Author Topic: General Dynamics F-111 Ideas and Inspiration (Read 65872 times)

GTX_Admin · « **on:** January 26, 2012, 01:48:19 PM »

Folks,

An area for your General Dynamics F-111 Ideas and Inspiration. To start with an inspiring picture of the old Pig.

Regards,

Greg

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #1 on:** January 26, 2012, 01:56:43 PM »

One I did a while ago...a STOVL F-111:

elmayerle · « **Reply #2 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:11:23 PM »

First thought that comes to mind is re-engining it with F110 engines (GD-Ft. Worth did study this intently and it was quite doable), particularly if the variant selected acquires a high inlet distortion tolerant fan derived from that of its F118 sibling. Beyond that, a comprehensive avionics upgrade and a "glass cockpit" seem like obvious moves. Beyond that, perhaps converting it to have a deployable probe and drogue refueling set-up (as proposed for F-111K or production F-111B) in addition to or in place of the flying boom receptacle.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #3 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:07:01 PM »

The idea of re-engining with GE110s was also looked at for the RAAF F-111s. In the end though, it just wasn't cost effective.

If you look at my Greater Australia story though, I had this happen much earlier in their lives...at the same time as Australia acquired F-14Bs.

Regards,

Greg

elmayerle · « **Reply #4 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:22:16 PM »

That works well. I wonder, would 1/48 scale Super Bug inlets work for replacing the standard F-11 inlets in 1/72? You'd reduce max. speed since you wouldn't have a variable inlet, but I could see advantages.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #5 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:22:59 PM »

Another idea: a RN FAA F-111L (UK variant of the F-111B fitted with TF41s) carrying SeaEagle ASMs...

elmayerle · « **Reply #6 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:38:42 PM »

Thought for the afterburning TF41 (which, based on a 1967 AW&ST article was quite powerful having demonstrated 27,000 lb thrust in full burner) would to a joint RR/Allison/SNECMA venture with a nozzle similar to that of the M53 in the Mirage 2000. If I'm reading Tommy Thompson's Ginter book on the F-111B, the production refueling probe wasn't that different from what was proposed for the F-111K.

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #7 on:** January 26, 2012, 02:57:03 PM »

Squared off intakes as seen on Vigilante, Foxbat, Eagle, Tomcat, Super Hornet to name several examples.

finsrin · « **Reply #8 on:** January 26, 2012, 03:00:58 PM »

What flashes to mind is building 1/72 F-111 with 1/48 F-22 front & rear wings.
Bill

Jeffry Fontaine · « **Reply #9 on:** January 26, 2012, 03:01:43 PM »

Quote from: finsrin on January 26, 2012, 03:00:58 PM

What flashes to mind is building 1/72 F-111 with 1/48 F-22 front & rear wings.

Why stop with that, may as well add the twin tails too.

Attached are images of a stealth what-if F-111 from some model show, builder unknown, event unknown.

finsrin · « **Reply #10 on:** January 26, 2012, 03:08:26 PM »

Oh Yes - so fine !
USAF should buy some.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #11 on:** January 27, 2012, 02:23:50 AM »

Here's some along that line that I drew a while back:

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #12 on:** January 27, 2012, 02:35:50 AM »

Business Jet Development:

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #13 on:** January 27, 2012, 03:29:02 AM »

Another variation - this time with a tandem cockpit:

Cliffy B · « **Reply #14 on:** January 27, 2012, 03:47:14 AM »

Did these a while back for the other site. The "Sea Vark"; and amalgam of the F-111 and the F-14 to make a supersonic, carrier capable, heavy attack bird.

F/A-111N of VAH-9 "The Hoot Owls" - Line Bird - TPS Scheme 1

F/A-111N of VAH-7 "The Peacemakers" - CAG Bird - TPS Scheme 2

F/A-111N of VAH-11 "The Checkertails" - Line Bird - TPS Scheme 2

F/A-111N of VFC-111 "The Sundowners" - Line Bird - Flanker Blues

F/A-111N of VFC-111 "The Sundowners" - Line Bird - Arctic Green Scheme

Line art courtesy of Coops213's blanks found here http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=25.0
Enjoy guys!

-Mike

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #15 on:** January 27, 2012, 03:50:01 AM »

Quote from: Cliffy B on January 27, 2012, 03:47:14 AM

Line art courtesy of Coops213's blanks found here http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,28426.0.html

Chris's blanks available here: http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=25.0

Cliffy B · « **Reply #16 on:** January 27, 2012, 03:52:07 AM »

Amended; thanks Greg!

arc3371 · « **Reply #17 on:** January 31, 2012, 07:26:14 PM »

Dont really know were to post this so... I was wondering how would you modernize the F-111 so that it stays a viable strike aircraft in 2020? Avionics, engines etc.

Maverick · « **Reply #18 on:** January 31, 2012, 07:49:11 PM »

The usual I expect. Radar upgraded to one of the newer APG sets, modern engines along the lines of the F404, glass cockpit instead of analog dials, etc. Perhaps even replace the cockpit escape module with conventional bang-seats like they did with the B-1B.

The real problem is the airframe fatigue which I believe was the killer for the type in USAF & RAAF service.

Regards,

John

taiidantomcat · « **Reply #19 on:** January 31, 2012, 11:34:33 PM »

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-F-111-Supercruise-2001.html

There are also some really good profiles of super F-111s and I have seen a build of a stealthy vark somwhere....

arc3371 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 01, 2012, 12:40:40 AM »

Thank you for a very interesting link

upnorth · « **Reply #21 on:** February 01, 2012, 01:37:53 AM »

From a purely WHIFF standpoint:

I agree with the above comment about conventional bang seats replacing the capsule; it certainly would free up some extra space in the region for new avionics or just a weight savings.

The old engines would definitely have to go as well.

I also think a redesign of the main landing gear, in the vein of the proposed F-111H would also be part of the deal. That would certainly free up some internal space for avionics, fuel or an extended weapons bay.

The variable geometry aspect would be another matter though; it's not exactly the stealthiest technology ever applied to an aircraft. It's also a lot of extra moving parts and weight.

To really go out on the F-111 Whiffing limb, I'd be inclined to delete the variable geometry aspect entirely in favour of a fixed wing layout .

If you delete weight penalties like the escape capsule, wing sweep mechanisms and overly complex main landing gear unit and replace them all with more conventional arrangements and marry it up to modern engines with supercruise; I think you'd keep all the favourable aspects of the F-111 intact and gain valuable internal space to improve it.

Variable geometry really has fallen by the wayside as technologies go. No new designs based on it have come about in a long time and all that have been based on it are retired or at least quite long in the tooth.

I think simplification of the engineering would be the key to taking the F-111 to 2020.

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #22 on:** February 01, 2012, 01:54:06 AM »

Quote from: taiidantomcat on January 31, 2012, 11:34:33 PM

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-F-111-Supercruise-2001.html

There are also some really good profiles of super F-111s and I have seen a build of a stealthy vark somwhere....

Just be careful using Carlo Kopp as a serious reference - he is widely viewed by those actually in the industry as a nutter (there is a reason he is referred to as Carlo Kook by some)! He trys to sound convincing and fools a lot of people but at the end of the day many of his ideas are totally impractical. Moreover, he fails to grasp the realities of technical, financial or operational constraints.

Regards,

Greg

GTX_Admin · « **Reply #23 on:** February 01, 2012, 02:00:10 AM »

An important question to first ask here: From what point are you talking about starting the modernisation? If you start it in 1990 you will get a different set of answers to 2000 or 2010. Also do you want it through to 2020 or beyond (say 2030).

The main areas to look at would be:

Engines - easiest change here is probably to change the TF30s to GE110s (this was looked at for the RAAF's F-111s)
Avionics - main change here would actually to make them more supportable (though that often comes with capability advantages as well) - for one, I would look at replacing the Pave Tack Pod
Airframe - definite fatigue issues here, though not so easy to solve, though at the same time there are ways. I would also want to see some LO technologies applied.

BTW, I am moving this to the F-111 Ideas and Inspiration thread.

Regards,

Greg

arc3371 · « **Reply #24 on:** February 01, 2012, 02:07:52 AM »

I was thinking a modernization program somewhere around 2005-10


Swords to Plowshares GB Now Open!!

News:

Author Topic: General Dynamics F-111 Ideas and Inspiration (Read 65872 times)