Beyond The Sprues
Current and Finished Projects => Physical Models => Aero-space => Topic started by: mikejapan on March 09, 2013, 05:43:40 AM
-
It just hit me one day that I would for some reason enjoy an F-14 Tomcat that was built for jet races.
I would like some input on this matter.
Would some corners be cut on the F-14 or some more aerodynamic features be added and etc?
This is my inspiration > http://megagames.com/sites/default/files/game-content-images/nexgen_l1.jpg (http://megagames.com/sites/default/files/game-content-images/nexgen_l1.jpg)
Thanks,
Michael
-
Well for one you could lose the back seater...
-
A single fin (asymmetric) would decrease drag, increase speed, and would be enough control for a racer without dogfighting anymore ;)
-
Single asymmetric vertical fin on the list. Maybe a redesign depending? Similar shape to a Harrier or an early test Flanker P-42?
Any power plant suggestions?
I'm not sure if this is needed but would a redesign of the intakes be required?
-
Actually, if you went with an evolved F401, you wouldn't need to alter the intakes, but you'd likely have 35,000 lbt, per engine, in full burner. I'm talking about taking the F401 as it existed in 1974 when cancelled and subjecting it to the same development and evolution as the F100 (which has an unbuilt version capable of 32,000 lbt in burner to match GE's hottest F110). Since the two share a common core, with the differences being in the fan and low turbine that drives it, this is not at all unreasonable.
-
Re engines, you could probably go with something akin to race engines. In other words, highly tuned, high thrust engines that are changed out after every race or every few races.
-
Ah, about like the "stock" engines in the recce MiG-25's where they had to be swapped out after a high-speed run.
Taking that approach with an evolved F401, you could probably get up around 38,000 lbt in full burner for a race.
-
Exactly.
-
You wouldn't need the chin pod, the pylons could go too (though I like the way they make the Tomcat look). Maybe a reshaped or even reduced beaver tail?
-
I like the F401 and Mig-25 engine ideas.
Since this is a racer plane, that means like some have already said is to remove all combat related equipment.
I think that keeping a RIO is just for test purposes of some sort.
Good idea on the beaver tail. I'll think of something.
What about the fences on the upper fuselage between the wings? Keep them or drop them?
Any suggestions on the ventral fins and horizontal stabilzers?
BTW....Asymmetric fin. I really don't know Tophe. lol It's definitely different from some pictures I've found.
-
A few ideas that occured to me:
Replace the three piece windscreen with a single frameless piece similar to what's been done with some T-33s on the civil circuit. That should represent a weight savings by less framing and a reduction in drag by not having the flat section in front.
Lightened landing gear. Since it won't be landing on carriers and you'll have substantially reduced the weight by taking out the military gear, the big sea legs won't be required.
Presuming the radar will be stripped out too, that gives you the option for reshaping the nose for optimal airflow.
One thing that really struck me is what to do about the wing pivot gear, that's a ton of weight to consider.
I have no idea if it was possible to get the Tomcat off the ground with any degree of sweep beyond minimum in the wings, but if it was then perhaps an acceptable sweep angle could be found that could both get the plane off the ground and let it hit a competitive racing speed and the wings could be locked there and parts of the swing mechanism could be removed.
Of course that also opens doors to a giving it a completely redesigned, perhaps lighter and simplified, wing.
-
F-14XL with ogival delta wing. ???
([url]http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww37/jmsfbip/F14XL-multiview.jpg[/url])
And another F-14 iteration which looks a bit like a heresy.
([url]http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww37/jmsfbip/TSR14-multiview.jpg[/url])
([url]http://i703.photobucket.com/albums/ww37/jmsfbip/TSR14-airscene.jpg[/url])
Especially second mod looks great :) Concorde wing , removed airbrake, simplified canopy. Of course landing gear is too massive so I would reconsider changing it to F-16-ish.
-
Lose the cockpit bubble altogether and go for an integrated cockpit with small windows a la XF-103 for a single reclining pilot. Compensate for the limited visibility with a camera/sensor based synthetic vision system.
Martin
-
Lose the cockpit bubble altogether and go for an integrated cockpit with small windows a la XF-103 for a single reclining pilot. Compensate for the limited visibility with a camera/sensor based synthetic vision system.
Martin
So it's like what I did with my F-15SMT? The COFFIN system I mean?
And the 2 concept aircraft are nice but that's REALLY stretching it for me. lol ;D
I'd like to keep the swing wings and removing all the combat equipment and etc is quite a load of the Cat.
Michael
-
Personally I wouldn't go quite as far as postulating neural interfaces and stick with good old fashioned side controllers instead, but the external look would indeed be pretty much like in a COFFIN design, although with side and possibly top windows, like for example the in flight configuration of the Concorde prototypes.
Martin
-
Hmmm I see. Actually there were COFFIN versions that still used the side stick controls from what I recall.
I'll keep in mind about that mod.
For the landing gear, I think I have a spare set of SU-30 type landing gear around. Should I use those?
As for the Radome, I will leave it since it's already nicely tapered.
I've already decided on a paint scheme for the plane. Just imagine the sponsors.... >.>
I was also looking at this kind of vertical stabilizer for the Tomcat. http://f.hatena.ne.jp/Mirage/20090507123131 (http://f.hatena.ne.jp/Mirage/20090507123131)
Also considering canting the tails like this one. http://venom800tt.deviantart.com/art/F-14E-Block-II-upgrade-WIP-1-335468665 (http://venom800tt.deviantart.com/art/F-14E-Block-II-upgrade-WIP-1-335468665)
-
A few ideas that occured to me:
Replace the three piece windscreen with a single frameless piece similar to what's been done with some T-33s on the civil circuit. That should represent a weight savings by less framing and a reduction in drag by not having the flat section in front.
Lightened landing gear. Since it won't be landing on carriers and you'll have substantially reduced the weight by taking out the military gear, the big sea legs won't be required.
The single windscreen idea will also make it "look faster" :) Mike, you could also paint some of the clear canopy piece aft of the pilots station (just a thought)
Brilliant! I had not even thought about the Landing Gear! If you look at Tomcat landing gear bays, they have tons of doors as well, the front section has FOUR alone! For as much as I like the Tomcat front gear with the twin wheels, a single door/single wheel would really stand out I believe :) give the LW cred you are going for.
I have removed the Four Strengthening ribs on Tomcat kits before, it takes about 2 minutes with a razor saw, or you can clip and sand with some sprue nippers. IMHO I think you should do it for the aesthetics, it will make it look smooth, smooth=fast. plus its more nice space for exotic paint jobs or sponsors :)
Right click save on those two Tomcat links as well bud :) :) Thanks!
-
"I have removed the Four Strengthening ribs on Tomcat kits before, it takes about 2 minutes with a razor saw, or you can clip and sand with some sprue nippers. IMHO I think you should do it for the aesthetics, it will make it look smooth, smooth=fast. plus its more nice space for exotic paint jobs or sponsors :)"
Strengthening ribs? Where exactly do you mean on the plane?
-
"I have removed the Four Strengthening ribs on Tomcat kits before, it takes about 2 minutes with a razor saw, or you can clip and sand with some sprue nippers. IMHO I think you should do it for the aesthetics, it will make it look smooth, smooth=fast. plus its more nice space for exotic paint jobs or sponsors :)"
Strengthening ribs? Where exactly do you mean on the plane?
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/US_Navy_050216-N-7405P-060_A_squadron_quality_insurance_inspector_conducts_a_walk_around_inspection_on_the_top_of_an_F-14B_Tomcat.jpg/1280px-US_Navy_050216-N-7405P-060_A_squadron_quality_insurance_inspector_conducts_a_walk_around_inspection_on_the_top_of_an_F-14B_Tomcat.jpg)
:)
I would also look into Carbon Fibre Scale Decals (Make sure you include the word "Scale" in your searchers or you will get lots of 1:1 scale stuff) Carbon Fiber is really popular with racing vehicles of all types
-
Oh those fences! I thought about that yesterday but I wasn't sure if it was really needed to remove those.
I'm also contemplating on adding sawtooths on the horizontal stabilizers for some reason. Which will also make it unique!
-
Replace the three piece windscreen with a single frameless piece similar to what's been done with some T-33s on the civil circuit. That should represent a weight savings by less framing and a reduction in drag by not having the flat section in front.
A blown, frameless windscreen was part of the future upgrade proposals Grumman had out there under the various "Tomcat 21" and "ASF-14" designations. It just makes sense.
-
^ I noticed that! I bet I can just throw on an F-15 windscreen for the hell of it. I have a spare one from an F-15E.
Would lengthening the ventral fins be beneficial as well?
Michael
-
One thought that occurs to me is to go with longer and deeper ventral strakes (perhaps 1/48 strakes on a 1/72 kit) and a single vertical tail like Grumman's final mockup. The longer and deeper strakes would oblivate the need for the additional fold-down strakes on the mockup.
-
Smooth out the Sparrow troughs on the underside: airflow in that area is REALLY important on the F-14 (the AIM-54s screwed it up so badly that 4 x Sparrows on the belly were often chosen where long-endurance was more important than engagement range).
I'd hesitate about shortening the beaver tail: you might get increased base drag that negates the benefit. Lengthening it on the other hand, and making it a smoothly tapered shape, might actually reduce profile drag though....
A single fin is definately a good idea IF you don't need high-alpha maneuverability.
It all really depends on the format of your race: if it's a long-distance straight-line exercise then all these things will make a difference. If it's a pylon-race-on-steroids though, you might want to retain that high-alpha capability since there's not much point going like a bat out of hell down the straights if your turn radius around the pylon sucks. If the distance is long, then the Tomcat's high internal fuel fraction will count in it's favour, but if it's short, then you're just dragging empty tankage around with no benefit.
If it is a pylon race then the F-14 (or any swing-winger) would be a very keen choice, given it's large speed range. In fact, if it's a shortish range pylon race, I might be inclined to enter a cleaned-up MiG-23, given it's acceleration.... ;)
-
It's definitely a pylon race with some tight turns. Nothing an F-14 CAN'T handle ;)
Sorry everyone I forgot to mention that.... ::)
-
How long are the straights between the turns?
What altitude can/do the racers fly at in between turns?
-
Lowest possible altitude is 50ft and highest is 400ft. Laps for this class of plane would be 8 if your wondering, since there will be 5 other planes racing.
The longest runs I am honestly not sure. But since these are after burning jet engines we're dealing with. I suspect the max allowed speed is 850-900mph?
Which is scary
Michael
-
Rid yourself of the tailhook and its associated housing? Ejection seat still needed? If not, you can save some serious weight that way
-
Ejection seats are staying. Because if something goes wrong your life could depend on that.
Getting rid of the tailhook makes sense. But what if the brakes fail?
-
Getting rid of the tailhook makes sense. But what if the brakes fail?
Consider a lighter weight tail hook like the spring-loaded type that was installed on the F-100 Super Sabre perhaps?
-
Ejection seats are staying. Because if something goes wrong your life could depend on that.
Getting rid of the tailhook makes sense. But what if the brakes fail?
Now its your model of course, but if something goes wrong at 850-900 MPH 50-400 ft from the ground, you are probably talking to st. peter before you realized something went wrong. :). the prop jobs that fly air races now don't have em, a lot of racing pilots don't even bother with parachutes. just sayin' :)
-
Getting rid of the tailhook makes sense. But what if the brakes fail?
Go with the lighter hook from a F-15, then use the F-14 hook to make a navalized F-15.
-
Now its your model of course, but if something goes wrong at 850-900 MPH 50-400 ft from the ground, you are probably talking to st. peter before you realized something went wrong. . the prop jobs that fly air races now don't have em, a lot of racing pilots don't even bother with parachutes. just sayin'
I'll keep that in mind! Ejection seats would be useless in this kind of race.
I'm thinking about actually getting rid of the RIO's equipment completely. My father suggested a flat deck like an F-15C.
The tailhook from an Eagle sounds pretty good to me. I think I'll go along with that.
If I was going to build a navalized Eagle, it would definitely have landing gear from an F/A-18. I don't like how close the rear landing gear are for a ship.... Shivers
-
If I was going to build a navalized Eagle, it would definitely have landing gear from an F/A-18. I don't like how close the rear landing gear are for a ship.... Shivers
My navalized F-15s will have just that and the F-15 mains can go toward the landing gear on a F-18L or production F-17.
-
Elmayerle = I'm glad to see that someone else thinks alike!
Alright I'm going to buy a 1/48th Tomcat soon. Shouldn't be hard to mod thanks to everyone's input here! :)
Thanks,
Michael