"Salt River Cliffs" ©
7 years ago
Tuesday, June 21, 2016
Friday, May 1, 2015
Sierra Madre Art Fair Reminder
Hi all,
Just a reminder that Tina and I will be at the Sierra Madre Art Fair this weekend, Saturday, May 2 from 9:30 am to 6:00 pm and Sunday, May 3 from 9:30 am to 5:30 pm.
Located at Sierra Madre Memorial Park, 222 w. Sierra Madre Blvd., we are mid-way down the East side of the park at Booth 50.
Two of our works are below, a watercolor called "Clearing Storm" and a black and white print I shot called "Forest Sentinel."
Come out for some good food, good live music, and great art! Hope to see you there!
Just a reminder that Tina and I will be at the Sierra Madre Art Fair this weekend, Saturday, May 2 from 9:30 am to 6:00 pm and Sunday, May 3 from 9:30 am to 5:30 pm.
Located at Sierra Madre Memorial Park, 222 w. Sierra Madre Blvd., we are mid-way down the East side of the park at Booth 50.
Two of our works are below, a watercolor called "Clearing Storm" and a black and white print I shot called "Forest Sentinel."
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Sierra Madre Art Fair 2015
Hi all,
Tina and I will be showing our art once again at the Sierra Madre Art Fair, which will be held on May 2-3, 2015.
Here are a couple of samples of new work what we will be selling:
The event will be located in:
Memorial Park
At Sierra Madre Blvd & Hermosa Avenue
(222 W. Sierra Madre Blvd)
Sierra Madre, CA 91024
Saturday 9:30 am to 6:00 pm
Sunday 9:30 am to 5:00 pm
Come join us for some good food, good music and great art!
Hope to see you there.
Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Sierra Madre Art Fair 2014 Reminder
Hi All,
Just a reminder that Tina and I will be at the 52nd Annual Sierra Madre Art Fair on
May 3-4, 2014. We are at booth #50.
Here are a couple of other examples of what we will have available:
“Mists Over The Merced” B&W print, Tony Chong
"McWay Falls" - oil, Tina Chong
The event will be located in:
Memorial Park
At Sierra Madre Blvd & Hermosa Avenue
(222 W. Sierra Madre Blvd)
Sierra Madre, CA 91024
Saturday 9:30 am to 6:00 pm
Sunday 9:30 am to 5:00 pm
Come join us for some good food, good music and great art!
Hope to see you there.
Sunday, April 13, 2014
Sierra Madre Art Fair 2014
We will be selling our art at the 52nd Annual Sierra Madre Art Fair on May 3-4, 2014. Here are a couple examples of what we will have available:
“Along Vineyard Drive” – oil, Tina Chong
“Road to the Book Cliffs” B&W print, Tony Chong
The event will be located in:
Memorial Park
At Sierra Madre Blvd &
Hermosa Avenue
(222 W. Sierra Madre Blvd)
Sierra Madre, CA 91024
Saturday 9:30 am to 6:00 pm
Sunday 9:30 am to 5:00 pm
You are cordially invited to join us for good food, good
music and great art!
Hope to see you there.
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Green Dreams – The U.S. Army Evaluates the N-156F
My early articles did not feature footnotes because I was still expanding the envelope of what I could do in the space allotted to me, which was initially 500 words. I soon surpassed that, but it would be several months later before I would hit my stride. What helped was the shift to a purely digital format with Engineering's Airspace on-line magazine.
Unfortunately this piece was written for VelocitE, the name of the magazine that preceded Airspace. VelocitE was a duel track publication with both a digital and a hard copy issue. The hard copy feature meant there were limitations to what I could do.
I remember being very disappointed that not all of the photos I picked for this article (and the Apollo 13 article before it) could be included in the physical issue. Fortunately they were all in the digital issue, which was important because none of the black and white photos featured had been seen before to the best of my knowledge. Even more important to me were the color photos, most of which have not been seen before except as black and white images.
In short this article started me on the path of doing more independent research into Northrop Grumman programs and proposals and into discovering the history behind them. It's been quite a journey and a satisfying one at that. I hope to continue on that path in retirement.
This article originally appeared in the Northrop Grumman Engineering Department's in-house magazine VelocitE, Volumn 2, Number 10, July 2010. It is posted here with permission and has Approved for Public Release number 12-1492.
Green Dreams – The U.S. Army Evaluates the N-156F
By Tony Chong
The early years of the N-156F were ones of uncertainty. The single-seat, light-weight fighter variant
of the successful design that produced the two-seat T-38A Talon trainer was not
backed by the U.S. Air Force. While
built with an eye towards the proposed foreign military sales program under
development by the Department of Defense, the use of the N-156F for that
purpose was not a foregone conclusion.
Despite its lukewarm reception to the small fighter concept,
the Air Force was tasked with initial flight tests of the N-156F, which
occurred concurrently with the T-38A in 1959 and 1960. Three prototypes were ordered, but only two
were completed. The Air Force suspended
construction of the third aircraft as it decided two were sufficient for the
test program.
At the conclusion of the tests the Air Force declined to
pursue the design any further. Northrop
was left with two flyable aircraft and one partially-built vehicle in storage,
but no customers. However, an
opportunity arose in 1961 from an unlikely source: the U.S. Army.
Since the formation of the Air Force and the division of
responsibilities outlined in the document “Functions of the Armed Forces and
the Joint Chiefs of Staff,” also known as the Key West Agreement, the Army was
forbidden to operate jet-powered fixed wing combat aircraft. While the Air Force saw the roles as clearly
defined, the Army chafed at the restrictions. Close Air Support (CAS) was vital to the service’s successful land
operations and the Army lacked confidence that the Air Force would make supporting
the Army a high priority. As such they
cast about for ways around the agreement.
Rebuffed in an earlier attempt to purchase Cessna T-37
Tweetybirds as an operational forward-based aircraft, the Army decided in 1961
that it needed to acquire a light jet for the Forward Air Controller/Tactical Reconnaissance
role. Artillery fire support is an Army
function, so they reasoned the ability to accurately direct those fires must be
in their purview as well.
Three aircraft were chosen for evaluation. Among them was the foreign-made Fiat G-91R
light tactical fighter/reconnaissance aircraft. Another competitor was the Douglas A4D-2N Skyhawk light attack jet (re-designated
as A-4C in 1962). The N-156F Freedom
Fighter was also selected and became the only twin-engine competitor in the
trials.
Both N-156s participated in the tests, with the number two
aircraft (59-4988) outfitted for unimproved field operations. This eventually consisted of larger tires for
the main gear and a twin-tire arrangement for the nose gear.
Sod field operations were conducted at NAS Jacksonville and
NAS Pensacola, FL in June and July of 1961 with the other two modified
competitors. Initial results were very
favorable for all aircraft, with the N-156F receiving high marks for its easy
field maintenance and load-carrying capabilities.
The number one N-156F (59-4987) later acquired U.S. Army
markings for some additional tests and publicity functions. These were carried out in September of 1961
and provided a unique appearance for the Freedom Fighter.
Despite the promising results, the Air Force made its
objections known and the Army backed down. The competition was cancelled. The remaining G-91R returned to Europe, the other one having crashed
during the evaluation, killing its Italian Air Force test pilot Riccardo
Bignamini. The two A4Ds were brought
back to standard configuration and returned to the U.S. Navy.
Its hopes dashed, Northrop renewed the hunt for
customers. Its faith in the N-156F was
borne out in 1962 when the aircraft was chosen to be the U.S. export fighter of
choice under the new Military Assistance Program. The newly designated F-5A would be the
progenitor of a line of successful fighters. A total of 2,603 were built of all variants.
The Army would make one more attempt at acquiring a jet-powered,
fixed-wing combat aircraft before finally ceding the role to the Air Force in exchange
for control over rotary-winged aircraft in an accord known as the
Johnson-McConnell Agreement of 1966.
My thanks to Kristi Harding of Records Management for her
help in this article.
For a short history on the development of the U.S. Unified
Command Structure go to:
For a pdf of the Functions of the Armed Forces and the Joint
Chiefs of Staff document click on number 17 at this site:
For a synopsis of the Johnson-McConnell Agreement go to this
link:
For a color photo of the Fiat G-91R in U.S. Army markings
see this site:
Photo Captions
1.
2.
Close up of the large, single-tire nose gear and the trench it dug during the test. The mud guard is quite apparent. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
3.
A view of the ramp at NAS Jacksonville, FL, with all three competitors. The N-156F is 59-4987, the number 1 Freedom Fighter. It was not modified with the special tires. The two Douglas A4D-2Ns directly behind the N-156F are modified with duel-tire main gear. The Italian-built G-91R-1 (serial # 0042) on the right also has larger tires for unimproved field operations. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
4.
Duel-tire nose gear and large main gear tires were outfitted to N-156F 59-4988 at NAS Jacksonville. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
5.
A close up of the main gear tires on N-156F #2. The tires appear to have minimal tread. By this time sod field tests were moved to NAS Pensacola, FL. Note the partial USAF markings on the main gear door. 59-4988 carried standard USAF markings throughout the evaluation. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
6.
The duel-tires on the nose gear of the N-156F were substantial. Subsequent tests showed the arrangement worked quite well. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
7.
The West German-built Fiat G-91R-3 (serial # 0065) sits in front of the Italian-built G-91R-1 (serial # 0042). The G-91Rs flew in U.S. Army markings throughout the tests, but wore standard German and Italian color schemes. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
8.
Douglas A4D-2N, Bureau Number (BuNo) 148483, sit on the sod field with BuNo 148490 in the background. The A4Ds retained their standard markings and colors for most of the tests. International Orange panels were added to denote them as test aircraft and at some point the BuNos were temporarily removed. Note the duel-tire main gear and the sleek, wheeled power cart. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
9.
Later in September 1961 the first N-156F (59-4987) appeared in U.S. Army markings at NAS Pensacola, FL. Nearly all published photos of this aircraft are in black and white. The full color image is quite striking. Note the yellow tail markings and the white Army (minus U.S.) on the nose. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
10.
A close up view of N-156F #1 with “ARMY” prominently displayed on the nose. The man in the cockpit is possibly Northrop test pilot Hank Chouteau who was attached to the evaluation program. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
11.
A right rear quarter view of N-156F #1 at NAS Pensacola. Pensacola Bay is in the background. Photo credit: Northrop Grumman
Approved for Public Release: Northrop Grumman case # 12-1492, 9/4/2012
Wednesday, February 5, 2014
Northrop's N-196 - The Passed-Over Hound Dog
The
number of missile and rocket proposals developed by the various
aerospace companies during the 1950s and early 1960s was truly
staggering. Northrop was among them with at least a dozen different
types under study, not including the Radioplane division's efforts. The
N-196 was one of them. It was Northrop's submission to the Hound Dog
air-to-surface missile competition.
Northrop’s N-196 – The Passed-Over Hound Dog
By Tony Chong
As noted in “Northrop’s N-191 Proposal and Its Design
Evolution,” (airspace. Aug., 2012), things are not always what they seem.
The silver model in that article is a case in point.
While it was discovered stored with two legitimate model versions
of the N-191 and was very close in configuration to the middle of the three
designs, as noted it did not conform entirely to the illustrated and described shape.
At the time it was suspected it may have been an earlier variant, but further
research has uncovered an even more fascinating truth. The model was of an
entirely different and earlier proposal known as the N-196.1
N-196 was the heritage Northrop Aircraft, Inc. bid on the
U.S. Air Force’s urgently requested Weapon System-131B (WS-131B), which was to
provide an air-to-surface missile that could be carried by the new Boeing B-52
Stratofortress, thus giving the increasingly vulnerable manned bomber force the
ability to strike heavily protected targets at a survivable stand-off range.
WS-131B was the result of a March 1956 General Operations
Requirement (GOR 148) that officially recognized the need for such a weapon and
formalized the request to the industry. The requirements also included Mach 2
or greater speed at 55,000 feet with a range of 350 nautical miles. It was to
be armed with a nuclear warhead.
Northrop’s bid was a missile made of conventional aluminum
sheet metal for ease of assembly. Length was to be 38’9” long with a span of
15’. The design featured a moderately swept high-wing arrangement with a
similarly-shaped tail with an all-moving ventral vertical fin. The vehicle had
a dorsal inlet with boundary layer gutters between the inlet and fuselage body.
Power was to be provided by a General Electric J85
afterburning turbojet with a Fairchild J83 turbojet as an alternative engine. Solid-propellant
rocket-powered engines were also considered by the Northrop design team but
rejected as it was felt it would push the vehicle beyond currently established
“state-of-the-art” speeds, delaying a rapid introduction into the operational
inventory.2
Performance was projected to meet the Mach 2 speed and 350
nautical mile range requirement with a 60,000’ ceiling instead of the 55,000’
requested. Weight was to be 6,850 lbs. with a 1,800 lb. warhead. Projected
accuracy of the operational missile, or Circular Error Probable (CEP), was to
be 3,560 feet.
Interestingly, the N-196 featured a bomb bay located at the
missile’s center of gravity instead of a nose-mounted integral warhead.
Northrop’s vision was to allow the vehicle to perform a free-fall warhead drop
which would keep the missile flying. After delivery it could then provide
immediate bomb damage assessment reconnaissance and operate as a post-strike
decoy for additional B-52 survivability.
In addition, alternative payloads would allow multiple
target strike options. If the target area was low-threat, the bomb drop could
be accomplished with the N-196 still attached to the B-52 wing pylon. Reusable missile
launch training could also be accomplished by attaching a parachute recovery
system to the vehicle to keep costs down.
Using a 10,000 lb. bomb load for the Stratofortress,
Northrop estimated the increased stand-off strike radius using a single N-196
to be 192 nm for a B-52D model and 224 nm for the G model. If two N-196s were
carried, the strike radius became 34 nm for the D and 98 nm for the G.3
The N-196 was to be the joint effort of the Northrop
Aircraft Inc.’s Aircraft Division, Radioplane Division and Anaheim Division,
with program lead by Aircraft Division. By this time (July 1957), William F.
Ballhaus had succeeded Edgar Schmued as engineering V.P. while retaining the
Chief Engineer title. Welko Gasich continued as Preliminary Design Chief (see airspace.
Sept. 2012).
WS-131B was won by North America Aviation. Deployed in 1959,
the resulting missile was known as the GAM-77 Hound Dog. Post-1962 it was known
as the AGM-28A/B. By then the Air Force viewed the Hound Dog as an interim
weapon until the Douglas GAM-87 (AGM-48) Skybolt air-launched ballistic missile
became operational. Skybolt was cancelled in 1962, so the Hound Dog soldiered
on, finally being retired in 1976.
As for the N-196, it would be logical to assume there might
be a link between it and the PD-0806 N-191 design. But according to retired
Northrop Grumman engineer Jerry Huben, who drew up both vehicles, there was no
“relativity” between the two.4
As the N-191 version was nearly three times the size of the
N-196, that is probably so. Yet it does illustrate that the design options for
a given set of parameters (e.g. Mach 2+ speed with dorsal inlet) often produce
strikingly similar results; much to the chagrin of future historians trying to
piece together the past from out-of-context information and artifacts.
But then again, the thrill of the hunt and the excitement of
discovery are part of the allure of historical research.
Tony Chong is a
historian, photographer and a contributing editor to Airspace. He leads
activities in the Aerospace Systems Display Model Shop and works in El Segundo.
Footnotes
1. Northrop
N-numbers show a lot of non-chronological assignments in that period, as if
some batches of projects were numbered out of sequence at a later date. It is
not positively known whether this was a deliberate act of disinformation or
merely the result of internal bureaucracy, but the author suspects the latter.
2. Report
No. NAI-57-790 Management Proposal for Weapon System 131-B (Northrop Model
N-196) July 1957, Northrop Corp., Hawthorne, CA, July 1957, 2,
declassified per DOD DIR 5200.10. July 1967.
3. Ibid,
5
4. Email
from Jerry Huben to author, 16 October 2012.
References
1. Report
No. NAI-57-790 Management Proposal for Weapon System 131-B (Northrop Model
N-196) July 1957, Northrop Corp., Hawthorne, CA, July 1957,
declassified per DOD DIR 5200.10. July 1967.
2. The Evolution of the Cruise Missile, by Kenneth P. Werrell, Air University Press,
Maxwell AFB, 1985. It can be found in pdf. format here: http://aupress.au.af.mil/digital/pdf/book/werrell_cruise.pdf
Photo Captions
1.
This artist’s concept appears a lot rougher in
finish than a lot of the other Northrop art of the period, but it is not
totally out of the norm as a stylistic approach to product representation. The
N-196 shows its ventral tail quite well in this piece. Unfortunately the
artist’s name is not visible. Photo credit:
Tony Chong collection
2.
This 3-view drawing details the general
arrangement and some scrap views of the N-196 design, including B-52 pylon and
wing. Note the bomb bay in the missile body. Photo credit: Tony Chong collection
3.
Compare this drawing of the PD-0806 to the
previous 3-view. While strikingly similar, there are differences in the
configuration, mostly in the cruciform tail and short body length aft of the
horizontals of the N-191 versus the two horizontals with ventral fin and
extended body aft of the tail surfaces of the N-196. Photo credit: Tony Chong collection
4.
This upper left front quarter shot of the model shows the dorsal inlet in
good detail. Photo credit: Tony Chong
5.
A look at the upper right rear quarter shot of the model shows the smooth finish on the dorsal tail area. As noted in the N-191 article, the quality of the finish indicated that the either the repair was spectacularly well done or that the vehicle only had three tail surfaces to begin with, meaning it was an earlier variant or a different vehicle. The answer seems pretty conclusive now. Photo credit: Tony Chong
6.
This
top view shows the wing leading and trailing edge shapes and the corresponding
similar tail surface shape. Again, note the length of the aft body with exhaust
nozzle. Photo credit: Tony Chong
7.
A
shot of the belly of the model reveals the broken ventral tail fin.
Unfortunately no control surface lines or bomb bay doors were draw onto the
model. Photo credit: Tony Chong
8.
A North American Aviation GAM-77/AGM-28 Hound Dog in flight shows off the
missile’s configuration. The large belly pod housed the Pratt & Whitney
J52-P-3 turbojet engine. Photo credit:
U.S. Air Force
9.
5.
A look at the upper right rear quarter shot of the model shows the smooth finish on the dorsal tail area. As noted in the N-191 article, the quality of the finish indicated that the either the repair was spectacularly well done or that the vehicle only had three tail surfaces to begin with, meaning it was an earlier variant or a different vehicle. The answer seems pretty conclusive now. Photo credit: Tony Chong
6.
7.
8.
9.
This photo
shows a Boeing B-52F Stratofortress taking off with two GAM-77/AGM-28 Hound
Dogs, one under each wing. N-196 carriage would have been similar. Note the
amount of smoke produced by the eight Pratt & Whitney J57-P-43W turbojet
engines. B-52 minimum interval take-offs (MITOs) were quite spectacular to see in
large part because of the smoke. Photo
credit: U.S. government
Approved for Public Release: Northrop
Grumman Case 12-2189, 12/18/12
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)