Douglas X-3 Stiletto X

**lazarus** · January 23rd, 2018, 00:33

https://drive.google.com/open?id=18v...TpIWs3DpGlA0wb
Attachment 57345 Attachment 57346 Attachment 57347

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*** · January 23rd, 2018, 02:41

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** · January 23rd, 2018, 03:13

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** · January 23rd, 2018, 08:35

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** · January 23rd, 2018, 09:19

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** · January 23rd, 2018, 09:23

Originally Posted by 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?

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** · January 23rd, 2018, 16:18

Originally Posted by lazarus

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/...ouglas-X3.html

***wombat666*** · January 23rd, 2018, 16:50

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.

**lazarus** · January 23rd, 2018, 21:47

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.

**Bjoern** · January 24th, 2018, 07:29

Originally Posted by lazarus

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

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** · January 24th, 2018, 11:15

Originally Posted by warchild

... 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** · January 25th, 2018, 12:27

Mr. Shupe, you have way too much time on your hands, and a generous streak wide enough to require inner, middle and outer markers!

I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten

) 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** · January 25th, 2018, 13:36

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9930090188.pdf

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

**Milton Shupe** · January 25th, 2018, 15:32

Originally Posted by 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!

I' do some digging , make some inquiry's (cajole and or threaten

) 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** · January 25th, 2018, 15:36

Originally Posted by 000rick000

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9930090188.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** · January 25th, 2018, 18:16

Originally Posted by Milton Shupe

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

**Milton Shupe** · January 25th, 2018, 18:46

Originally Posted by warchild

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** · January 25th, 2018, 18:50

Originally Posted by 000rick000

Milton, starting on Page 61 of the PDF.

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/c...9930090188.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** · January 25th, 2018, 18:57

Originally Posted by warchild

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** · January 25th, 2018, 19:09

Originally Posted by Milton Shupe

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** · January 25th, 2018, 19:25

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*** · January 25th, 2018, 19:46

Originally Posted by warchild

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** · January 25th, 2018, 20:53

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

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

**Milton Shupe** · January 25th, 2018, 21:14

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/c...9930088524.pdf