Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, qzgy said:

Nice.  notice there are two planes in the image, what's the one on the right? And the back?

 

2 hours ago, NotAnAimbot said:

The one in the back looks like a XF-88.

The right and left are both XF-91's in different levels of development. Republic experimented a lot with the design, adding a radome and V-tail at different points. I looked around and I'm pretty sure NAA is right about it being an XF-88. No other plane from the era had the wing inlets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

June 1949: Lockheed XF-90

Image result for xf-90

A 1945 US Amy request to produce an advanced fighter birthed Lockheed's proposal: the XF-90. Data showed that a delta wing with the current design would not work, so swept wings were used instead of delta. The final design had a similar layout as the P-80 Shooting Star, but with a sharper nose and two turbojet engines. 

qlVy7q0.png

The structure, using a heavier and sturdier aluminum, made the aircraft heavier than its competitors. Thus resulting it to be underpowered. An improved version would use afterburners, but still would be underpowered. The XF-90 was Lockheed's first aircraft to go supersonic but in a dive. The design was placed second to McDonnell's XF-88 before it was cancelled. After Lockheed lost the contract, one of the two testbeds were sent to Nevada, where it would survive three atomic blasts. 

kViJFeo.png

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/MunbroKerman/Lockheed-XF-90

Tomorrows' Craft:

@NotAnAimbot's XB-51

Edited by Munbro Kerman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 October 1949: Martin XB-51

W7RKYMb.png

martin_b-51.jpg

The XB-51 must be remembered as one of the rare tri-engined military jets to have been designed. Also of interest were the variable-incidence wings, rotary bomb bay and the fact that roll was done using wing spoilers, small ailerons only giving the pilot control feedback. It was also Martin's first ejection seat equipped aircraft. Armament was a maximum of 10 000 pounds of ordinance and a planned 8 20mm cannons in the nose on production aircraft. Although originally named "XA-45", the "A" designation was eliminated in 1946 and so the current name was chosen. It competed against the Avro CF-100 "Canuck" and the English Electra "Canberra" as a replacement for the A-26 "Invader" attack aircraft which had served during WW2.

Martin_XB-51_(SN_46-685)_061026-F-1234S-005.jpg

Although maneuverable, the XB-51 had a low G tolerance of only 3.7 positive Gs. Coupled with relatively low endurance compared to the Canberra and its inability to land in improvised airstrips, these disadvantages put it out of the competition in favor of the Canberra, one of the rare non-indigenous aircraft put in service by the USAF. Although flight testing continued, the second prototype later crashed while performing aerobatics. The remaining prototype was used to film the movie Toward the Unknown as the Gilbert XF-120. It crashed during take-off after refueling.

Image result for xb-51 bomb bay

9S22LE6.png

Builder's notes

Operating the bomb bay:

  1. Approach target
  2. Decouple the bay using function group 5 at some distance of the target
  3. Switch to the bomb bay, roll it into position and hold it with SAS
  4. Release bombs by staging
  5. Roll it into closed position and disengage SAS

The plane is about as maneuverable as you'd expect for its size, but does have a strange problem when it suddenly pitches down with SAS. Performance is also close from the real deal in speed and size, although this required using two Panthers per mounting node. Action group 1 toggles the flaps, and action group 5 decouples the bomb bay. Gear is synchronized with cargo bays, so you may have to activate either manually if one of the gear fails to extend.

Download

https://www.dropbox.com/s/d7kpv7te2b64m1j/XB-51.craft?dl=0

Up next: @NorthAmericanAviation's XF-93

Edited by NotAnAimbot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bnr7xIn.jpg

I found this, might be of use to builders

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Yukon0009 said:

I found this, might be of use to builders

Dankeschön:)

January 1950 : North American YF-93

NiJxbTj.png

The YF-93 Design was adapted from an F-86A. It was a very early example of a fuselage employing area rule, which helped make supersonic flight more stable and controllable. One could call it an ‘intermediate step’ between the F-86 and F-100, competing in the same trials that the XF-88 Voodoo won, even though the YF-93 received the contract, strangely. Much like most prototypes of this age, it was designed in the midst of rapid technological advancement, and was obsolete by the time it was finished. The two units produced would be used as chase planes at Dryden Flight Research Center / Edwards AFB until they 'wore out.'

pcKmfwI.png

Because the nose of the plane was now occupied by six 20mm cannons and a search radar, engineers decided to use side-mount 'NACA ducts.' Research found that the NACA style flush-mounted intake ducts restricted airflow at high angles of attack, causing loss of power. Below is an image of a functional NACA duct. The purpose of the shape of the duct is to interrupt as little bypassing air as possible.

duct_design1.gif

IH51nEG.png

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/North-American-YF-93

Tomorrow's Craft
Grumman XF10F "Jaguar"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May 1952: Grumman XF10F "Jaguar"

BNGfBcQ.png

The Grumman XF10F tested the concept of variable sweep wings, much like the Bell X-5, introduced a year before. The purpose of the variable sweep in the XF10F was the same as it is with the F-14; reduce takeoff runs to make carrier operations easier. This aircraft would be Grumman's first stone in the path to a successful variable-sweep system, being succeeded by the continuation of the X-5 program from Bell, and the F-111B program, jointly developed by Grumman and General Dynamics.

Grumman-XF10F1-Jaguar.jpg

The Jaguar had an astonishingly horrid thrust to weight ratio of 0.19:1 (lb/ft:lbs). Test pilot Corwin "Corky" Meyer said it was entertaining to fly "because there was so much wrong with it." This 'wrong-ness' was generally caused by poor maintenance and assembly. Issues included the wing-pivot mechanism's grease having a tendency to 'gel up,' the Westinghouse XJ-40's unreliability, and, for a specific example, a 5-inch-long screw holding an instrument bank which marred the circuitry of the plane as it flew. Said screw was supposed to be 0.4 inches long:rolleyes:. Ironically, the swing-wing was the only component reported to work flawlessly. The U.S. Navy eventually lost interest in this aircraft when they had a thought that probably read out like this: "Say, lets just make a bigger boat---and put a ramp on it!" all things considered, I wonder if this, had it gone into service, could have beaten the Vought F7U "Cutlass" for 'worst track record.':D

ytDM8VH.pngHwB2IY1.png

Important Controls:

To Toggle Sweep angle: This system is still experimental (in my KSP build), and is not 100% reliable. Successful cycles are more likely to occur in the air, at speed.
Press "1," this disengages the wings from the rest of the craft. Toggle position with "2." this works from Straight-->Swept and vice versa.

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/Grumman-XF10F-Jaguar-Swing-Wing

Tomorrow's Craft:
Convair YB-60

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

August 1952: Convair YB-60
Cheesy video of mine:

           In 1950, Convair created a concept model B-36G, a swept-wing B-36 to be powered exclusively by jet engines. In 1951, the United States Air Force showed interest and authorized the conversion of two B-36F’s to the B-36G configuration. As the design evolved and grew away from its B-36 origins, the project name changed to YB-60.

           Straying from the traditional ‘glass-bottomed-cockpit’ so common on propeller-driven craft with bombardier crew, Convair instead opted to have the YB-60’s nose taper to a needle-like instrument probe, while still using the B-36 style bubble canopy. resulting in an unmistakable look. The massive jet bomber also shared 72% parts commonality with its parent design (B-36).

Program Competition Details

           The competitor to the YB-60 was Boeing’s XB-52 Stratofortress. The Boeing proposal was much more expensive because it did not rely on a past design with new modifications, meaning that part of the B-52’s cost would include creating all-new machinery and tooling for manufacture of the new bomber. To counter this though, the B-52 was 100mph faster than the YB-60, and the YB-60 also experienced severe handling issues, whereas Boeing’s design did not. A plus for the Convair design, though, was that it could claim a 72,000lb bomb load—almost double the B-52’s 43,000lb claim. The Air Force did not see value in this extra capacity, though. Both aircraft required 5 crew members, a definite upgrade from the B-36’s 10. Although anecdotal, it should be noted that the XB-52 flew 3 days before the Convair.

HAkSqY2.png

Here's an album of the build, early on:

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/Convair-YB-60

Tomorrow's Craft:
@Servo's XB-52

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

August 1952 - Boeing XB-52 Stratofortress

8nReAcM.png

The Boeing B-52 Stratofortress has one of the longest and most transformative design phases of any airplane ever. It began in the mid 1940s as a propeller bomber designed to replace the ubiquitous Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress and B-29 Superfortress of World War Two. However, the design was passed over in favor of the massive Convair B-36 Peacekeeper postwar, but would get another chance in the design competitions of the late 1940s. There, the B-52 competed against a modified B-36, the B-60.

X-B52_Ground.jpg

The B-52 was much more expensive than the B-60 during the prototyping stage, thanks to the fact that all the tooling and machinery had to be rebuilt, while the B-60 reused a large amount of the B-36’s tooling. Additionally, the B-52 only carried about 60% of the bomb load of the B-60 (43,000 pounds versus 70,000+). However, it was much faster, smaller, and ultimately (despite pneumatic problems which grounded the first XB-52 for a year) more reliable. Because of this, the B-52 won the contract, and entered service in 1955. It hasn’t left service since.

T44yN5s.png

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/servo/XB-52-Stratofortress

Tomorrow's Craft:

@NorthAmericanAviation's Douglas X-3 Stiletto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OOO I really like that solar panel cockpit! It looks very sleek and futuristic.

Nice replicas!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

October 1953: Douglas X-3 "Stiletto"

jIQOhrn.png

The Stiletto was built for the purpose of testing jet propulsion at Mach 2---an aircraft intended to fly and conduct research at long-term supersonic speeds, it was of course plagued by under-powered engines of the time. Despite that, it did have a few other firsts: the trapezoidal, low-area wing would be used successfully in the design of the supersonic Lockheed F-104, and titanium would see its first major use in aviation based on its inclusion in a large portion of the X-3's airframe.

985px-Douglas_X-3_NASA_E-17348.jpg

Like most aircraft of the time, NACA was a prime user after Douglas test pilot William Bridgeman completed his 26 flights with the plane. to push the X-3 past Mach 1, a ten degree dive was necessary. On July 28, 1953, the X-3 reached its maximum speed of Mach 1.2---far below the program's plans, but fast enough to somewhat gauge how a jet engine handled these speeds. After the Douglas-intended tests, NACA chose to test the aircraft further for finding data of transonic handling characteristics. What was found was that, because of the small wing area, the body of the plane carried most of the weight in a roll, making it controllable at transonic speeds. this research (and the shape of the plane) would be used in many designs of fighters and interceptors of the same era.

aQYQltN.png
1pktx5F.png

It's also worth noting that because of the X-3's unprecedented fast takeoff and landing speeds, new tire technology had to be developed to keep the tires on the landing gear of the X-3 from failing. This replica handles very much like the original plane; touchy controls, fast takeoff runs, not very eager on the idea of a 'sharp turn.' The "super-cool wicked sub-zero totally mondo cockpit glass" could not be replicated, unfortunately.
Screen-Shot-2015-10-20-at-12.18.20.png

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/Douglas-X-3-Stiletto

Tomorrow's Craft
@Servo
's Convair F2Y Sea Dart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, NorthAmericanAviation said:

The "super-cool wicked sub-zero totally mondo cockpit glass" could not be replicated, unfortunately.

It also looks utterly impractical. But I agree it looks good. Also, nice job on the rest of the craft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

January 1953: Convair F2Y/F7 Sea Dart

NO5NLoS.png

The Convair F-7 Sea Dart was an experimental seaplane fighter design in the late 1950s. Also designated F2Y, only a few prototypes were ever made, as the program was cancelled after numerous issues with the design. The Sea Dart launched using hydroplanes under the nose, and could break the speed of sound, making it the only seaplane to have ever done so.

  F2Y Sea Dart 2.jpg

The design was created to allow supersonic aircraft (which at the time required long takeoff/landing rolls) to operate from carriers. In fact, one possible role for the Sea Dart would have it operating from a submarine carrier, although that design didn’t make it very far.

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/servo/F-7-Sea-Dart

Tomorrow's Craft:

My own Bell X-5 Variable Incidence demonstrator

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

June 1951 - Bell X-5

I apologize for messing up the dates. The X-5 flew between when the YF-93 and XF10F flew.

oqUfIgu.png

The X-5, built by Bell Laboratories in 1950, was the first variable geometry jet aircraft (there was a strange propeller plane in the 1920s with limited variable sweep) built and flown in the world. It was based on captured German data on the untested Messerschmitt P.1101 model. Although visually similar to the P.1101, the X-5 had the capability of changing its wing sweep in flight (rather than on the ground), thanks to a system of electric screwjacks and disc brakes to hold the wings in place. The system allowed the wings to shift between a 20, 40, and 60 degree sweepback in under 30 seconds.

DgPysNp.png

Although the design partially accounted for the shifting center of mass, lift, and pressure, in some positions the X-5 could fall into an unrecoverable spin. This spin caused the death of a test pilot and the loss of the second prototype, and effectively prevented the Air Force from seriously considering a variable geometry plane for twenty years.

1024px-Bell-X5-Multiple.jpg

Despite the setbacks, the X-5 program game engineers extremely valuable data on how variable sweep wings behaved, influencing the designs of the F-111 Aardvark and the legendary F-14 Tomcat.

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/servo/Bell-X-5

Tomorrow's Craft: 

@NorthAmericanAviation's XF-84H "Thunderscreech"

Edited by Servo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Servo said:

It's late tonight - I'll post the X-5 writeup + download tomorrow morning, alongside tomorrow's actual craft.

We will hold you to your word. In any case, see you then!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few hours late
July 1955: Republic XF-84H "Thunderscreech"

8mKwGJg.png

The Thunderscreech is an interesting plane to say the least. Its intentions were to break the sound barrier as a propeller-driven aircraft, but there are some very serious issues with this concept alone; at idle thrust, the XF-84H's propeller blade tips were already moving at supersonic speeds, making an incredibly loud 'crack' several hundreds of times per second. Reportedly, the sound made by the plane's blades during engine run-up was so loud, it could be heard over twenty miles away. Because of this, the pilot had to receive his instructions not by radio. but by light signals. Beyond that, Allison Engine Company and Republic program researchers found that the transonic propeller created harmonic vibrations that were 'harmful to humans.'

xf84h-3.jpg

The aircraft was not received well by its crew; after his first flight in the aircraft, test pilot Lin Hendrix is quoted as saying " You aren't big enough and there aren't enough of you to get me in that thing again!" Needless to say, that flight was his last with that craft.

90jeocD.png

The XF-84H was powered by an Allison T40 turboprop/shaft combination which developed a shaft-output of 5,100hp, and helped the plane achieve a top speed of 520mph. It is one of the fastest propeller-driven aircraft in the world, second only to the Tupolev Tu-114.

Download Link:
coming tomorrow (June 15) want to work out some kinks

 

'Tomorrow's' Craft
@Munbro Kerman's Bell X-2 "Starbuster"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

November 1955: Bell X-2 "Starbuster"

Image result for bell x-2

Development beginning in 1945, the Bell X-2 was built by Bell Aircraft to test flight characteristics beyond Mach 1 and 2. Built to exceed the speed limits of the X-1 and D-558-II, and the temperature and altitude limits of any other plane. The X-2 had the first engines of its kind in U.S. aircraft: throttleable rocket motors. The copper-nickel alloy and stainless steel construction were to combat the intense heating at Mach 3 caused by friction. 

UgDiKxf.png

The X-2 program was years behind schedule, and during the time the F-104 was conducting tests in a fighter configuration. Data from tests concluded that the aircraft would experience extreme stability problems at around Mach 3. Two pilots, Ivan Kincheloe and "Mel" Apt, were assigned to put the craft to the test. Kincheloe became the first pilot to exceed 100,000 feet, topping out at 126,000 feet. Three weeks later Apt would become the first man to exceed Mach 3, at an altitude of 65,000 feet. 

G487P6x.png

After achieving the highest speed, Apt banked the aircraft where it lost control from inertia coupling, the same problem Yeager faced with the X-1A. Apt tried to gain control again, but could not and was forced to ditch. Unfortunately, Apt was crippled from the severe ejection forces, and could not open his main parachute, which ultimately killed him.

kVAtwFu.png

Download Link:

https://kerbalx.com/MunbroKerman/B-29-with-Bell-X-2-Starbuster

Tomorrows' Craft:

@qzgy's X-13 Vertijet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

December 1955: Ryan X-13 Vertijet

1024px-Ryan_X-13.jpg

The Vertijet was one of the first attempts of the US Air Force at a VTOL aircraft. It was actually derived from a though of whether the Ryan FR-1 Fireball would be able to take off vertically, given its greater than 1:1 TWR at low fuel levels. Interested, the United States Navy's Bureau of Aeronautics issued a contract to conduct testing in that area with the interest in submarine based aircraft. This craft was one pat of a larger program. After small tests between 1947 and 1951, Ryan was awarded a contract to develop a full jet powered VTOL aircraft, designated the X-13. Two were built.

S0Kr2PK.png

Interestingly, the craft was just about big enough to hold the pilot in a rotating seat and the Rolls-Royce Avon engine, producing 44 000 N of thrust. Control was maintained by thrust vectoring in the pitch and yaw directions and small puffer jets on the wingtips controlled roll. Underneath the aircraft was a small hook used for hanging (yes hanging) the craft from the test stand which could be raised or lowered for transport or for testing VTOL capabilities. This hook was also used for "landing" the craft during testing, conducted by pilot Peter F. "Pete" Girard and W. L. "Lou" Everett.

ohHB4Nd.jpg

First takeoff (horizontal) occurred in December of 1955. Afterwards, hooking practice was done before the first full flight where the craft took off vertically, transitioned to horizontal flight and back and hooked again in 1957. It was also apparently demonstrated in July of the same year in Washington DC. Development was canceled later that year as no operational requirement existed. Both prototypes were retired to museums.

Vj3J28D.png

The replica does not handle well as well as I'd like - Pitch is often sluggish to respond at high speeds, so be warned. Otherwise, it is quite stable.

Link to download: https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/Ryan-X-13-Vertijet
I have also made an experimental trailer that can be raised and lowered. It does not work currently, but if you are willing to try, go ahead! Link: https://kerbalx.com/qzgy/Vertijet-Trailer

Tomorrow's Craft: @NorthAmericanAviation's F5D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

April 1956: Douglas F5D Skylancer

pCVOzGM.png

The Douglas F5D Skylancer is an evolution of the F4D Skyray, using the same smooth-sided Delta-wing configuration as before. It had an incredibly good climb rate at 20,000ft/min (105m/s), and a top speed of Mach 1.5. Service ceiling was 57,500ft (17,500m) The program test pilot was Alan Shepard, who would go on to become America’s first ‘astronaut.’ Go figure!

douglas-f5d-skylancer-prototype-navy-fig

The NASA F5Ds' would serve to test the Ogival Delta-wing, a style of tailless delta that was to perform very well at supersonic speeds, versus a conventional delta. The design proved efficient, and research data gained through the F5D program would help complete the Concorde, space shuttle, and influence the design of the X-20 DynaSoar—a program to which the F5D was very close. The F5D was used as a trainer for the X-20 program until its cancellation, at which point they continued use as chase planes. Both NASA aircraft survive today and are on display.

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/Douglas-F5D-Skylancer

Tomorrow's Craft:
North American YF-107A "Ultra Sabre"

aaaannnd, a quick plug for @qzgy: I cannot express how much I love that vertijet---that specific replica is the pinnacle of those I have seen recently!:D:rep::rep::rep::rep::rep:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, NorthAmericanAviation said:

aaaannnd, a quick plug for @qzgy: I cannot express how much I love that vertijet---that specific replica is the pinnacle of those I have seen recently!

Thank you very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

September 1956: North American F-107 "Ultra Sabre"

95jeZ6D.png

The F-107, nicknamed Ultra Sabre, "Man Eater," and "Super Super Sabre," is the final evolution of the military track of Sabre aircraft from North American. Regarded positively, it lost the contract to the F-105 either through the fate of politics, or perhaps by being the ‘right plane at the wrong time’. Despite this, most data pointed to it being a better-handling plane, lacking only in bomb-armament. The F-107’s performance was indeed superior, due to the fact that it's design philosophy leaned towards a fighter more than anything else. The following should be noted: project pilot Bob Baker thought this was a fine-handling aircraft. Additionally, even Scott Crossfield, who only had the chance to make an aborted takeoff run after a front gear failure, remarked that it was a very good-handling and appropriately responsive aircraft.

f107-7.jpg

The forward position of the cockpit gave great visibility---it was definitely a 'pilot's airplane.' In fact, it was a so much of a pilot's plane that Bob Baker took it to Mach 1.03 on it's (No.1 Aircraft) maiden flight. 14 months after this first flight, the aircraft would reach Mach 2 for supersonic airspeed tests.

To the Nat'l Museum of the U.S. Air Force by (mostly) VFR

          Following the close of the F-107A program, unused prototype No.2 was to be flown by Major Clyde Good to The National Museum of the U.S. Air Force (NMUSAF). He had planned to accomplish this by following an F-100 which was also being retired to the museum. Maj. Good Knew that the radio nav. systems and instrument backlights had not been installed, but a refueling stop had separated the two aircraft. Given this happened during heavy cloud-cover, Maj. Good was forced to fly VFR, or Visual Flight Rules, meaning he had to follow known ground locations and roadways of St. Louis to navigate in the dark. He 'guessed' headings by occasionally reading his unlit instruments by flicking the spark-wheel of his Zippo lighter. His goal was to eventually show up in Dayton, Ohio, close enough to Wright-Pat that they would be able to pick him up on radar. Eventually, he got within range, and was vectored down to the runway. Now on approach, he let the gear down to make another discovery: no landing lights! At this point, he properly lit his Zippo lighter and landed successfully with both instrument readings and visual queues.

sFaiGDA.png

Intake Innovations

          The “Ultra Sabre” was the first to employ a Variable Area Intake Duct (VAID), which regulated the volume of air entering the engine, a Pratt and Whitney J75-P-9, for more efficient and powerful combustion. The VAID system saw further use on the A-5, XB-70, and the design of the F-108. The VAID system was a major step forward in the development of supersonic jet intakes. Despite the Top-mounted intake appearing to be aft of a low-pressure zone which could have caused air starvation to the engine, this did not happen due to how forward it was in relation to the fuselage-disturbed air.

Download Link:
https://kerbalx.com/NorthAmericanAviation/North-American-F-107-Ultra-Sabre

Tomorrow's Craft:
Bell X-14 VTOL

Edited by NorthAmericanAviation
minor article changes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

February 1957: Bell X-14

N3nocgn.png

Bell's X-14 was a VTOL capability demonstrator, intended to prove the concept of controlled, vectored thrust in transitioning from a vertical takeoff to horizontal flight. Thrust vectoring was done through keeping the engines stationary and deflecting the thrust with ducts over the craft's COM. Previous American VTOL aircraft had been tilt-wing or tail-sitter aircraft. The aircraft is sometimes called a Bell-Beech X-14, due to its use of Beechcraft Bonanza wings and landing gear, along with the tail of the Beech T-34 mentor. These parts were used for saving weight and expense.

1280px-Beech_X-14A_NASA234_(5008431941).

The X-14 program was maintained until 1981, making the airframe 24 years old upon its retirement. Over the years, the Armstrong-Siddeley Viper turbojets were replaced with General Electric J85's, and the aircraft was suffixed with -A and -B. A computer and fly-by-wire controls were installed in the 1970's to give better stability and simulate the characteristics of other VTOL aircraft of the time. The only reason the program ended was due to the aircraft being damaged in a landing accident in 1981, otherwise there were plans to develop the aircraft into a -C model, which would have an enclosed cockpit, and even a trainer model. The X-14 was a cost-effective X-plane, even if that sounds impossibly oxymoronic.

LPXN4oQ.png

Download Link:
KerbalX is just giving me Error 500's right now, will put up tomorrow

Tomorrow's Craft:
@NotAnAimbot's Avro CF-105 Arrow

Edited by NorthAmericanAviation
details, clarification, proofread "__" filled in

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The X-14 is really ugly....

@NorthAmericanAviation, mind explaining the exact VTOL mechanism? Its kinda unclear from the article. Was it seperate lift jets or was it a harrier-esque VTOL, with the outlet swiveling? Or was it something else?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, qzgy said:

The X-14 is really ugly....

@NorthAmericanAviation, mind explaining the exact VTOL mechanism? Its kinda unclear from the article. Was it seperate lift jets or was it a harrier-esque VTOL, with the outlet swiveling? Or was it something else?

yeah, the engines are stationary and it uses thrust deflectors/outlets over the center of mass. I didn't replicate any sort of deflector, merely a second set of engines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The CF-105 is ready, but I'm currently unable to access my computer. I might be able to tonight, but the release may also be postponed to tommorow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now