perttime

What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Was it kind of a weird looking thing? A real ugly duckling? Thanks; Ernie P.

perttime

Ugly duckling? I don't think so. It had nicely flowing lines, actually.


What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

7) a couple of years before scrapping, they experimented with adding a third engine to one of the prototypes.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Well, some of the versions looked pretty ugly to me. (-: Thanks; Ernie P.

perttime

What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

7) a couple of years before scrapping, they experimented with adding a third engine to one of the prototypes.

8) the third engine was quite different from the other two

perttime

What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

7) a couple of years before scrapping, they experimented with adding a third engine to one of the prototypes.

8) the third engine was quite different from the other two

9) OK, this one didn't work out... but there was a follow up design, based on it. That one became a great success in a few different roles. Fast, good range, could carry nukes or cameras, able to catch high flying bombers.

perttime

What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

7) a couple of years before scrapping, they experimented with adding a third engine to one of the prototypes.

8) the third engine was quite different from the other two

9) OK, this one didn't work out... but there was a follow up design, based on it. That one became a great success in a few different roles. Fast, good range, could carry nukes or cameras, able to catch high flying bombers.

10) the successful follow up design even used the same Name. The type designation was different (F-something).

perttime

What fighter aircraft

1) it was designed and built to a requirement for a long range bomber escort
2) before the prototypes flew, its designation was changed
3) it was selected for production, against two competing designs, but then the whole idea was dropped: only the two prototypes were ever built
4) both prototypes were scrapped

5) it was underpowered with the original engines, so they added a feature that was pretty new at the time
6) more powerful engines were planned for production aircraft

7) a couple of years before scrapping, they experimented with adding a third engine to one of the prototypes.

8) the third engine was quite different from the other two

9) OK, this one didn't work out... but there was a follow up design, based on it. That one became a great success in a few different roles. Fast, good range, could carry nukes or cameras, able to catch high flying bombers.

10) the successful follow up design even used the same Name. The type designation was different (F-something).

11) it was designed for six 20mm guns but a photo on the National Museum of the US Air Force site shows it test firing rockets too.

-

I'm shutting down for the night.

Post your answer now. You can still beat Ernie P. to it. I know he has the correct answer but hasn't got around to posting it yet...

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

If no one has this by the time I get up in the morning, I'm going to post the answer. Clue 7) alone should give it to you. I mean, how many planes flew with three engines AND were flying in the nuclear age? Thanks; Ernie P.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Well, I guess most of our regulars are out Christmas shopping. Still, time to end this one. McDonnell XF-88 Voodoo. A beautiful little aircraft, but that turboprop up front looked strange to me. Thanks; Ernie P.


The McDonnell XF-88 Voodoo was a long-range, twin-engine jet fighter aircraft with swept wings designed for the United States Air Force. Although it never entered service, its design was adapted for the subsequent supersonic F-101 Voodoo.
The XF-88 originated from a 1946 United States Army Air Forces requirement for a long-range "penetration fighter" to escort bombers to their targets. It was to be essentially a jet-powered replacement for the wartime North American P-51 Mustang that had escorted Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress bombers over Germany. It was to have a combat radius of 900 mi (1,450 km) and high performance. McDonnell began work on the aircraft, dubbed Model 36, on 1 April 1946. On 20 June the company was given a contract for two prototypes designated XP-88. Dave Lewis was Chief of Aerodynamics on this project.


The engineering team stands after Flight 100.


Supersonic jet-turboprop hybrid XF-88B


Landing the XF-88
The initial design was intended to have straight wings and a V-shaped tail but wind tunnel tests indicated aerodynamic problems that led to a conventional tailplane being substituted and the wings being swept. The USAAF confirmed the order for the two prototypes on 14 February 1947, while a change in designation schemes lead to the unflown prototypes being re-designated XF-88 on 1 July 1948, with the type gaining the nickname "Voodoo".
The Voodoo had a low/mid-mounted wing, swept to 35Β°. The two engines, specified as Westinghouse J34 turbojets were in the lower fuselage, fed by air intakes in the wing roots and jetpipes beneath the rear fuselage. This made room in the long fuselage for the fuel tanks required for the required long range. The Voodoo's short nose had no radar, being intended to house an armament of six 20 mm (.79 in) M39 cannon, while the fighter's single pilot sat in a pressurised cockpit and was provided with an ejection seat.

perttime

Of course it is

A couple of photos:

MajorTomski

My Dad was a part of the design team on the -88. He did the avionics installations behind the cockpit.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

This one is kind of tricky to form into a question, but it is well worth the effort. A real piece of aviation history. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Now there's a bit of aviation trivia! MajorTomski, good to see you active again. It must be a special thing to know your family has helped form thr future. Is your dad still interested in aviation matters? Thanks; Ernie P.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Late night clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

(3) The first successful test occurred well before WWII.

MajorTomski

Yep he just turned 88 and still flys RC. I just sent him a set of plans for a Jimmie Allen Bluebird Racer. Something he built when he was a kid.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

An early morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

(3) The first successful test occurred well before WWII.

(4) A human error occurred during the first test, but nothing catestrophic resulted. The test continued successfully.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Born in 1923? Man; he has seen some history. Please give him my best. Thanks; Ernie P.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sorry; been busy. A late night clue and one to make up for lost time. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

(3) The first successful test occurred well before WWII.

(4) A human error occurred during the first test, but nothing catestrophic resulted. The test continued successfully.

(5) An early form of mid-air refueling was tested, but was not used in practice.

(6) A number of different configurations were tried, and all proved relatively successful.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

And an early morning clue. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

(3) The first successful test occurred well before WWII.

(4) A human error occurred during the first test, but nothing catestrophic resulted. The test continued successfully.

(5) An early form of mid-air refueling was tested, but was not used in practice.

(6) A number of different configurations were tried, and all proved relatively successful.

(7) Despite the rather complex nature of the project, only one serious accident occurred. That accident resulted in the death of a pilot.

Halftrack99

My Feedback: (1)

Sounds a lot like the history of aerial refueling. The aircraft could be used for cargo, bombing, refueling and reconicence. The first aircraft to try this were prior to WW1 but 5 makes it sound like it is not refueling.

So inflight docking??

SimonCraig1

Composite aircraft and the JU-88 Mistel in particular?

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Aerial refueling was a feature of the original design, though it was never used in practice. Inflight docking was a feature of the project design, and you are headed in the right direction. But I'm looking for a specific project (by name) and specific aircraft (by name). Keep thinking; you'll get there. Thanks; Ernie P.


Question: What project, and what aircraft, do I describe?


Clues:

(1) This was a concept tried both before and after. Prototype aircraft were developed and tested. But only once was the concept developed into an effective weapon actually used successfully in combat.

(2) Four distinct and specific purposes were to be served by these aircraft.

(3) The first successful test occurred well before WWII.

(4) A human error occurred during the first test, but nothing catestrophic resulted. The test continued successfully.

(5) An early form of mid-air refueling was tested, but was not used in practice.

(6) A number of different configurations were tried, and all proved relatively successful.

(7) Despite the rather complex nature of the project, only one serious accident occurred. That accident resulted in the death of a pilot.

(8) One configuration used an aircraft with fixed landing gear, which created serious problems. Using retractable landing gear solved the problem.

Ernie P.

My Feedback: (3)

Sorry, no. But you aren't totally looking in the wrong direction, either. You and (especially) Halftrack99 are starting to figure it out. Thanks; Ernie P.

MajorTomski

Well you're obviously in the parasite aircaft ball park

Mistles are out because they didn't happen before the war

The Dcoking part implies the great ariships but they weren't sucessful in the war

projcect tom tom came after the war and never was sucessful in combat

the XF 85 and follow on YF-84/ B-36's althoubh deployed weren't used in combat.

Good narrow set of hints