Douglas X-3 Stiletto X

[lazarus]

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18v_IYGhV7bRa-G_XHmTpIWs3DpGlA0wb
573455734657347

It's 'ol masa Ito-Sans from the 2002 days, so remember, it's geriatric.
X materials and animation deffs, VC model, textures assigned in DDS. Considering it's age, the lawn dart isn't too bad.
Be great for old Edwards AI, and there's a dearth of X ships for the sim. I did some basic geometry massaging to get things matched up with the visual model- by eye, so, not perfect, but better. Mike Pooks cockpit cfg, Hetzie has a 2D set made over at sinviation. Put in and adjusted the flight tuning, the numbers aren't way out of whack. Very long take offs run and landing run out at high speeds - around 160-170 kts, its easy to get into a high sinkrate and jam your pud in the dirt.
Have not got 'round to doing anything with the effects set yet. Frames are fantastic, looks allright.
It's not a Milton plane; sorry, Pam. But it'll fill the hole until somebody takes the bit. Good fun, though!

[Jafo]

I remember seeing pics of this thing as a rug-rat....and always thought it was the bee's knees .... even if the reality was less stellar...;)

[Bjoern]

Ah, the aircraft that vidicated the Starfighter's concept of pointiness with as little lifting surface as possible. But unlike the Widowmaker, it didn't have the power to go with it.

[lazarus]

I've never been able to decide if it's pretty or freakish. Probably one of the last machines ever designed with the little tiny traditional vertical stab, this thing must have hunted in yaw some terrible. They did get a grip on inertia coupling out of it, and learned what not to do. It seemed kind of a retrograde step after the sky streak and sky rocket, which looked right and flew right. I guess you could call it successful. They only built the one, and it didn't convert into a smoking hole, so win.
Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?

[warchild]

Thanks Lazarus.. I Downloaded this the other day and although i had to make a couple adjustments to the fde because of my oversensitive joystick, it flew all right.. I was surprised when i saw that Ito-Sama had factored in Coupled MOI, which is a lot of what the plane was designed to explore.. Coupled MOI is kind of the witches brew of aviation. Mostly in FSX and P3D you wont see it, and old experienced FDE engineers will tell you it doesnt matter, but for a long slender body like the X-3 and the manned missile, its quite the pain. Coupled MOI happens when you move through two planes at the same time, which in most aircraft is always if your not flying straight. WWI flic's and the dogfight in Top Gun provide excellent examples of Coupled MOI. As the planes roll and yaw through a turn, youll see the Ennpenage skid outward You'll also see this in the classic wings Sopwith Camel ( because the tail is heavy ). Thats Coupled MOI, and its been known to throw aircraft into unrecoverable situations.. The X-3 was instrumental in finding ways to combat this effect and pioneered new technologies for the time that we now take for granted ( yaw dampers anyone?? ).. Its a good plane, and a fun one.. I'm sorry i got over amped and fired up and hijacked the other thread. Me and my five year old mentality when it kicks in.. It's truly embarrasing, and in this case may have caused people to not care to make the plane.. I just get too excited..

[warchild]

I've never been able to decide if it's pretty or freakish. Probably one of the last machines ever designed with the little tiny traditional vertical stab, this thing must have hunted in yaw some terrible. They did get a grip on inertia coupling out of it, and learned what not to do. It seemed kind of a retrograde step after the sky streak and sky rocket, which looked right and flew right. I guess you could call it successful. They only built the one, and it didn't convert into a smoking hole, so win.
Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?

I can only guess that being test pilots during that time period, they were expected to not get in a situation where ejection was needed, and if they did, they were expendable.. Hell, men died building the hoover dam and the panama canal, whats one test pilot?? The fifties had major attitude problems..

[Bjoern]

Hey, how'd they get out of this thing in a gripping situation? It's a fixed canopy, and the poor schlub crawled in the aft hatch and over the seat - jettison the nose?

"Flying for the first time in 1952, the X-3 looked weird. The pilot sat in a pressurized cabin on a downwards-firing ejection seat, which also served as an electric lift to provide access from the ground. The X-3 was difficult to handle when taxiing, tricky on take-off and very difficult to fly. "
http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Douglas-X3.html

[wombat666]

I remember sticking together the ancient Lindbergh 1:48 plastic model kit together a lifetime ago!
And I mean 'sticking'.........build 'em fast and out of the box back in the day.
:biggrin-new:

[lazarus]

Thanks, Bjoern. The recollection came back as soon as I read your post. The door is a carry-over from the lindbergh kit, a battery compartment for the original 'motorized' toy features they were fond of. Boss Ito often modelled models. So it's a good representation of a bad model of the X-3.:biggrin-new:

[Bjoern]

Boss Ito often modelled models. So it's a good representation of a bad model of the X-3.:biggrin-new:

That's an interesting approach. I have an untouched Revell 1:48 kit of a F-4F here. Maybe I could... (Just kiddding.)

[Milton Shupe]

... snipped ... Its a good plane, and a fun one.. I'm sorry i got over amped and fired up and hijacked the other thread. Me and my five year old mentality when it kicks in.. It's truly embarrassing, and in this case may have caused people to not care to make the plane.. I just get too excited..

Pam,

If you are referring to me or my thread, I was in no way offended or put off; actually was honored by your comments. Thank you :-)

I did some web searching and found plenty of info on the X-3 but not a single really good 3-view with cross-sections.
I think cross-sections are essential for getting a good quality model built for this aircraft.
Although there are a few good walk-around pics to be found, its just hard to get a feel for the body/engine mold from what I have seen.

If a good 3-view with cross-sections can be found, I'll take a stab at the model and mapping but would leave sounds, exterior/interior textures, and flight model (i.e. the rest of the project) to you/others. Panel proper gauges I do not have in my inventory although I could populate with some functional ones.

[lazarus]

Mr. Shupe, you have way too much time on your hands, and a generous streak wide enough to require inner, middle and outer markers!:encouragement:
I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten:biggrin-new:) of some museum coneheads. No promises, though. Sections drawings are hard ones to get. Took me a month of shaking and pistol-whipping to find a set of Seamaster sections.

[Mach3DS]

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090188.pdf

Contains a 3 view and engineering measurements of the required items for the wing.

[Milton Shupe]

Mr. Shupe, you have way too much time on your hands, and a generous streak wide enough to require inner, middle and outer markers!:encouragement:
I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten:biggrin-new:) of some museum coneheads. No promises, though. Sections drawings are hard ones to get. Took me a month of shaking and pistol-whipping to find a set of Seamaster sections.

LOL Well, my "markers" were laid out above so if proper sectional drawings can be found, maybe I can provide a reasonable model acceptable to the interested group.

Thank you

[Milton Shupe]

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090188.pdf

Contains a 3 view and engineering measurements of the required items for the wing.

Thank you Rick; that is very helpful for accurate wing layout. I have seen but one picture showing the LE of wing extended I assume to 7 degrees as noted in the doc.

Will need to do some study to determine how the main gear retracts.

Found 3 decent pics of the cockpit that were quite helpful.

[warchild]

Pam,

If you are referring to me or my thread, I was in no way offended or put off; actually was honored by your comments. Thank you :-)

I did some web searching and found plenty of info on the X-3 but not a single really good 3-view with cross-sections.
I think cross-sections are essential for getting a good quality model built for this aircraft.
Although there are a few good walk-around pics to be found, its just hard to get a feel for the body/engine mold from what I have seen.

If a good 3-view with cross-sections can be found, I'll take a stab at the model and mapping but would leave sounds, exterior/interior textures, and flight model (i.e. the rest of the project) to you/others. Panel proper gauges I do not have in my inventory although I could populate with some functional ones.

Milton, you are far too kind. I mean that sincerely. Your words honor me as well.. I believe i got lucky. I found a drawing of the quality i usually use when making FDE's. I hope it's of some use too you :)..
Pam

http://www.ninfinger.org/models/vault2009/X-3_Stiletto_3_view_diagram_WIKI-EN_NASA.png

[Milton Shupe]

Milton, you are far too kind. I mean that sincerely. Your words honor me as well.. I believe i got lucky. I found a drawing of the quality i usually use when making FDE's. I hope it's of some use too you :)..
Pam



Thanks Pam; I have that one and a few others, but none that show cross section drawings that are essential for getting the fuselage shaped correctly at various points. That is key for an aircraft like this one.

Attached is a crude example of cross sections for the Beech D18. This was part of a larger 3-view drawing where the cross sections are identified at locations along the side view.

[warchild]

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090188.pdf

Contains a 3 view and engineering measurements of the required items for the wing.

My Gods where did you find that?? I used to spend weeks trying to find stuff like that. Inncredible.. Thank you.. Alll those figures and formulas they give you culminates in the final design of the aircraft, and in essence, the airfile. It doesnt have power plants but thats less important.. Thanks for digging that up..
Pam

[Milton Shupe]

My Gods where did you find that?? I used to spend weeks trying to find stuff like that. Inncredible.. Thank you.. Alll those figures and formulas they give you culminates in the final design of the aircraft, and in essence, the airfile. It doesnt have power plants but thats less important.. Thanks for digging that up..
Pam

Rick is great when seeking this stuff out. You should see the data collection for the xf-92A project. :-)

[warchild]

Thanks Pam; I have that one and a few others, but none that show cross section drawings that are essential for getting the fuselage shaped correctly at various points. That is key for an aircraft like this one.

Attached is a crude example of cross sections for the Beech D18. This was part of a larger 3-view drawing where the cross sections are identified at locations along the side view.

I understand.. The predominantly square body and the round nose is a difficult transition without the cross sections.. I'm afraid i havent been able to find any either.. Perhaps in time someone can dig something up.. We can always hope.. Thank you. :)
Pam

[Milton Shupe]

Actually Pam, it is much more complicated.

Note the rounded triangular nose section, then at the cockpit, a flattened sided triangular shape, followed by the bulging fuselage with the engines added completely reshaping the fuselage, then the tail section becomes somewhat of an inverted, though rounded triangular shape.

This makes for a modeler's nightmare without some cross section help. :-)

[Jafo]

My Gods where did you find that?? I used to spend weeks trying to find stuff like that. Inncredible..

Searching is all 'GIGO' ....Garbage In Garbage Out.

It's what you put in as the 'search' that's most important...;)

A salient Motto....
"Life is like a sewer. What you get out of it depends on what you put into it." ...;)

[Milton Shupe]

Found an operations manual on EBay out of Ireland. Do not have PayPal though.

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/-/282103320695?

[Milton Shupe]

Pam, you may be interested in this one It covers approach and landing analysis of 5 test aircraft including the x-3 and xf-92a.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930088524.pdf

[Penzoil3]

Found an operations manual on EBay out of Ireland. Do not have PayPal though.

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/-/282103320695?

I have PayPal. Bought this, will PM you when it arrives Milt. Will then snail mail it to you. Glad to help, after all you do for us.
Sue

[warchild]

Thanks Milton.. Great find on the pic's.. And yeah. That triangle shape on its nose and its " Big ears" always made me think of a giant mouse..

I thought i'd paste this here in case anyone is interested.. Good reading..

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-077-DFRC.html

[warchild]

https://thelexicans.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/x-3.gifhttp://www.kartonmodellbau.de/WebRoot/Store3/Shops/63481486/5339/59BC/7CCC/B40C/5B7E/C0A8/2AB8/EA59/304003-001_m.jpg

[lazarus]

Okay, we want to look for Jay Miller's book 'X-planes'. That's got a set of sections drawings for the X-3 that the R/C guys have been using. Probably out of print. I'm trying to see if any of the phuds I know have one, and want to do some scans. Nothing yet, but that narrows the search a bit.

[warchild]

Okay, we want to look for Jay Miller's book 'X-planes'. That's got a set of sections drawings for the X-3 that the R/C guys have been using. Probably out of print. I'm trying to see if any of the phuds I know have one, and want to do some scans. Nothing yet, but that narrows the search a bit.

Nope. Not out of print, just on its third edition and pricey is an understatement..
https://www.amazon.com/X-Planes-X-1-X-45-3rd/dp/1857801091

[lazarus]

Library and photocopier, then. I also saw it on google book preview, so I need to go find that again; hopefully they haven't 'blacked out' the page with the drawing.

[warchild]

we owe you one.. good luck..

[hertzie]

we owe you one.. good luck..

Lazarus, if you can't afford buying, I will do it for you. Just tell me what you want, I'll pay that $ 51,-- or $ 55,-- for you and maybe they can send it directly to your home.

Regards, hertzie.

[mikewmac]

I have The X-Planes: X-1 to X-31, New Revised Edition by Jay Miller published in 1988 and there aren't any section drawings of the X-3. There is one relatively small three view drawing by Chuck Davis displaying top, port side and front views along with fourteen photos. The X-3 chapter is six pages long with the first page only containing the three view drawing and four photos. The remaining five pages contain both text and photos.

The X-Planes: X-1 to X-45, Third Edition published later may have the desired section drawings, but I would not necessarily assume so unless you have definitive information indicating that it does.

[Bjoern]

If Amazon is too expensive, try Abebooks:
https://www.abebooks.com/

Good prices and some titles you can't find anywhere else.

[Bjoern]

Actually Pam, it is much more complicated.

Note the rounded triangular nose section, then at the cockpit, a flattened sided triangular shape, followed by the bulging fuselage with the engines added completely reshaping the fuselage, then the tail section becomes somewhat of an inverted, though rounded triangular shape.

This makes for a modeler's nightmare without some cross section help. :-)

The first two photos are actually excellent modeling resources. Almost dead-on in the first one and the highlights and reflections on the second one help with getting the curves right.
Sectionals would make for speedier modeling, yes. But this doesn't look that nightmarish at all. Especially if you can dig out more of these photos.

[Milton Shupe]

Pam,

Some "light" reading :-)

X-3 Research Papers

Stability and Control Characteristics
https://www.ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930088730&qs=N%3D17%2B4293939922

Flight Testing
http://ethw.org/First-Hand:Research_Airplanes_Without_Rockets_-_Chapter_10_of_the_Experimental_Research_Airplanes _and_the_Sound_Barrier

Vertical tail Loads at Transonic Speeds
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/112360.pdf

[Milton Shupe]

I have PayPal. Bought this, will PM you when it arrives Milt. Will then snail mail it to you. Glad to help, after all you do for us.
Sue

Thank you Sue; that is so kind and thoughtful. I greatly appreciate that. :jump:

[Milton Shupe]

The first two photos are actually excellent modeling resources. Almost dead-on in the first one and the highlights and reflections on the second one help with getting the curves right.
Sectionals would make for speedier modeling, yes. But this doesn't look that nightmarish at all. Especially if you can dig out more of these photos.

Bjoern,

It's not nightmarish to model, but to get it right would require cross sections.

The issue is not the front; it's the mid-section to end of afterburners.

[Milton Shupe]

Here's a few helpful tidbits ...

[warchild]

Pam,

Some "light" reading :-)

X-3 Research Papers

Stability and Control Characteristics
https://www.ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930088730&qs=N%3D17%2B4293939922

Flight Testing
http://ethw.org/First-Hand:Research_Airplanes_Without_Rockets_-_Chapter_10_of_the_Experimental_Research_Airplanes _and_the_Sound_Barrier

Vertical tail Loads at Transonic Speeds
http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/112360.pdf


Your timing is perfect sir. Woke up unable to catch my breath this morning, and I still can barely breath so a bit of reading is perfect for today.. Thank you..

[Mach3DS]

I will be in possession of the entire Test-Flight research reports by end of day. Please don't buy anything until I get back to you. It may contain what you need. :) 12 PDF reports.

[warchild]

Bjoern,

It's not nightmarish to model, but to get it right would require cross sections.

The issue is not the front; it's the mid-section to end of afterburners.

I was looking at that last night/this morning which is why i posted the pic from the paper airplane company. It shows the joint that defines ( my words arent so good right now.. sorry ) the section. If we remove the mouse ears Whats left is simply two opposing triangular cones fitted together. The mouse ears get added on to form the sides and define the engine tunnel. They are almost extraneous, and the flat sides of the plane are nearly an illusion..

https://pre00.deviantart.net/6a18/th/pre/i/2016/289/0/4/douglas_x_3__stiletto__by_sfreeman421-d7e85q5.jpg

What chaffes my hide, is that all these model companies that make plastic models, work directly from drawings such as you need. And they keep them locked away..

[Mach3DS]

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090201.pdf

Figures have a better 3 view and Gear diagrams


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930088730.pdf

Figure 3. 3 view shows additional engineering definitions angles and dimensions


Pam, I have them all now. 10 PDF's that are relevant.

All can be found here:


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/?N=0&Ntk=All&Ntt=Douglas%20X-3&Ntx=mode%20matchallpartial&Nm=123|Collection|NASA%20STI||17|Collection|NACA

If this link doesn't bring up the search results. Search for "Douglas X-3"

All the info for EXACT AIR FILE creation are contained in the these research reports.

You're welcome! LOL :)

[Penzoil3]

Thank you Sue; that is so kind and thoughtful. I greatly appreciate that. :jump:

It will take awhile to get here from England. Let you know asap... Don't tell anyone I did something nice, you'll ruin my reputation.
LOL
Sue

[warchild]

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090201.pdf

Figures have a better 3 view and Gear diagrams


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930088730.pdf

Figure 3. 3 view shows additional engineering definitions angles and dimensions


Pam, I have them all now. 10 PDF's that are relevant.

All can be found here:


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/?N=0&Ntk=All&Ntt=Douglas%20X-3&Ntx=mode%20matchallpartial&Nm=123|Collection|NASA%20STI||17|Collection|NACA

If this link doesn't bring up the search results. Search for "Douglas X-3"

All the info for EXACT AIR FILE creation are contained in the these research reports.

You're welcome! LOL :)

Perfect.. Thanks Rick. I still remember how to do nested calculations within larger calculations, so maybe if i write everything out long form, I can make sense of it again..

[Milton Shupe]

It will take awhile to get here from England. Let you know asap... Don't tell anyone I did something nice, you'll ruin my reputation.
LOL
Sue

LOL Sue; the secret is safe with me, indeed. :-)

No hurry on the shipping; I know it takes 10-14 days for delivery.

I have the B-26 Marauder project to wrap up, and I have the FSX Native radial-based Grumman Mallard to complete, about 65% done now.

[Milton Shupe]

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930090201.pdf

Figures have a better 3 view and Gear diagrams


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19930088730.pdf

Figure 3. 3 view shows additional engineering definitions angles and dimensions


Pam, I have them all now. 10 PDF's that are relevant.

All can be found here:


https://ntrs.nasa.gov/?N=0&Ntk=All&Ntt=Douglas%20X-3&Ntx=mode%20matchallpartial&Nm=123|Collection|NASA%20STI||17|Collection|NACA

If this link doesn't bring up the search results. Search for "Douglas X-3"

All the info for EXACT AIR FILE creation are contained in the these research reports.

You're welcome! LOL :)

Well done Sir; thanks :-)

[warchild]

You see, we think of airplanes and well, we think of what we know to be airplanes with everything in its standard position. This plane broke all the rules. the J-34 engines were below the reference atum line, but centered with center of lift, which is unusual compared to what we see in most aircraft made since then. The entire tail cone/empannage is the fuel tank, so now you have all your fuel well above the reference datum line and behind the CG. I remember studying one aircraft which had fuel tanks in the vertical stabilizer. I mean, this was the dawn of the jet age, and frankly, these guys didnt know how to design a jet. They were breaking new ground every day, and planes like the X-3, X-4 starstreak and others went a very long way into pioneering todays aircraft. The X-3 was perfect for what it did, as a result of its poor design. The J-42 jet engine that the X-3 was supposed to have had, never materialized and the planes primary role could not be fullfilled, but what it gave us has saved millions of lives over the years through better design engineering..

[warchild]

Here's a few helpful tidbits ...

Perfect.. Thanks Milton :)..

[Milton Shupe]

You see, we think of airplanes and well, we think of what we know to be airplanes with everything in its standard position. This plane broke all the rules. the J-36 engines were below the reference atum line, but centered with center of lift, which is unusual compared to what we see in most aircraft made since then. The entire tail cone/empannage is the fuel tank, so now you have all your fuel well above the reference datum line and behind the CG. I remember studying one aircraft which had fuel tanks in the vertical stabilizer. I mean, this was the dawn of the jet age, and frankly, these guys didnt know how to design a jet. They were breaking new ground every day, and planes like the X-3, X-4 starstreak and others went a very long way into pioneering todays aircraft. The X-3 was perfect for what it did, as a result of its poor design. The J-42 jet engine that the X-3 was supposed to have had, never materialized and the planes primary role could not be fullfilled, but what it gave us has saved millions of lives over the years through better design engineering..

Pam,

Maybe you overlooked the very large fuel tank in the belly just behind the cockpit and below the AC section, and well forward of the CoL/CoG/MAC 25-75.
Since in the belly at the widest part of the fuselage, I'd bet that its capacity exceeded that in the tail section which was narrow but long.

"... the J-36 engines were below the reference atum line, ..."
My drawing shows the engines above the reference datum line. ???

[warchild]

Pam,

Maybe you overlooked the very large fuel tank in the belly just behind the cockpit and below the AC section, and well forward of the CoL/CoG/MAC 25-75.
Since in the belly at the widest part of the fuselage, I'd bet that its capacity exceeded that in the tail section which was narrow but long.

"... the J-36 engines were below the reference atum line, ..."
My drawing shows the engines above the reference datum line. ???

I stand corrected. Thank you.. Please be patient with me today. It's a very rough day. The worst yet.

[Milton Shupe]

I stand corrected. Thank you.. Please be patient with me today. It's a very rough day. The worst yet.

Oh, no problem Pam. I have had a few days to study the drawings and data so its starting to sink in for me. :-)

[lazarus]

I've been living afloat for a number of years, so, no postbox, no library's, which is a minor down side. Upside, no junkmail, by-law screws, other humans with giant subwoofers and no brain; no JW's or LDS knocking on the door at 08:00 either, unless they want to swim a long, long way, and risk being harpooned.:a1310: I was thinking more in terms of somebody's scanned and PDF'd it, somewhere...:untroubled: Best thing ever is the cheap dish and Hughes. But, that may be a dead end-the X-planes book. The EDF R/C guys may be wrong despite the claim, yet somebody's done a set of sections drawings. Still beating the bushes. Somebody will score. Fired off some inquiry's to the AF museum and NASA's PR flack, see if that gets a response other than getting blown out of the water by a Predator:biggrin-new:

[warchild]

I've been living afloat for a number of years, so, no postbox, no library's, which is a minor down side. Upside, no junkmail, by-law screws, other humans with giant subwoofers and no brain; no JW's or LDS knocking on the door at 08:00 either, unless they want to swim a long, long way, and risk being harpooned.:a1310: I was thinking more in terms of somebody's scanned and PDF'd it, somewhere...:untroubled: Best thing ever is the cheap dish and Hughes. But, that may be a dead end-the X-planes book. The EDF R/C guys may be wrong despite the claim, yet somebody's done a set of sections drawings. Still beating the bushes. Somebody will score. Fired off some inquiry's to the AF museum and NASA's PR flack, see if that gets a response other than getting blown out of the water by a Predator:biggrin-new:

Where do you live; down at the gates in sausolito???

[Milton Shupe]

Another interesting read:

https://www.thisdayinaviation.com/tag/douglas-x-3/

Bill Bridgeman: "
“Then one morning Johnny called me to his office. ‘Bill, we would like you to take a look at the X-3. Maybe you would like to test her. She’s in the final stages over in Hangar Three. Go over and take a look at the mock-up. See what you think. . . ‘ On the ground floor in front of a door marked KEEP OUT. SECRET PROJECT MX656. . .

“I climbed aboard. In order to get into the cockpit, the seat was mechanically lowered to the ground. There was a button to raise the elevator. It buzzed ominously as it very slowly lifted me into the nose. Visibility was extremely poor from her windows, they were faired-in exaggerations of the Skyrocket slits. It was impossible to see the ground. The thin, insecure looking wings were so far behind me that they were out of sight. It would take some weighing to decide whether or not I wanted to bet my life on the integrity of this ship. . .

“I was afraid to take on this airplane. I was also afraid someone else would accept the challenge. And I was afraid that I would decide to accept it.”

[Milton Shupe]

Some unusual test recording facts:

http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Douglas-X3.html

[Milton Shupe]

I found the Pilot's Operating manual online for free:

http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2016/05/douglas-x-3-flight-operating-handbook.html

[Sundog]

I don't have any good drawings of it with cross sections, but I am asking around. I'll let you know what I find.

[warchild]

I found the Pilot's Operating manual online for free:

http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2016/05/douglas-x-3-flight-operating-handbook.html

Thats an awesome find Milton.. Thank you. :) :)

[warchild]

ok, so, I have a question for you guys before i start digging into this flight model.. Do you want me to model both the powerplant it had AND the power plant it was supposed to have ( which never appeared ), or do we want to just use the one powerplant??

[warchild]

Even if i didnt know the hell this plane would put its pilots through, i'd be afraid too..

NACA pilot Joseph A. Walker made his pilot checkout flight in the X-3 on August 23, 1954, then conducting eight research flights in September and October. By late October, the research program was expanded to include lateral and directional stability tests. In these tests, the X-3 was abruptly rolled at transonic and supersonic speeds, with the rudder kept centered. Despite its shortcomings, the X-3 was ideal for these tests. The mass of its engines, fuel and structure was concentrated in its long, narrow fuselage, while its wings were short and stubby. As a result, the X-3 was "loaded" along its fuselage, rather than its wings. This was typical of the fighter aircraft then in development or testing. These tests would lead to the X-3's most significant flight, and the near-loss of the aircraft.

On October 27, 1954, Walker made an abrupt left roll at Mach 0.92 and an altitude of 30,000 feet.

The X-3 rolled as expected, but also pitched up 20 degrees and yawed 16 degrees. The aircraft gyrated for five seconds before Walker was able to get it back under control. He then set up for the next test point. Walker put the X-3 into a dive, accelerating to Mach 1.154 at 32,356 feet, where he made an abrupt left roll. The aircraft pitched down and reached a g-loading of -6.7, then pitched upward to +7 Gs. At the same time, the X-3 sideslipped, resulting in a loading of 2 Gs. Walker managed to bring the X-3 under control and successfully landed.

The post-flight examination showed the fuselage had been subjected to its maximum load limit. Had the G forces been higher, the aircraft could have broken up. Walker and the X-3 had experienced "roll coupling," in which a maneuver in one axes will cause an uncommanded maneuver in one or two others. At the same time, several F-100s were involved in similar incidents. A research program was started by the NACA to understand the problem and find solutions.

( https://www.nasa.gov/centers/armstrong/news/FactSheets/FS-077-DFRC.html )



In the pdf's from above i discovered that raising the horizontal stabilizer a couple inches helped to correct for these errors. On the F-104 which could be said is the red headed step child of the X-3 we find the horizontal stabilizer lifted into the top of the vertical stabilizer and all these problems are pretty much gone, regardless of the heavy fuselage loading..

[warchild]

Some unusual test recording facts:

http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/aircraft/Douglas-X3.html

I would make a correction to that data if i may..

The original test Pilot ( Bill Bridgeman ) made a total of 26 flights in the X-3.
Lt. Col. Frank Everest and Maj. Chuck Yeager each made 3 flights, and Joseph Walker made the final 8 flights for a total of 40 flights before the aircraft was retired..

[Milton Shupe]

ok, so, I have a question for you guys before i start digging into this flight model.. Do you want me to model both the powerplant it had AND the power plant it was supposed to have ( which never appeared ), or do we want to just use the one powerplant??

Hi Pam, :-)

Assuming that we find a way to get this model done, my thinking is to do both as an option, but I would prefer how it was supposed to be to get the most out of this project, but I leave that to you, and will respect your decision.

Thanks

[Milton Shupe]

I would make a correction to that data if i may..

The original test Pilot ( Bill Bridgeman ) made a total of 26 flights in the X-3.
Lt. Col. Frank Everest and Maj. Chuck Yeager each made 3 flights, and Joseph Walker made the final 8 flights for a total of 40 flights before the aircraft was retired..

Yes, I saw that ... always take some of these sites with a grain of salt. Some use general figures as well so I make sure I use lots of reference data and then try to reconcile differences.

[Bjoern]

It's not nightmarish to model, but to get it right would require cross sections.

The issue is not the front; it's the mid-section to end of afterburners.

Well, even that's doable in my eyes (the engine pods are pretty distinctive and the fueselage tapers out and back in, with fus. and nacelles simply "puttied" together, for lack of a better term), but since I don't want to become the (in)voluntary executive on modeling this one, I'll leave the judgement to you. :) ;)

[Milton Shupe]

Well, even that's doable in my eyes (the engine pods are pretty distinctive and the fueselage tapers out and back in, with fus. and nacelles simply "puttied" together, for lack of a better term), but since I don't want to become the (in)voluntary executive on modeling this one, I'll leave the judgement to you. :) ;)

LOL Well, you are more than welcome to do it Bjoern. I have no affinity to this aircraft; my preferences are toward props. :-)

For me to do it, I want it to be as correct as possible. IMO, eyeballing it is not worth the time invested because I know the end result is going to be off in places 8-12" or more, and then the model is open to constant critique and adjustments trying to hit everyone's opinion of where it's wrong. Bah! LOL

[lazarus]

Pam, currently near Birch Bay, debating about north or south come better weather season. Leaning towards Los Cedros, though, go kill me a Great White.
Back to the Marlinspike...Still looking for drawings...:wavey:

[warchild]

Pam, currently near Birch Bay, debating about north or south come better weather season. Leaning towards Los Cedros, though, go kill me a Great White.
Back to the Marlinspike...Still looking for drawings...:wavey:

Sounds wonderful.. No life in the world like living anchored out, which i did for a time in a little 25' Piver off gate 5 in sausalito..Next lifetime should there be one, i'll get a 35' cross.. :).. Or better yet, own a yacht company so i can design my own :).. Think of it. A trimaran that jibes like a monohull :)..

[warchild]

I'm wondering ( and no i'm not quite sane tonight. my blood oxygen is frighteningly low ). That side elevation from NACA is pretyty accurate, and even gives the sut in angle for the thrust tunnel ( 21* ). What if we used that to model the side elevation, sans cockpit and empennage to the width given in the drawing, and then use the front elevation to shape it? We could then do the same thing for the empannage and cockpit and simply marry the two together. Now, Please understand, I'm speaking as a layman here. I cant do poly modeling, and havent any clue as to the complexity of what i'm suggesting, But I figure if the numbers match up then we're good to go..

[warchild]

OK. So Back at it.
Paul has done an absolutely spectacular job of nailing the power and lift curves and a few other purposeful annoyances. I'm working with the lifting surfaces seeing as Nasa didnt fully take them into account until it began its lifting surface/lifting body experiments of the 1960s where in the X-3 was at least mentioned in passing. Paul will be working on other projects in the near future ( Thanks JF! Best partner I ever had..... ) and so wont be able to dedicate any time to this project, but we hope to have it in a presentable state before he has to go. However, we move forward.
For me, theres a lot to do. Adverse yaw, is one thing, adverse yaw on purpose is another and the RIGHT type of adverse yaw during the correct set of circumstances is yet another. I've got the first one ok so far, I need to get to the third.
The bottom line for me I guess is that this plane is legendary for being unstable, kantankerous and over all a general pain, but if that were true, why did Lockheed simply take all of Nasa's research data, and build the F-104 with it ( yup, its a direct knockoff )??? I want this plane to reflect those qualities that infuriated pilots, but held enough promise for Lockheed to create one of the greatest legends of flight with it: The F-104.

https://i.imgur.com/Fj18Gpg.jpg

[warchild]

I know its been a while. I'm sorry.. However, theres some good news. I turned over the release candidate of the FDE to Milton the the team for their testing and approval, yesterday. Hopefully, that means, it wont be long now :)..

Testing it in FSX revealed FSX's docile nature. The plane is much easier to fly in FSX than it is in P3Dv4, but yeah, it'll still kill ya if you dont treat it like a lady..

90% of a standard flight, can be done with one finger on the trim wheel. The other ten percent?? Keep things gentle on the controls and she'll bring you home safe and sound, till you land ( thats another challenge ). Think things through a turn, dont just manhandle it. It'll kill ya.

Landings are where the plane really shows off its inherent lateral instability. Use a lakebed or somewhere where your not trying to line up with a center line, because you have to be flat and low and smooth, or she'll start rocking side to side and you'll end up imitating the opening sequence to six million dollar man ( which was an XB-24 btw: a lifting body designed after the X-3 ).

Over all, I love this plane. It's a blast. I cant wait to get it into your hands, But Milton and crew will be adding their own special touches too it before release so please be patient.. I guarantee your gonna like it..

Pam

https://i.imgur.com/G86Hx8l.png

https://i.imgur.com/2F3Ypoc.png

[Penzoil3]

THANKS! :encouragement:

[Milton Shupe]

THANKS! :encouragement:

If all goes well, I plan to have a beta release out by the weekend.

This will serve to get some exposure to various computer systems and testing variety as we work to wrap up the package.

[MrZippy]

Looks great, Pam. Stand by for crash tests. My poor neighbors....they wonder why I'm always screaming:biggrin-new: They think I'm nutz!:very_drunk:

[roger-wilco-66]

Awesome job on the FDE, Pam. As usual.
And the modelers, also as usual.


Cheers,
Mark

[Montie]

I wish we had a good looking Groom Lake scenery the fly these out of! Looks great!

[MrZippy]

I wish we had a good looking Groom Lake scenery the fly these out of! Looks great!

More likely a Muroc/Edwards scenery.:encouragement:

[Jafo]

Still itching for it...;)

[warchild]

Welll, I'm sorry guys. I tried making a video of it to show it off on launch day, but, Instant replay abruptly ends after about three minutes and places you back at the end of the flight your replaying. I dont know whats causing it. If anyone can proffer a clue, I'd greatly appreciate it..

[roger-wilco-66]

More likely a Muroc/Edwards scenery.:encouragement:

I wonder why this has never been made after all these years of FSX :-)

Cheers,
Mark

[warchild]

I wonder why this has never been made after all these years of FSX :-)

Cheers,
Mark

Welll, it's just a guess, but, virtual airlines were quite popular for a few years. Probably still are, and except for Janet airlines, nothing flies to those places except military planes, and for those, i haven't even a laymans guess..

[warchild]

Well kids, here it is. Your first peek. You can count the thermal layers by the number of rolls left and right and the nose bounces. There are good reasons why this plane was never to be flown into any kind of weather.. I make no apologies for the obsolete software i used for recording it. It's all I have. I do apologize for Youtubes weird formatting and my lack of knowledge as to how to do a professional job of it. I sincerely hope you find this, entertaining and informative..
Thank you.
Pam

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy0JJyFOV1s&feature=youtu.be

[MrZippy]

Good job, Pam! World's fastest lawn mower. You land 'em like I land 'em.:applause::ernaehrung004:

[warchild]

Welll, it's like I told Mark. zYouve got a 200 mph tricycle under you when you land. It doesnt steer very well and has a tendency to go unstable and imitate the six million dollar man, if you try.

[MrZippy]

Well, it's like I told Mark. You've got a 200 mph tricycle under you when you land. It doesn't steer very well and has a tendency to go unstable and imitate the six million dollar man, if you try.

I'll wind up being the $1.50 man cartwheeling down the runway trying to pop the dragchute:biggrin-new:

[Milton Shupe]

If all goes well, I plan to have a beta release out by the weekend.

This will serve to get some exposure to various computer systems and testing variety as we work to wrap up the package.

We have been working diligently to wrap up some little things; just a few more left to do. Not sure we'll make it today but will not be long now.

Thanks for your patience.

[Sundog]

That looks absolutely amazing. BTW, I really like the AB effect as well.

[MrZippy]

Looking great, Milton & Team! Gonna have myself wrapped in 5 layers of bubble-wrap to get ready for my crash tests.....er flight tests:biggrin-new::encouragement:

[Milton Shupe]

Looking great, Milton & Team! Gonna have myself wrapped in 5 layers of bubble-wrap to get ready for my crash tests.....er flight tests:biggrin-new::encouragement:


LOL Well, if you follow the flight phase guidelines and keep a steady hand on approach, you should not have issues.

[Jafo]

Firefly.....
"This landing could get interesting..."
"Define 'interesting.'"
"Oh God ..... we're all going to die?"
:sentimental:

[MrZippy]

Just checking back in. Everyone on the Milton team doing OK?

[Milton Shupe]

Just checking back in. Everyone on the Milton team doing OK?

Indeed, we are. Hold up is being addressed as time allows. Should not be much longer; then we can beta test.

Thanks for understanding.

[MrZippy]

Indeed, we are. Hold up is being addressed as time allows. Should not be much longer; then we can beta test.

Thanks for understanding.

Not a problem, Milton. Was just getting a little worried about health issues. No rush on my part.:wavey:

[warchild]

I made final adjustments to the handling two days ago and passed the FDE to Paul. Paul will run it through one more sieve and make final adjustments too the power train before sending it too Milton. Please Understand though that Paul is back under a full work load and is taking precious time to assist us and may take a little longer than any of us including him, would like.

[Penzoil3]

Loved the video ! Thanks for all the work. Looking forward to crashing, er, flying this!
Sue

[MrZippy]

Loved the video ! Thanks for all the work. Looking forward to crashing, er, flying this!
Sue

Bubble wrap, Sue, and lots of it!:wavey:

[MrZippy]

OK, my new flight suit is ready for the X-3 test flights!:encouragement:

63865