It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


( The Real flying triangle ? )

page: 1

log in


posted on Nov, 25 2002 @ 10:16 PM
General Dynamics

[Edited on 1-9-2003 by quaneeri]

posted on Nov, 25 2002 @ 10:18 PM
The Avenger II was to be the US Navy's new Advanced Tactical Aircraft, designed to replace the Grumman A-6 Intruder as the Navy's primary carrier-based attack aircraft. The design never reached production, cancelled by the US Government after a series of budget overruns, design problems, and political infighting. Not much has been released about the Avenger II, no doubt due to the lawsuits that followed the government's cancellation of the production contract. Virtually everything was destroyed in the aftermath - both data and jobs. Massive layoffs occurred at both McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics after the contract was cancelled.

A-12 Avenger II - The Full Scale Mockup On Display
The General Dynamics / McDonnell Douglas A-12 Avenger II Full Scale Mockup was publicly displayed for the first time on June 29 & 30, 1996, at the Carswell JRB Open House in Fort Worth, Texas.

The A-12 FSM was displayed in an open hangar, making for less than optimal photographic lighting conditions - not to mention the throngs of people trying to escape the hot Texas sun...


The canopy is a very large one-piece affair, and hinges to the starboard side.
The Intakes are baffled/louvered, not unlike the B-1B.
The lower intake lip looks as if it might hinge downward to increase intake area, much like the B-1B and the Eurofighter.
The ducted exhaust was centrally located at aft edge of the lower surface, no thrust vectoring.
The outboard wing panels have leading edge slats.
Radar/sensors are located behind conformal panels in the leading edge, just outboard of the intakes.
External stores could be carried, primarily fuel tanks.
Refueling probe extends from the upper side, starboard of the canopy, much like the F-14 or F/A-18.
Internal bays carried weapons on trapezes, much like the F-117A and YF-22.

The cockpit was fully mocked up and looked a lot like an F-15E.
General Dynamics (now Lockheed Martin Tactical Aircraft Systems) has donated the A-12 FSM to the Alliance Aviation Museum group for eventual display in their (as yet unbuilt) museum at Alliance Airport north of Fort Worth, Texas.

[Edited on 1-9-2003 by quaneeri]

posted on Nov, 27 2002 @ 06:51 PM
Give me a SINGLE good reason NOT to replace the A-6 Intruder with it.


posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 05:46 AM
This thing has such a cool shape.

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 06:48 AM
I'm reallysceptic about these pics.

Don't you have any shoot of the aircraft in take-off or landing phase ?

And, necro99 this plane is a prototype; It isn't designed for carrier weapons.

[Edited on 14-2-2003 by D.A.R.Y.L]

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 07:50 AM
She's beautiful. Were they seriously considering her for carrier duty? I would think her wing width would limit her usefulness on a carrier.

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 12:39 PM
A-12 Avenger II
Plans for the Navy's A-12 combat aircraft called for incorporating more advanced stealthy characteristics than were used in the F-117A, as well as significantly greater payload capabilities. The Navy's A-12 Avenger Advanced Technology Aircraft (ATA) was slated to replace current A-6s on aircraft carriers in the mid-1990's.

But on 7 January 1991, Secretary of Defense Richard Cheney canceled the program, in the largest contract termination in DoD history. By one estimate the A-12 had become so expensive that it would have consumed up 70 percent of the Navy's aircraft budget within three years.

The Navy originally planned to buy 620 of the McDonnell Douglas/General Dynamics aircraft, with the Marine Corps purchasing an additional 238 planes. And the Air Force at one point considered buying 400, at an average cost that was estimated at close to $100 million each. The A-12 was designed to fly faster and further than the A-6E, and carry a large bomb-load in internal bomb-bays to reduce drag and maintain a low radar cross-section. As with the Advanced Tactial Fighter (ATF), the A-12 was expected to have greater reliability than current aircraft (double that of the A-6E), and require half the maintenance manhours.

At first blush, the A-12's performance capabilities would have been in roughly the same class as existing aircraft. The key improvement over existing aircraft, not inherently obvious when comparing specifications, was stealth. While today's radar can detect existing naval aircraft at a range of 50 miles, the A-12 was designed to remain undetected until approximately 10 miles away. This would result in significant operational and survival benefits for the A-12 since defenders would have little opportunity to engage the aircraft once detected so close to the target. The A-12's reduced radar cross section would have been derived, in part, from carrying its ordnance internally. While the top speed of the more visible F/A- 18 and A-6 would be significantly reduced by the drag induced by external weapons carriage, the internal weapons bay on the A-12 would provide no impediment to speed.

The A-12 proved to be the most troubled of the new American stealth aircraft in large part because of problems found in the extensive use of composites in its structure. These composites did not result in anticipated weight savings, and some structural elements had to be replaced with heavier metal components. The weight of each aircraft exceeded 30 tons, 30% over design specification, and close to the limits that could be accommodated on aircraft carriers. The program also experienced problems with its complex Inverse Synthetic Aperture Radar system, as well as delays in its advanced avionics components.

The full scope of these problems were not appreciated at the time of Defense Secretary Cheney's Major Aircraft Review, which slowed the production rate and dropped 238 Marine Corps aircraft, leaving the original total Navy buy of 620 aircraft. Cheney also decided to delay for over 5 years the Air Force buy (from 1992 to 1998), which was decoupled from the Navy project. Subsequently, the A-12 contractors revealed that the project faced serious engineering problems and a $2 billion cost overrun, which would delay the first flight by over a year, to the fall of 1991, and raised the unit cost substantially.
According to the 1990 administrative inquiry conducted for the Secretary of the Navy, the cost performance data from the A-12 contractors clearly indicated significant cost and schedule problems. The results of an oversight review of the cost performance reports disclosed that the A-12 contract would probably exceed its ceiling by $1 billion. However, neither the contractors nor the Navy program manager relied upon this data; instead, they used overly optimistic recovery plans and schedule assumptions. The inquiry concluded that the government and contractor program managers lacked the objectivity to assess the situation and they disregarded financial analysts who surfaced the problems.

The U.S. Navy on January 7, 1991, notified McDonnell Douglas and General Dynamics Corporation (the Team) that it was terminating for default the Team's contract for development and initial production of the A-12 aircraft, and demanded repayment of the amounts paid to the Team under such contracts. The Department of Defense terminated the contract after the contractors failed to deliver a single airplane after receiving more than $2 billion in payments. Instead, the contractors refused to continue with the contract unless they received extraordinary relief in the form of relaxed terms and extra funds. At the same time, they would or could not assure delivery of an aircraft by a time certain, specify the aircraft's performance capabilities, or commit to a specific price for the aircraft. The Team filed a legal action to contest the Navy's default termination, to assert its rights to convert the termination to one for "the convenience of the Government," and to obtain payment for work done and costs incurred on the A-12 contract but not paid to date.

On December 19, 1995, the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ordered that the Government's termination of the A-12 contract for default be converted to a termination for convenience of the Government. On December 13, 1996, the Court issued an opinion confirming its prior no-loss adjustment and no-profit recovery order. In an early 1997 stipulation, the parties agreed that, based on the prior orders and findings of the court, plaintiffs were entitled to recover $1.071 billion. Furthermore, on January 22, 1997, the court issued an opinion in which it ruled that plaintiffs are entitled to recover interest on that amount.

The government is filing a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit following a decision against it on 20 February 1998 by the United States Court of Federal Claims. The Department of Defense believes that the court's decision in favor of the contractors is wrong and provides unwarranted relief from a failure to produce the aircraft for which the contractors are fully responsible. The Federal Claims Court decision was fully expected based upon earlier rulings by the trial judge; the government has made clear its belief that those earlier rulings were fundamentally flawed. The court's decision concludes the protracted trial phase of this case and will allow the appellate phase to begin.

[Edited on 1-9-2003 by quaneeri]

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 01:03 PM

[Edited on 1-9-2003 by quaneeri]

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 04:58 PM
That TBF pilot must be REALLY suprised!

posted on Feb, 14 2003 @ 06:18 PM

The painting above of the A-12 was one of the last done by the late General Dynamics artist, Bob Cunningham. The TBM Avenger in the painting was the one flown by President George Bush, who went to Fort Worth and dedicated the A-12 when it was still classified. The A-12 was to have been the Avenger II.
This full size mockup of the canceled A-12 was donated to us by Lockheed.

[Edited on 1-9-2003 by quaneeri]

posted on Apr, 4 2003 @ 07:44 AM
Good job!!!!!!!!!!!! That is an awesome pic. I like how they painted it white.

posted on Apr, 8 2003 @ 04:24 AM

posted on Apr, 9 2003 @ 03:59 AM
Since when did the navy start flying lol. I love the added navy on the triangle.

new topics


log in