aircraft/loadouts Grumman F10F-1 Jaguar - The Cougar's Successor With Variable Swept-Wings

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

The USN line is lacking in rank V, and the navalized Sabres (FJ-3 and FJ-4) have already been suggested, so I want to suggest this plane.

 

Quick overview:

 

 

Spoiler

 

The Grumman F10F-1 Jaguar is a prototype jet fighter with variable swept-wings designed for the United States Navy in 1952. Despite never reaching production, it helped General Dynamics design their F-111 Aardvark and Grumman's very own and special F-14 Tomcat.

 

 

 

 

History, design and development:

 

 

Spoiler

 

The Model 83 was a submission put forward by Grumman to the United States Navy (USN) as a single-seat, single-engine jet fighter. The proposal was revealed in early September of 1947 and intended for carrier-based operations - as a fighter it could carry a battery of 4 x 20mm cannon as well as bombs and rockets for the strike role. Unlike other early-generation jet fighters, the Model 83 was to fit the APS-19 radar. The wing mainplanes were fitted amidships and sported sweepback along the leading edges while the tail section, encompassing a single fin, mounted the horizontal planes high (forming a "T" style tail unit). The jet engine would be aspirated through wingroot intakes keeping the nose free for armament and radar. The cockpit was set ahead of midships with generally good vision for the pilot.

 

It was intended that the aircraft would take on the British Rolls-Royce "Nene" turbojet engine as the "XJ42-TT-2" to be produced locally by Taylor Turbine. The engine was to produce up to 5,000 lb of dry thrust output and featured an afterburning capability which would increase thrust to 8,000 lb for short periods. The prototype designation for the Model 83 became "XF10F-1" and an April 1948 USN contract followed for two machines (one flyable and other a static test article). The name "Jaguar" was eventually associated with the design.

 

Preliminary work provided unique insight into the proposed aircraft and issues related to handling were revealed which led engineers to rework some facets of the design. A "variable incidence" wing was introduced to compensate and a USN increase to the fighter's expected range brought about additional revisions which, inevitably, led to increased overall weight for the carrier-based fighter development. Grumman was able to produce a mockup before mid-1949 but the program was beginning to face rising obstacles which put its future in doubt. The Westinghouse afterburning XJ40 turbojet was now the engine being fitted promising thrust output up to 11,000 lb.

 

Instead of the variable incidence wing, Grumman managed to convince USN authorities that a variable-geometry wing would solve ongoing handling issues at low- and high-speeds and this was then installed on the finalized prototype. The product achieved its first flight in prototype on May 19th, 1952. Sufficiently impressed, the USN followed an order for 112 machines under the model designation of "F10F".

 

Despite the push forward, the Jaguar ended its service life as only a single prototype (the second prototype lay incomplete before the end). There proved too many issues (performance, technically and mechanically related) for the Jaguar to overcome - performance from the temperamental XJ40-WE-8 engine led to an underpowered aircraft as thrust output reached only 6,800 lb during tests. The variable-geometry wing worked as planned but proved a bit too impractical for frontline carrier-based fighter use. As a result, the Model 83 / XF10F project was ended where it stood (and the production order subsequently cancelled) during April 1953. Despite this, the exposure for Grumman engineers was priceless despite the overall "failure" of the product in question - the "swing-wing" capability was used to perfection in the Grumman F-14 "Tomcat" fleet defense fighter of the 1970s.

 

Grumman performance estimates for their Model 83 included a maximum speed of 686 miles per hour, a service ceiling of at least 30,000 feet and a rate-of-climb nearing 10,100 feet-per-minute. Combat radius was listed at 440 miles. The XF10F-1 prototype exhibited a maximum speed of 710 miles per hour and a range out to 1,670 miles. Both airframes were ultimately expended or scrapped.

 

 

 

 

Camouflage:

 

 

Cockpit:
 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Internal Components:
 

Spoiler

 

 

 

 

Specifications

 

 

 

Spoiler

 

Grumman F10F-1 Jaguar

 

 

General Characteristics

 

First flight:  19/5/1952

Number built:  1

Role:  Fighter

Crew:  1

Length: 16.59 m (54.5 ft)

Wingspan: 

• Normal (Spread): 15.42 m (50.8 ft)
• Swept: 11.17 m (36.8 ft)

Wing area: 

• Normal (Spread): 43.38 m ² (467 ft ²)
• Swept: 41.8 m ² (450 ft ²)

Height:  4.95 m (16.3 ft)

Empty weight:  9,265 kg (20,426 lbs)

Loaded weight: 12,451 kg (27,449.756 lbs)

Max. takeoff weight:  16,080 kg (35,450 lbs)

Powerplant:  1 x Westinghouse XJ40-WE-8 turbojet developing 3,084.428 kgf of thrust (30.24791 kN, 6,800 lbf)

 

Performance

 

Maximum speed (normal/spread):  1,055 km/h (655.5 mph, 569.5 knots) at sea level

Maximum speed (swept): 1,143 km/h (710 mph, 617 knots) at sea level

Cruise speed:  1,017 km/h (632 mph, 549 knots)

Never-exceed speed:  Mach 0.9637188 (1,190 km/h, 739.4317 mph, 642.5486 knots)

Rate of climb:  51.308 m/s (168.33 ft/s)

Service ceiling:  13,960 m (45,800.5 ft)

Range: 2,687 km (1,669.6 mi, 1,450.8 nmi)

Max. range :  3,363.5 km (2,090 mi, 1,815 nmi)

Wing loading (Normal/Spread):

• Empty weight: 213.577686 kg/m ²  (43.74 lb. ft ²)
• Loaded weight: 289.096358 kg/m ²  (59.21 lb. ft ²)
• Max. takeoff weight: 370.677732 kg/m ²  (75.92 lb. ft ²)

Wing loading (Swept):

• Empty weight: 221.650718 kg/m ² (45.4 lb. ft ²)
• Loaded weight: 300.023923 kg/m ² (61.45 lb. ft ²)
• Max. takeoff weight: 384.688995 kg/m ²  (78.79 lb. ft ²)

Thrust/weight:

• Empty weight: 0.33
• Loaded weight: 0.28
• Max. takeoff weight: 0.19

 

Armament

 

Guns:  4 x 20mm AN/M3 cannons (190 rpg, 760 rounds in total)

Bombs: 2 x 1,000 lbs (2 x 907 kg)

Rockets: 

• 6 x 127mm HVAR High Velocity Aircraft Rocket
• 2 x 24x70mm rockets

 

 

 

Looking at the top speed, I think that if they decide to add this plane, they should add a proper counterpart to it.

 

Sources/References:

 

Spoiler

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_XF10F_Jaguar

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=1514

https://www.aviationsmilitaires.net/v2/base/view/Model/1612.html

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/f10f-specs.htm

http://www.aviastar.org/air/usa/grumman_jaguar.php

Modeler-Constructor. Alexander Chechin. With a variable sweep wing 
W. Green, G. Swanborough. The Complete Book of Fighters 
Le Fana de l'Aviation. Corwin Meyer. Un chat de gouttière: le Grumman XF10F-1 "Jaguar" 

Naval Fighters 26. Corwin Corky Meyer. Grumman XF10F-1 Jaguar

 

Edited November 20, 2020 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[leroyonly 4,310]

Open for discussion. 

[dotEXCEL 5,969]

+1 yes please!

[scavenjer 1,892]

Gib, fits the top tiers of jets quite well and can provide additional CAS.

[kev2go 5,112]

 with 51m/s climb and a 1,190 Top speed 

 

So climb rate faster than a MIg17A, and significantly faster top speed than anything else in game, being just 45km/h shy of achieving Supersonic Flight ?

 

seems like this is too good. for 9.0 for the time being. Id think this will be fairer for consideration when higher performance jets are added from other nations.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 25, 2018 by kev2go

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

29 minutes ago, kev2go said:

1,190 Top speed 

 

That's the rip speed. It did not reach that in a straight line.

 

30 minutes ago, kev2go said:

So climb rate faster than a MIg17A, and significantly faster top speed than anything else in game, being just 45km/h shy of achieving Supersonic Flight ?

 

Which is why I said this at the end of the post  

 

2 hours ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Looking at the top speed, I think that if they decide to add this plane, they should add a proper counterpart to it.

 

The Jaguar is a good aircraft to add in case they want to expand the limitations of rank V.

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

2 hours ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

Thrust/weight:

• Empty weight: 0.33
• Loaded weight: 0.28
• Max. takeoff weight: 0.19

 

But the T/W values are lackluster

[LaChasseBordel 26]

Nice one !

 

Speed wise it would be alright with 9.0/9.3

It also could be an interesting premium for grinding rank VI when it comes out, since US Naval aviation doesn't lack mass-produced aircraft to fill up the tree

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

Suggestion OP updated! 3/25/2018

 

More speed values added.

 

(you might want to check them if you'd like to)

 

12 minutes ago, LaChasseBordel said:

It also could be an interesting premium for grinding rank VI when it comes out, since US Naval aviation doesn't lack mass-produced aircraft to fill up the tree

 

I prefer seeing low-end jets as rank V premiums, because giving new players the chance to go straight to top tier would cause a huge mess in teams.

 

Things like the P-59 Airacomet, He 280, Meteor Mk 1 etc

Edited March 25, 2018 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[Emmerad333 8]

Why not?

[FrankDaTank4 9]

+1 I think it could be the same BR as the FJ-3 and before the FJ-4!

 

Great Find!

[J0ntza 0]

+1 Would be great addition to US naval jets.

[Y3_SkyBreaker 249]

I'd support it. It looks like they could add it and a few counterparts in other nations as a transition into Rank VI jets. 
+1

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

1 hour ago, Y3_SkyBreaker said:

I'd support it. It looks like they could add it and a few counterparts in other nations as a transition into Rank VI jets. 
+1

Sounds nice.  

 

1 hour ago, FrankDaTank4 said:

+1 I think it could be the same BR as the FJ-3 and before the FJ-4!

 

Great Find!

 

Thanks

[HorexKitsuneNeko 2]

+1 I wonder how the variable sweep would be implemented in the game, I am guessing it would be like just flaps? but then they would have to add more "stages" in addition to "combat", "takeoff", "landing"?

[pusia669 16]

I supportet this i wanna resreach and fly this beauty  +1

Edited March 25, 2018 by pusia669

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

30 minutes ago, HorexKitsuneNeko said:

+1 I wonder how the variable sweep would be implemented in the game, I am guessing it would be like just flaps? but then they would have to add more "stages" in addition to "combat", "takeoff", "landing"?

 

Flaps have [ and ] to raise and lower as default. Maybe ; and ' since those buttons are next to each other on keyboard for variable-swept wing functions  

[SkyEye 857]

+1 im all for the Navy getting actual competitive jets but its performance seems too good for the current top teir and how would they model different performance changes the variable wing offer?

Edited March 25, 2018 by SkyEye

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

11 hours ago, SkyEye said:

+1 im all for the Navy getting actual competitive jets but its performance seems too good for the current top teir and how would they model different performance changes the variable wing offer?

 

I find it pretty simple. They already have performance values for all flap positions in the game, all they would have to do is do the same but with a bit more extensions.

 

I did say they would have to add proper counterparts to it at the end of the thread.  

[Nell_Lucifer 927]

+1

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

Surprised a variable swept wing jet fighter that's not supersonic is not getting the amount of attention one would expect it to get for what it is 

Edited October 11, 2018 by EpicBlitzkrieg87

[mrparty1 950]

Let's not forget the engine electronics box that had a screw that was 5 inches too long which mangled the wiring. That was pretty much the source of most of the technical troubles. The other issue was the awful horizontal stabilizer, but that was apparently replaced with the one from the F9F-8. Italso looks pretty underpowered. In general...

 

Apparently the wing sweep mechanism worked like a dream though, so that's good.

 

+1 but at 9.7 or maybe 9.3 on account of it's very P/W

 

Edit: actually apparently the wings jammed from poor maintenance, but at least they unswept themselves when they did.

 

Corky Meyer said it was an entertaining plane to fly though... Because there was so much wrong with it!

Edited October 11, 2018 by mrparty1

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

9 hours ago, mrparty1 said:

Let's not forget the engine electronics box that had a screw that was 5 inches too long which mangled the wiring. That was pretty much the source of most of the technical troubles. The other issue was the awful horizontal stabilizer, but that was apparently replaced with the one from the F9F-8. Italso looks pretty underpowered. In general...

 

Apparently the wing sweep mechanism worked like a dream though, so that's good.

 

+1 but at 9.7 or maybe 9.3 on account of it's very P/W

 

Edit: actually apparently the wings jammed from poor maintenance, but at least they unswept themselves when they did.

 

Corky Meyer said it was an entertaining plane to fly though... Because there was so much wrong with it!

 

None of those flaws would be modeled in the game though  

[mrparty1 950]

9 hours ago, EpicBlitzkrieg87 said:

 

None of those flaws would be modeled in the game though  

Of course not. Hopefully that means it will still be entertaining to fly!

[EpicBlitzkrieg87 8,350]

On 12/10/2018 at 21:39, mrparty1 said:

Of course not. Hopefully that means it will still be entertaining to fly!

 

As long as it gets a good BR I'm sure it will be