Jump to content

Any idea what this test vehicle is on F-101A 53-2438?


RidgeRunner

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, RidgeRunner said:

I have a suspicion that this was simply an aerodynamic test vehicle that was not reeled out. Maybe Robert Dorr's description was about the ultimate intent rather than reference to this exact set up. Not only is there no winch gear apparent there doesnt appear to be any recovery frame to bring such a device safely back on to the pylon. Or am I mistaken?

 

Martin

I reckon you're probably right, anyway, you have a photo to work on and you could justifiably model it in that configuration.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

Where would the winding gear have been? Inside the thick pylon?

Could i play devils advocate here ? That mount looks like it is forward of the belly tank mounts. Could it possibly be in the ammunition bay with cable fed through a hole of some sort ? As for a safe recovery,  i have not seen any photo’s of the rear of that pylon/weapon arrangement. Its possible there is something there we havent seen from the 2-3 grainy photo’s ? Just my :2c: on the matter. 

 

 Dennis

Edited by Corsairfoxfouruncle
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Dennis, that's a good thought. I'm still of a mind to think that it may have been an inert vehicle, dropped for aero testimg becaause of the lack of recovery gear. I'm happy to be proved wrong though ;).

 

Martin

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah ha, I hadn't seen those. They don't appear to be in the first image that I posted.

 

so, any ideas about those, anyone?

 

Martin

Edited by RidgeRunner
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/02/2019 at 02:21, RidgeRunner said:

Ah ha, I hadn't seen those. They don't appear to be in the first image that I posted.

And you’re right...

 

22 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

It looks like a makeshift sight?  Maybe related to the drone?

...it’s just a trap handles! :facepalm: The angle of a view makes me see something unusual...

 

Pardonnez-moi! But now we know how the «what-if» parts appeared in some kits! 😀

 

P.S. Just googled the «NF-101» and found some interesting information in Russian: «Two aircraft under the designation JF-101A and NF-101A were used to test the General Electric J79 turbojet engine, apparently for the F-101D/E variant with the J79 engine.»

 

I don’t know how this information is truthful.

 

Cheers! 😶

Edited by Nikolay Polyakov
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nikolay Polyakov said:

F-101» and found some interesting information in Russian: «Two aircraft under the designation JF-101A and NF-101A were used to test the General Electric J79 turbojet engine, apparently for the F-101D/E variant with the J79 engine.»

 

Yes, Nikolay, the F-101A still exists in a US museum.

 

Martin

 

 

4 hours ago, Nikolay Polyakov said:

...it’s just a trap handles! :facepalm: The angle of a view makes me see something unusual...

 

What do you mean, Nikolay?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So armed with Robs info i found some more using “Prometheus towed target.”

 

https://picclick.com/Hayes-Aircraft-Photo-Birmingham-Alabama-Prometheus-Tow-Target-152746458135.html

 

https://www.worldcat.org/title/prometheus-supersonic-dart-type-tow-target/oclc/757378627

 

I think the 2nd entry is a book/PDF about the prometheus. If you go to worldcat looks like this Hayes aircraft also did work on the KB-50’s as well.

 

Edited by Corsairfoxfouruncle
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rob de Bie said:

Maybe I was lucky tonight on Ebay:

 

https://www.ebay.com/itm/MAYBE-UNIQUE-HAYES-AIRCRAFT-PROMETHEUS-TARGET-DRONE-DESK-MODEL/264196614355?hash=item3d835868d3:g:CbIAAOSw50JbNUR2:rk:2:pf:0

 

I had never seen it before, but it matches your photos reasonably well.

 

Rob

 

I'd say that you've hit the jackpot, Rob :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Corsairfoxfouruncle said:

So armed with Robs info i found some more using “Prometheus towed target.”

 

https://picclick.com/Hayes-Aircraft-Photo-Birmingham-Alabama-Prometheus-Tow-Target-152746458135.html

 

https://www.worldcat.org/title/prometheus-supersonic-dart-type-tow-target/oclc/757378627

 

I think the 2nd entry is a book/PDF about the prometheus. If you go to worldcat looks like this Hayes aircraft also did work on the KB-50’s as well.

 

 

Great finds, Dennis! I just need to work out the best way of reproducing that needle :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 1/31/2019 at 9:13 AM, RidgeRunner said:

........ any thoughts of the pylon apparatus would be of immense help. Thank you.

 

I was looking through the Osprey book mentioned last night for something completely different and on coming across the black and white image and was reminded of the second part of your initial query .......... might the inner wing pylon from an F-84F be suitable for providing the basis for the carrier? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
On 2/13/2019 at 5:54 PM, Nikolay Polyakov said:
On 2/9/2019 at 3:28 PM, RidgeRunner said:

NF-101A 53-2438-001

 

Thanks Nikolay. An interesting shot that I hadn't seen before. As you say, not a F-101A and the dart is different. On the one I'm building it looks like the dart (Prometheus) was simply strapped to the pylon? THere appear to be white/metal straps in two points. my suggestion is tha this was an un-powered airborne dummy. If it were powered would there not be a rail or similar? Any thoughts? 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

On the one I'm building it looks like the dart (Prometheus) was simply strapped to the pylon?

Yes, looks like it fixed by the metal band for some aerodynamic tests(?).

 

2 hours ago, RidgeRunner said:

my suggestion is tha this was an un-powered airborne dummy. If it were powered would there not be a rail or similar? Any thoughts?

Maybe it’s not detachable. That’s why the pylon is so massive.

 

Anyway, it’s just suggestions.

 

Cheers! 🙂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Nikolay Polyakov said:

Yes, looks like it fixed by the metal band for some aerodynamic tests(?).

 

10 minutes ago, Nikolay Polyakov said:

Maybe it’s not detachable. That’s why the pylon is so massive.

Yes, that was my thought too

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

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
×
×
  • Create New...