USAF's tanker of the future

www.afrl.af.mil...
Picture

January 2005

"AFRL and Lockheed Martin partnered to complete approximately 200 hours of wind tunnel tests on a model of a next-generation tanker concept. During 2 weeks of testing at Lockheed Martin facilities in Marietta, Georgia, engineers collected aerodynamic data showing the effects of placing tanker equipment in various positions on the model. Analyzing this data will provide a better idea of how changing the equipment’s position between locations such as the model’s centerline or in a pod on the wingtip might affect a future tanker’s lift and drag.

In addition, the engineers conducted several tests in which they placed a receiver model in refueling positions behind the tanker. Data collected from these tests will reveal how the aerodynamic flow generated by the tanker will affect the receiver, thus helping engineers pinpoint design options for the tanker concept.

These tests are part of a continuing effort to design the Air Force’s next-generation strike tanker. AFRL is designing a tanker concept that will retain its high lift characteristics while producing a very stable wake to minimize effects on the refueling air vehicle."



With stealth tankers, "all your base are belong to us."


[edit on 6-5-2005 by NWguy83]

www.afrl.af.mil...

So this was in January 2005 ..
Is that the current picture ..... looks very amateurish. Maybe the concept is not but that picture is lol..... Looks like we have kids working in the big league

Originally posted by XPhiles
www.afrl.af.mil...

So this was in January 2005 ..
Is that the current picture ..... looks very amateurish. Maybe the concept is not but that picture is lol..... Looks like we have kids working in the big league

I wouldn't say that. It's probably just a very early concept art peice. Maybe it's a screenshot taken from a realtime simulation, hence the low res textures and poly count. It sounds like they are in a very early stage of development. I doubt this is what the final product will look like and i'm sure they arn't worried about the aesthetics of the image yet either. Not until they have a finalised design anyway. It's a big waste of time to put a lot of effort into an early concept art peice.

But anyway, I think the design itself is neat. Looks like they are going for a stealth design as well. Which makes sense for something like this.

that thing reminds me of the drop ship from 'aliens' the movie?.......i find it a bit unusual that in the past few years weve seen a lot of developments in fighter aircraft and bombers yet little in the way of transport aircraft..well certainly externally any way....does any one agree?

When I laid eyes on this image, I immediately thought 'Hadly Page Victor', the nose and intakes jsut shouted it to me.

www.aviation-art.net...

There is also a bit of talk over the Box Wing concept for use in transport and refueler aircraft.

Shattered OUT...

Some "more professional picutes"

i think it's a big too fat in the front. and it doesn't look that steathly either. wonder how many planes it can refuel at once hehe

Well I hope they go with this instead of that Airbus concept. Airbuses are a massive pain in the rear to do maintenence operations on, not a good thing when you're messing with precision inflight equipment.

Anyhow this Lockheed desing looks pretty good, it's all just a matter of fuel capacity and range for the most part.

Originally posted by optimus fett
that thing reminds me of the drop ship from 'aliens' the movie?
that's exactly the thought I had when I saw it

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Well I hope they go with this instead of that Airbus concept. Airbuses are a massive pain in the rear to do maintenence operations on, not a good thing when you're messing with precision inflight equipment.

Anyhow this Lockheed desing looks pretty good, it's all just a matter of fuel capacity and range for the most part.

I apologise but where did you hear this nonsense? Airbus in most cases could be EASIER to repair due to its use of fly by wire control systems, advanced flight computer control systems and composites, how can you say that an Airbus is more maintenence needie than say an 747 or 767 when with the newer models there are virtually no difference in the systems they employ, or how they employ them. If you can post some links to prove that the airbus aircraft would require more maintance, I for one would love to see it.

As for those pictures, they look interesting, kinda remind me of the STOL Herc competition, it looks like the loser, in so much as where they have mounted the engines. What do you lot think?

The YC14









[edit on 27-5-2005 by gooseuk]

Actually the The YC14 was the loser to YF-15 which led way to the development of the C-17. It used a concept known as upper surface blowing or something like that for STOL. The flaps were made of Titanium to deal with the heat. The prototype rests at the Pima Air Museum (I will try to dig up a picture from my trip 2 years ago)


www.pimaair.org...

BTW, according to AWST, McCain has asked the AF to consider other planes for the tanker competition including the 777

[edit on 5/27/05 by FredT]

Originally posted by FredT
Actually the The YC14 was the loser to YF-15 which led way to the development of the C-17. It used a concept known as upper surface blowing or something like that for STOL. The flaps were made of Titanium to deal with the heat. The prototype rests at the Pima Air Museum (I will try to dig up a picture from my trip 2 years ago)
[edit on 5/27/05 by FredT]

Fred, I think you meant YC-15 NOT YF-15! The YF-15 was the prototype for the F-15 Eagle. The YC-15 is the plane you are discribing in your post!

Tim
ATS Director of Counter-Ignorance

Tim you got me But ive been up for 24 hours

It still is one of the ugliest planes I have ever seen

hmm,

That plane is so dammed ugly, its... kinda cute
::Grins::

- Phil

i know this is drifting off-topic, but i'm just really wondering because i see it everywhere what does "all your base are belong to us" mean? i know what its trying to say, but why not say it properly? madness! oh and that concept plane would be a lil ba***rd to fly, looking at it, the weight distribution is frontal, which makes taking off hard, landing even harder and keeping it well-balanced in flight even harder. and when you're landing a plane with a heavy front, its bad. when its got a couple hundred litres of combustible fuel, its hell

Originally posted by gooseuk
I apologise but where did you hear this nonsense? Airbus in most cases could be EASIER to repair due to its use of fly by wire control systems, advanced flight computer control systems and composites, how can you say that an Airbus is more maintenence needie than say an 747 or 767 when with the newer models there are virtually no difference in the systems they employ, or how they employ them. If you can post some links to prove that the airbus aircraft would require more maintance, I for one would love to see it.

This information comes from a mechanic for United Airlines who worked extensivly with both Boeing and Airbus aircraft. Although the fly by wire systems are helpful apparently some of the parts on an Airbus are an absolute pain to get at when performing maintenence on them.

I'll be sure to ask a bit more on why they're such a pain when I get the chance.

kinda looks like the dropship in Halo...

the pelican... it does as well, never thought of that but lookin at it it does! who knows, maybe they got a Spartan on board? :O now wouldn't that be a sight?

What does "All your base are belong to us" mean!!??

It is a phrase that first appeared in a badly-translated video game called "Zero Wing" in 1989. For some strange reason that no-one really knows, the phrase (along with some other phrases from the same game) has become really popular, and you are supposed to laugh every time you see it. If you don't find it funny, you just have to see it again (and again and again etc.)