 1967, in 1968 Spain decided to join in the development of Mirage G8

With a total production of 450 aircraft, France took 150, Spain 120, several export orders followed.

Irak bought 145 aircraft and Turkey 45.

During the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s it served well, downing 17 Iranian F-14s
View attachment 668010

View attachment 668011
Tomcatty style landing gear with Mirage-like intakes combined with a Phantomy canopy.
 

apparition13

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Messages
235
Reaction score
381
Tomcatty style landing gear with Mirage-like intakes combined with a Phantomy canopy.
I really like that design, especially the landing gear tucking up into the wing root. It leaves the entire fuselage clear for conformal carry, and since it could have carried six Phoenix under the fuselage it could have carried six Harpoon as well, possibly even eight given the size of the V-507's lower fuselage, which means it could have been a superior strike fighter. It wasn't as good a dogfighter as the Tomcat, but I can see an 80s air wing of just F-14Bs and this replacing the 1970 F-4/A-6/A-7 wing. It's too big for the French carriers though, which is unfortunate.

I like the idea of a smaller single engine V-507 along the lines of a Mirage G (kind of like a MiG-23 with Su-24 wings in shape) as well. A "Mirage V (for Vought)" if you will. There's your replace everything 70s Rafale analogue. And if it came in about the size of a MiG-23 that would make it roughly F-18 sized, so it should work on Foch and Clemanceau.
 

Opportunistic Minnow

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
271
Reaction score
415
Payen RP/Pa.... something, with counter-rotating propellers. Maybe, for example, the Payen RP.420 :
Hi from a new member!(and delta lover). I think the biggest problem with these layouts is the abysmal view from the cockpit when landing,except in the case of a nosewheel landing gear.I think you should try and cram a nosewheel bay behind the engine. Nevertheless,let's remember that canards were not successful during WW2-eg the Curtiss XP-55 Ascender.
Hi! Hmmm.... Payen layout with mid-engine & cockpit position similar to a TP-39?
 

Deltafan

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
968
Payen RP/Pa.... something, with counter-rotating propellers. Maybe, for example, the Payen RP.420 :
Hi from a new member!(and delta lover). I think the biggest problem with these layouts is the abysmal view from the cockpit when landing,except in the case of a nosewheel landing gear.I think you should try and cram a nosewheel bay behind the engine. Nevertheless,let's remember that canards were not successfull during WW2-eg the Curtiss XP-55 Ascender.
It's sure. This is the cause of the Payen Pa.101 crash.

But we can also imagine a more advanced cockpit (closer to duck plans) or what was done on the only Dyke Delta (double delta) built in France (by the French manufacturer Pierre Robin), with the installation of a transparent plexiglass plate on the floor.
 

Deltafan

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
968
Payen RP/Pa.... something, with counter-rotating propellers. Maybe, for example, the Payen RP.420 :
Hi from a new member!(and delta lover). I think the biggest problem with these layouts is the abysmal view from the cockpit when landing,except in the case of a nosewheel landing gear.I think you should try and cram a nosewheel bay behind the engine. Nevertheless,let's remember that canards were not successful during WW2-eg the Curtiss XP-55 Ascender.
Hi! Hmmm.... Payen layout with mid-engine & cockpit position similar to a TP-39?
For example, yes.

I don't remember a central engine solution for a Payen project. But I think the configuration of the P-39 must already have been a problem for engine maintenance. And I believe the problem would have been even greater for an airplane with a delta wing.
 

Deltafan

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,278
Reaction score
968
The Payen configuration is already.....erm.... let's go with compromised, so you may as well have fun with it.
Unfortunately, the canceled tests of Pa.101 and Pa.22 /2 - Pa.22 / 5, which only made straight lines above the runway (the first for a too "hard" landing, the second on German decision after several escapes from France of other planes) will never provide the answer.

We can only see that the reduced models produced later (Pa.100 or 22 with "in line" engines, never the 101, modified 100 with an oversized radial engine) had good behavior in flight, but had very big difficulties staying in a straight line during the take-off phase (I never saw one of them able to take off from a runway).
In this sense, we can also notice that the Pa.22 / 2 had two extensions / modifications of the fin (to finish in version 22/5). But, on the other hand, the pilot of the Pa.101 had declared that he was staying in a straight line. As this is only a statement and there is no film of the aircraft in flight (only one slow show on the grass, which disappeared of the free web some years ago), it is difficult to judge.

The only possible comparison of the time, even if far, seems to me to be the Russian Moskalyev SAM 9 Strela, ogival delta with in line engine and without canards but with a cockpit placed more forward, which flew correctly, at least officially.


Otherwise, for the fun with it, I have. And, thanks to, for example, SPF forumers like Citrus90, leaded50 and others, including on other forums, like Slava Trudu, It's not about to end ;)

HTiwxOs.jpg

k28b-13a-small-jpg.660623


dsc_0255-jpg.644267

SV42sHx.jpg

xKtiphz.jpg
 
Last edited:
Top