Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
McDonnell Douglas Turbo Prop?  
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6088 posts, RR: 29
Posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 10325 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was at an antique shop, in St. Louis, today and spotted this cool print of a McDonnell Douglas four engine turbo prop. Obviously they never built this thing, but what would it have been called and how far along in the design process did it get? It is a neat looking plane and appears to be rather large.




My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
18 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10381 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10271 times:

Wonder if it could have been derived from the C-133




View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Gerard Helmer




"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6088 posts, RR: 29
Reply 2, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10221 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mayor (Reply 1):
Wonder if it could have been derived from the C-133


looks similar, but those went out of production in 61 or so and McDD didn't come together until '67. I wonder if McDD thought about reopening the line to make passenger aircraft? It looks like the nose of a DC-10 with the wings of a C133.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinenoelg From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 10204 times:

I have searched high and low on Google for what this is and am genuinely perplexed! I would be very interested to find something out about this, as there is seemingly nothing online about it!

I hope you bought the picture  


User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6088 posts, RR: 29
Reply 4, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9957 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting noelg (Reply 3):
I hope you bought the picture


I did. I think it was worth $25. I paid $10 each for some TWA Boeing builders photos (727 and 747) a few years ago at the same place.

I took the picture out of the frame to see if it had any markings on the back. It is a photograph of a drawing, as it is on Kodak photo paper. It is a good print so it was done professionally. There is also a McDonnell Douglas stamp on the back that has space for date, department, and model, but all of that is blank. It has McDD's St. Louis HQ address. There is also a serial number for the picture on the back of the print: D4C 54598

The frame has a marking on it too; 8016-15-6. I doubt that means anything, but it may have been a property control number if this thing was in the offices. I have several Missile System prints from McDD (a buddy of mine was an engineer there and rescued them from the trash for me) and they have similar numbers on their frames.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10381 posts, RR: 14
Reply 5, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 9870 times:

Wish my uncle was still alive. He worked at the Douglas plant in California and did design work on the DC-8. I'm sure he'd know what this was.


"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offlinecrownvic From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 1897 posts, RR: 5
Reply 6, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 9585 times:

There was an airliner produced in the late 1960's called the McDonnell Douglas 188. It was a stole airliner with a similar configuration to the drawing, but it was smaller. Perhaps this was an early rendition of the design, before it was down-sized? I believe one or two prototypes were produced and actually saw Eastern and American liveries for demo purposes. The design was too expensive and was scrapped.

If you go on Flickr.com, there are many photos of the type.

[Edited 2010-12-24 17:48:13]

[Edited 2010-12-24 17:48:40]

User currently offlineJohnJ From United States of America, joined Jun 2000, 1657 posts, RR: 2
Reply 7, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 9400 times:

I guess they were pretty diversified back in the day. I had a job back in the early 1990s at a company that was using an elderly McDonnell Douglas computer system (Pick operating system) to run a call center application.

User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6088 posts, RR: 29
Reply 8, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9312 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting crownvic (Reply 6):
There was an airliner produced in the late 1960's called the McDonnell Douglas 188. It was a stole airliner with a similar configuration to the drawing, but it was smaller.

Looks about right. It is smaller, but it is much smaller. The engines are just about right.

Quoting crownvic (Reply 6):
If you go on Flickr.com, there are many photos of the type.

Here are a few. These are from the San Diego Air & Space Museum.


McDonnell-Douglas : 188 : STOL by San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives, on Flickr


McDonnell-Douglas : 188 : STOL by San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives, on Flickr


McDonnell-Douglas : 188 : STOL by San Diego Air & Space Museum Archives, on Flickr

The Eastern photo is shot over St. Louis. Busch Stadium is seen in the photo and you can see the approach to the Popular Street Bridge. US40/I-64 are not there yet, but the pylons are are being built. Looks to be 1968. I have a film made in that railroad yard below, which was filmed in May of 1968 and the US 40 elevated section construction appears to be in the same state of progess as in this photo.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlinemayor From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 10381 posts, RR: 14
Reply 9, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 9243 times:

Quoting falstaff (Reply 8):
Looks about right. It is smaller, but it is much smaller. The engines are just about right.

Now, that looks very much like it was derived from the design of the C-133.



"A committee is a group of the unprepared, appointed by the unwilling, to do the unnecessary"----Fred Allen
User currently offline474218 From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 6340 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 9191 times:

Quoting JohnJ (Reply 7):
I guess they were pretty diversified back in the day. I had a job back in the early 1990s at a company that was using an elderly McDonnell Douglas computer system (Pick operating system) to run a call center application.


In the late 60's early 70's the aerospace companies were very diversified! McDonnell Douglas created a Computer Aided Design (CAD) system called McAuto. While Lockheed created the Computer Aided Design and Manufacturing (CADAM) operating system. While vastly improved over the last 40 plus years both systems are in use today.


User currently offlinefalstaff From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 6088 posts, RR: 29
Reply 11, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 11 hours ago) and read 9085 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting mayor (Reply 9):
Now, that looks very much like it was derived from the design of the C-133.



The C-133 was built by Douglas. We know McDonnell-Douglas built the 188. If McDD came into being in 1967 and these photos of a flying aircraft were taken in 1968 or so, that means that work on the 188 started before the merger. So was the 188 a Douglas plane or was it a McDonnell plane? Which firm originated the design? I can't imagine this thing was entirely designed and put together in the short time between the merger and the date of the photos.

That photo of the 188 next to the McDonnell hanger (STL?) is good evidence that it was a McDonnell plane, of course they may not have got around to painting the hanger yet and that plane was just visiting.

Quoting crownvic (Reply 6):
Perhaps this was an early rendition of the design, before it was down-sized?


I am thinking maybe this was a proposed larger version of the 188 done after the smaller model was built. If it were an early design that eventually was downsized to the 188 the plane in the print in question would have been either McDonnell or Douglas, not McDonnell Douglas.



My mug slaketh over on Falstaff N503
User currently offlineOtnySASLHR From Spain, joined May 2007, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 8877 times:

I thought that the MD188 looked familiar - I looked on Wikipedia and my memory was confirmed that in fact it is a licence-built Breguet 941.
Designed in France in small numbers (6 in total) it featured the four engines interconnected by a drive-shaft. so an engine failure would not mean the loss of propellor rotation and the prop slipstream would continue over the entire wing surface. This accounts for the engines being so widely spread on the wing - a so-called "Blown Wing"

It was evaluated as a STOL airliner and alsoby NASA and The US military but no orders were forthcoming.
Perhaps the print was of a design to look at an enlarged version with the "blown wing" ?
Regards Tony



oTny
User currently offlineOtnySASLHR From Spain, joined May 2007, 131 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 8754 times:

Sorry forgot to add photo of Breguet 941 so here it is

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Steve Williams


Rgds Tony



oTny
User currently offlineglideslope From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1611 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8324 times:

Quoting falstaff (Thread starter):
I was at an antique shop, in St. Louis, today and spotted this cool print of a McDonnell Douglas four engine turbo prop. Obviously they never built this thing, but what would it have been called and how far along in the design process did it get? It is a neat looking plane and appears to be rather large.

Thanks for the post. Truly a neat AC I've never seen. Love the Mock Up in Eastern Livery.  



To know your Enemy, you must become your Enemy.” Sun Tzu
User currently offlinesrbmod From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 8160 times:

Just a thought out of left field, but could this be a potential commercial design based on their proposal for the CX-HLS program, which became known as the C-5? After all, the 747 is based on elements of Boeing's C-5 design and Lockheed did look at a passenger version of the C-5 (L-500).

From the C-5 Galaxy history page on globalsecurity.org:

Quote:

All three industry designs incorporated high-wing configurations with four large turbofan engines in underwing nacelles and front and rear doors with ramps for flow-through loading and unloading. The Boeing and Douglas designs had conventional tail configurations, whereas the Lockheed design incorporated a T-tail configuration. The C-5 design submitted by Boeing was found to have superior aerodynamic cruise performance in the transonic wind-tunnel tests performed at Langley. Boeing's experience with the C-5 competition coupled with Boeing management's vision of the market-ability of jumbo civil transports (and interest from Pan American Airlines) led to the development of the Boeing 747, which enabled Boeing to dominate the world market with a new product line. Although the 747 was a completely new aircraft design (low wing, passenger-carrying civil aircraft), the general configuration influence of the earlier C-5 candidate is in evidence.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...y/systems/aircraft/c-5-history.htm

High wing, conventional tail seems to match the description. Does anyone have any images of Douglas' C-5 design in which to compare to the sketch in the thread starter? While the awarding of the C-5 contract was prior to the merger, this sketch was probably done not too long after the merger.

Looking at the design, it appears to be a widebody fuselage (you can almost image it as the DC-10), so it would definitely have to be based on something other than the C-133.


User currently offlinehomsar From United States of America, joined Jan 2010, 1173 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 7105 times:

I don't know why, but that picture looks very familiar. I want to say that I've seen it in a book somewhere. Unfortunately, I won't be home for another six days to flip through my collection.


I was raised by a cup of coffee.
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25117 posts, RR: 22
Reply 17, posted (3 years 8 months 1 day ago) and read 6539 times:

Quoting glideslope (Reply 14):
Love the Mock Up in Eastern Livery.

It wasn't a mockup.. It was painted in Eastern livery during part of the test program to the best of my memory.


User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6594 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (3 years 8 months 17 hours ago) and read 5592 times:

Quoting srbmod (Reply 15):
Just a thought out of left field, but could this be a potential commercial design based on their proposal for the CX-HLS program, which became known as the C-5? After all, the 747 is based on elements of Boeing's C-5 design and Lockheed did look at a passenger version of the C-5 (L-500).

I like that theory better.

The little STOL props others are talking about was for a US competition, there were plans to build STOLports around the country so a plane was needed.

The large plane in the first post wouldn't have much to do with that, it looks to be the size of an A300 at least !



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
767-300 (N131DN) A Turbo-prop!?! posted Sat Jun 23 2007 04:44:56 by Lincoln
McDonnell Douglas MD-80: A Classic posted Mon Apr 30 2007 04:57:50 by MSYtristar
McDonnell Douglas DC-10 Prototype posted Thu Mar 22 2007 01:43:06 by Cdfmxtech
McDonnell Douglas MD-11- A Tribute By Wings. posted Wed Feb 28 2007 17:10:11 by WINGS
McDonnell Douglas - Why No 757/767 Rival? posted Tue Jan 9 2007 17:26:19 by 1337Delta764
Mcdonnell Douglas Sales? posted Fri Dec 15 2006 01:21:58 by GREATANSETT
McDonnell Douglas Paper Planes posted Wed Dec 13 2006 03:30:31 by L.1011
McDonnell Douglas Concept / A-320 Design Roots? posted Sun Dec 3 2006 18:38:24 by Blackbird
McDonnell Douglas DC 8 -- A Tribute By Wings. posted Sat Nov 25 2006 09:55:44 by WINGS
McDonnell Douglas, If It Didn't Merge? posted Mon Aug 7 2006 11:44:48 by GREATANSETT