Northrop YA-9

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 03/10/2014 at 10:07 • Filed to: planelopnik

8

28

When the Air Force started looking for a new dedicated ground attack plane in the late 1960’s, they first polled pilots of the venerable !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! who flew attack missions in Korea and Vietnam. Then they looked at the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! from WWII, and the !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , nicknamed the Panzerknacker (tank cracker). The Air Force determined that the ideal aircraft should have “long loiter time, low-speed maneuverability, massive cannon firepower, and extreme survivability.” The A-X program would search for a new plane to fit these criteria.

In 1970, the Air Force issued a request for proposals, in large part to counter the threat of Soviet armored forces. Included in the new requirements was that the aircraft would be designed specifically around a 30mm cannon, have a maximum speed of 460 mph, a takeoff distance of 4000 feet, an external load of 16,000 pounds, a mission radius of 285 miles, and a cost of $1.4 million per plane. Northrop was chosen to build the YA-9, and Fairchild Republic was chosen to build the YA-10.

Northrop’s contender for the contract was a traditional design, a plane which bears a certain resemblance to the Russian !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , NATO reporting name “Frogfoot”. But then again, form does follow function. The National Museum of the Air Force writes about the YA-9:

The A-9A was a high-wing, twin-engine, single-place aircraft. The plane was designed for exceptional maneuverability and had large flight control surfaces. The engines were specifically designed for the project by Lycoming. Each of the YF102-LD-100 turbofans developed 7,500 pounds of thrust at maximum power. Offensive firepower consisted of a 20mm Vulcan cannon and up to 16,000 pounds of ordnance carried on ten external wing stations. The winner of the A-X fly-off would incorporate the 30mm GAU-8 cannon into production aircraft, but the gun was under parallel development during the A-X competition and wasn’t ready for flight testing during the fly-off between October and December 1972. The A-9A featured a triple redundant hydraulic system, foam filled self-sealing fuel tanks and armor plating protecting vital systems including a titanium “bathtub” surrounding the cockpit (note: an aluminum “bathtub” was fitted in the prototype).

A fly-off between the YA-9 and YA-10 took place between October 9-December 10, 1972, and the YA-10 was declared the winner. Factors leading to the choice of the YA-10 were the less conventional engine placement which led to higher survivability in the case of a hit on the engine area, and the double tail, which helps conceal the engines’ heat signature, as well as providing redundancy if one of the tails is shot away.

Two prototypes were built by Northrop, and after the competition they were given to NASA for further flight testing. The custom-built Lycoming engines were stripped from the aircraft and mated to a C-8 Buffalo as part of the research into a quiet, short-haul aircraft. One of the prototypes is on display at March Field Air Museum, and the other awaits restoration at Edwards Air Force Base in California.

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

If you enjoy these Aviation History posts, please let me know in the comments. And if you missed any of the past articles, you can find them all at !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! .

!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!

Sources: !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!! , !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 10:16

1

The YA-9: proving that sometimes in competition, "You never go full retard" is a lie. When you're up against something as crazy as the A-10, sometimes you're not good enough if not crazy enough.

No doubt the A-9 would have been exceptional, but there are a couple of points on which they'd have had serious issue, and one of them is the results of a heat-seaking SAM hit: root engines with high exposure would be disastrous. It's also not safe'd for gearless landing quite like the A-10 is.

The second to last pic has an Cessna Dragonfly in the background - wonder what it's up to?

Bad Idea Hat > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 10:16

0

I think, personally, this is the more beautiful plane of the two. However, there is something to be said about where the A-10 mounted their engines, and all the added benefits of their location (maintenance, survivability, heat signature reduction).

ttyymmnn > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 03/10/2014 at 10:18

1

The second to last pic has an Cessna Dragonfly in the background - wonder what it's up to?

Chase plane for testing, most likely.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Bad Idea Hat 03/10/2014 at 10:19

0

+ physical screening against some impacts by the double tail, of course.

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 03/10/2014 at 10:20

1

Chase plane most likely on the A-37.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 10:21

1

That would seem the easy answer, but it's also got the long-range tanks on. Maybe it's just what they had "on deck" for that duty, as configured.

ttyymmnn > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 03/10/2014 at 10:23

0

There's a T-38 in the background of the second picture. I wonder if they chose the Dragonfly because of its low-speed handling characteristics. It might have been difficult for a T-38 to act as chase.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 03/10/2014 at 10:23

0

It *may* have a camera pod on the nose, it's hard to make out. Long-range tanks and paint job may indicate it got pulled from some other duty.

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 10:26

0

I think about that time they were using non-training Dragonflies for "drug war" duties, so that one could be a border-spotter in its day job for all we know.

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht 03/10/2014 at 10:27

0

Nah, doubtful on the camera pod. Looks like it's just a normal chase for a test flight.
A-37s are normally config'd like that. T-37s are usually slick.

A-37:

T-37:

RamblinRover Luxury-Yacht > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 03/10/2014 at 10:31

0

I wasn't talking about the drogue or other equip, I was talking about a lump which on further examination is the wing-tip tank for the other side, and what I'd thought was the wing-tip pod for that side is a pylon tank, as it's apparently more loaded for bear fuel-wise than I thought.

ttyymmnn > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 03/10/2014 at 10:53

1

The A/T-37 has always been one my favorite planes. I always thought it would be a great plane for flying around the country with a buddy. I've got a thing for side-by-side seating.

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 11:06

0

But oh how ANNOYINGLY loud they are. I thought my ears were going to bleed every time one came in on a cross-country.

The Transporter > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 11:23

1

In unrelated news I would love to own a T-37 or A-37. Too bad AMARC doesn't sell whole aircraft anymore.

ttyymmnn > The Transporter 03/10/2014 at 11:37

0

I said the same thing to Dukie and he said that they are incredibly loud. Maybe not the best thing for your local GA airport.

user314 > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 13:01

0

Yeah, and it's a piercing noise too. In Vietnam they were called the "6,000 pound dog whistle", and IIRC they later found an abnormally large number of pilots developed tinnitus.

The Transporter > ttyymmnn 03/10/2014 at 13:39

0

Those little Whittle centrifugal turbines also guzzled gas like crazy. If I had the money I would have bought Tweets by the train load for pennies on the dollar once the AF retired them. I'd then get an STC to re-engine them with either Williams FJ33s or P&W PW615s and - at customer requests - a modern avionics suite. The idea was to make an affordable warbird for the masses. A jet powered Miata.

Unfortunately Bush put the kebash on that after the Iranians got ahold of some F-14 spare parts that originally came from AMARC.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 11/19/2015 at 16:59

0

I spent time at an Air Force tech school at Sheppard AFB and I spoke with a pilot trainee who said the same thing. They wore foam ear plugs under their radio headphones.

Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole > Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo 11/19/2015 at 17:04

0

You too huh? 362nd Crew Dawg here. October 2000-April 2001.

Rusty Vandura - www.tinyurl.com/keepoppo > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 11/19/2015 at 17:42

0

I was there as a reservist in the 90s. It was kind of embarrassing, actually, how shallow and cheap the training was. And then I went back to Travis and the rest of the training was really cheap and useless. An expensive joke, really.

I served active duty in the Army, but if someone wants to serve in the military, and if they can tolerate the lifestyle, the Navy is the branch to choose. And if you want combat arms, the Marine Corps.

Spoon II > ttyymmnn 11/19/2015 at 21:50

0

Definitely enjoyable!

Jayvincent > ttyymmnn 11/19/2015 at 22:11

1

why settle for side by side when you can go for two pairs?

(kidding - the A6 and variants like the EA6 and KA6 are all great birds!)

ttyymmnn > Spoon II 11/19/2015 at 23:33

0

Thanks!

spudsmckraken > Dukie - Jalopnik Emergency Management Asshole 11/20/2015 at 00:25

0

That’s why it’s the “Tweet!”

Declan Hackett > ttyymmnn 11/20/2015 at 09:24

1

“long loiter time, low-speed maneuverability, massive cannon firepower, and extreme survivability.”

Which is why the F35 is the ideal replacement for the role!

ttyymmnn > Declan Hackett 11/20/2015 at 09:31

1

Exactly. And here is the money quote from USAF general Michael Hostage:

That is why the current upgrade programs to the F-22 I put easily as critical as my F-35 fleet. If I do not keep that F-22 fleet viable, the F-35 fleet frankly will be irrelevant. The F-35 is not built as an air superiority platform. It needs the F-22. Because I got such a pitifully tiny fleet, I’ve got to ensure I will have every single one of those F-22s as capable as it possibly can be. ( link )

Not to turn this into an F-35 bashing thread, but really, just what can the F-35 do? What is its mission? What ONE thing does it do better than any other airplane (besides VTOL)?

J R in WV > ttyymmnn 11/20/2015 at 14:19

1

I think seeing the prototypes that dueled it out for main line production selection is really cool. History of all types interests me, also things that go boom, so history of military aircraft is swell.

We have an Air Guard unit locally flying the C-130, so seeing the gunships adapted from the C-130 freighters is amazing. And we have a camp in AZ where the A-10s fly by below us on training missions - that’s way cool too.

ttyymmnn > J R in WV 11/20/2015 at 14:32

1

I think the best way to view history is not only to examine the winners and losers, which is indeed enlightening, but also to look at how one thing became another. As a musician, I spent years studying music history, and it’s always easiest to learn what comes first, then learn how the next person or style changed what came before. It’s a constant process of development and adaptation to needs, and some adaptations do lead to dead ends. I find the earlier eras of aviation, before the super computer and computational fluid dynamics, to be the most interesting, when engineers were designing aircraft with a slide rule and very much an attitude of, “Well, let’s see if this works.” And then you had to find an adventurous soul who was willing to climb inside and see if it did work. That’s why I’m in such awe of Igor Sikorsky. Not only did he perfect the helicopter, he served as his own chief test pilot, taking the first flights in all of his rotorcraft. The best quality in a test driver is the ability to tell the designer what needs to be done (which is what made Michael Schumacher such a fantastic driver for the development of the Ferrari F1 cars of his day). What better person to figure out what’s wrong than the guy who designed it?

Thanks for reading.