The son of Hercules - Speed Agile
 

See this:

http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/th...speedagile.jpg

Been around for a while, but obviously making progress.
The planform is bizzare, B2 meets C17.
Does anyone have any idea of how they get the STOL performance - some type of blown flap system?

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver...ebe98.Full.jpg

Boeing awarded patent for Speed Agile stealth transport concept
By Dave Majumdar on April 2, 2013 3:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0) |ShareThis
Boeing was granted a patent for a swept-wing powered lift aircraft on 26 March, which looks like it is based on the company's submission to the US Air Force Research Laboratory's Speed Agile program--which is a "collaborative effort" between NASA, Lockheed Martin and Boeing.

The AFRL program aims to study what it would take to develop a stealthy short take-off replacement for the C-130 Hercules series that could take-off and land in less than 1500ft and cruise at around Mach 0.8.

In any case, if the nation were ever to actually build something like this, it's not inconceivable that there could eventually be gunship and tanker variants. Of course, developing something like this would take money--something America is currently a little short on.

Per the USAF:

The SACD's high-efficiency STOL design incorporates a hybrid powered lift system. This lift system features a simplified mechanical design and low-drag integration. This lift system minimizes the engine size requirement so that both propulsion integration drag and power differential between takeoff and cruise are as small as possible, eliminating a major source of fuel efficiency problems and speed limitations in legacy systems.

Through a series of developments and demonstrations, the Speed Agile team concluded their effort in 2012 with large-scale validation tests and transonic validation tests, followed by a flight control simulation in which pilots rated the system highly.

Efficient point-to-point travel enabled by the SACD has the potential to eliminate dependence on major airports and extensive surface infrastructure to save time, fuel and environment. The resulting impact of this ability is a dramatic reduction in logistics footprint, fuel burn and time required to move people and supplies anywhere in the world via direct delivery to a forward base.

Looks similar to what I remember of the MD Super Frog concept before the Boeing acquisition of MD....

Really?
Tell us more... Google has only a few very short references.

Those intakes look like FOD magnets for dirt strips. Was this issued on 1 Apr perchance?

when does the MPA version become available?
what would you call it? Stealthrod?
Presumably something like that could patrol for days as long as the crew could stay awake

TT - intakes look like they've been shifted to the top on the patent drawing.
Milo - just buy a few Global Hawks and you'll be fine - no need to worry about P8s, P3s or an MPA version of the A400;)

Stealthrod? :eek:

That sounds like some wierd rohypnol fuelled rapist super-villain!

I don't like the sound of a stealth tanker. I'd like one I can find on radar when the weather's bad.

Look nice and affordable to be using from rough strips... Anyone want to guess the price tag?

Surely it can't cost any more than a F-35?

Your google-fu is lacking - there's plenty out there.

Here's an article about Boeing in 1998, shortly after the late '97 merger with MD:
1998 | 2636 | Flight Archive

And another in 2000:
lockheed martin | 2000 | 1164 | Flight Archive

Seems Boeing renamed it the Advanced Theater Transport, but kept the Super Frog nickname for a short while at least...

What I remember about it was that it was a tilt-wing design meant to compete with the quad-rotor that Bell-Boeing was working on for greater lift than V22 Osprey.

When searching for Mcdonell Douglas Tilt Wing, many more hits - perhaps super frog was an internal nickname. I did find at least a small handful of hits for Boeing redesigning tilt wing and references to evolution to ATT...

I was actually at MD in St Louis the last day it was MD and they were taking the signs down...

Beware, it can't be multi mission, how many times we have to tell them :ugh:

Looking at the F22, B2, F35, say 300 aircraft.. 2013 cost levels

400 mill per aircraft (~A380) x 300= $120 billion + 100 billions development costs + 100 billion for 30 yrs training & sustainment.. $320 billion at 2013 cost prices?

That's not even close to the F35.. Maybe I'm a bit low, double that.

Exclusive: U.S. sees lifetime cost of F-35 fighter at $1.45 trillion | Reuters

Anyway better start scaring the hell out of US taxpayers! The evil Chinese Arabs? Where's the flags & Hollywood when you need them..

Wouldn't those intakes be vulnerable to sucking up anything kicked out by the nose gear?


Posted from Pprune.org App for Android

1.45T / 2443 = 593.5M each
300B / 300 = 1B each

A bulk buy discount spread over 5 decades....sounds good!


We can bandy about fictitious numbers all day, it is the way of politicians and industry to use their best rose-colored glasses - in the end, we'll have fewer jets and they'll cost more with less capability...sadly, we all know that yet continue on the same path.

Looks to me a lot like the "Dropship" from the United Peace Force from............

Playstation

http://www.megghy.com/immagini/PS2/D/Dropship_Ps2.jpg

Other games consoles are available!

Senior Citizen
 

Senior Citizen perhaps released from the 'Black World' into the white world and drawing its pension by the time if this comes to fruition :mad:

Wonder if this will compete with the A400M? :ok:

Cheers

Yes very likely. Will be interesting to see two so different aircraft compete for the same contract.

The US based offer being stealth, the other one proven & 4 times as cheap.

So it would come down to who writes down the requirements and selection criteria.

On the KC-X tanker competition they were re-written after EADS won. From "best score for a variety of requirements" into meeting the minimum required tanker capacity (KC135 capacity) at minimal costs.

US congress will again make sure the USAF defines the right requirements / rules though ;)

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver...9a52d.Full.jpg

I don't like the look of those ramp crest angles in that picture.
Methinks someone has failed to realise what this aircraft would be used for. Sure it looks stealthy but it also looks to be substandard as a transporter.