Garrett STAMP | TheaterFire

[-]

Sh00ter80@reddit

30 mi range! Wiki: “The prototype took off and manoeuvred by means of a ducted fan, much like the Harrier. Unlike the Harrier it had no wings and had to depend on the fan's thrust for lift at all times. This gave it an expected range of 30 miles (48 km) at a speed of 75 mph (120 kph). The power came from a Garrett TSE-231 turbine normally used to power helicopters. The turbine gave 1050 pounds (476kg) of thrust by running at 6000 rpm. Two persons sat in a closed cockpit adapted from an OH-6 helicopter.

The prototype was successfully tested in tethered flight on December 21, 1973 inside a hangar at Marine Corps Air Station El Toro in California. Its competitor in the STAMP program was a one-person open-cockpit craft called the Williams Aerial Systems Platform (WASP), made by Williams International.”

[-]

CptKeyes123@reddit (OP)

Still better performance than the Rockwell XFV-12. Failed to do a tethered test.

[-]

Treemarshal@reddit

To be fair, the XFV-12 could have flown in fixed-wing, conventional mode - IIRC they seriously considered flying it from the factory to the test facility, decided to air-freight it instead, and when the VTOL tests came back as "not nearly enough lift" were kicking themselves for missing the opportunity to actually fly the thing.

[-]

CptKeyes123@reddit (OP)

I do think it could've been a cool plane! I've been meaning to use it's silhouette and power in a story of mine

[-]

BlacksmithNZ@reddit

That was a wild read; good enough on paper that they spent millions to build a prototype to find augmented thrust doesn't work that well.

If it had been a bit better, they could have used it with short take off and vertical landing like with RN Harriers; you don't fully need to take off vertically and hover with full load, just be able land without a full runway or arresting gear

[-]

AgentVirg24110@reddit

And the navy picked that for consideration over the 1970s version F-35B

[-]

CptKeyes123@reddit (OP)

Feels like it would be good for really messy terrain, like urban combat or forest.

My other idea is for a scifi story, if you want your crew to be able to have a little air mobile unit. And NASA did design a little moon hopper concept, in case the LEM broke. Never deployed or built, just concept art, but it fits.

[-]

ohygglo@reddit

The pinball and arcade machine company?

[-]

xrelaht@reddit

Honeywell makes home thermostats. They also make core components for nuclear warheads.

Unfortunately, this isn’t the same situation: pinball machines were built by the Williams Manufacturing Company, the WASP by Williams International.

[-]

bkcontra@reddit

interestingly, Honeywell spun off the home thermostat business (and garrett turbochargers). But they do still make the M1A1 tank engine, helicopter engines, APUs and biz jet engines.

[-]

ohygglo@reddit

Dammit! Thanks though.

[-]

Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit

No, the guys who build engines for cruise missiles

[-]

WoodenNichols@reddit

And every crewmember (including the ground crew) were deafened for life.

[-]

Fkyboy1903@reddit

Much as I adore the sci-fi looks (yet useless... EVERYTHING ELSE); I can think of one good use. A backup after loosing your main rotor and tail. Surprise, byatch! I'm flying out, Flight Of The Phoenix style!

[-]

broken_appliance@reddit

When did this first fly? Could this be what Lonnie Zamora saw?

[-]

CptKeyes123@reddit (OP)

1973, so I'm not sure.

[-]

mexchiwa@reddit

Looks like a prop for a 60s space marine movie. With a joke name

Was it called the STAMP because it would inevitably come down hard?

[-]

AutonomousOrganism@reddit

Small Tactical Aerial Mobility Platform :)

[-]

Old_Wallaby_7461@reddit

You can always tell when they start with the acronym and work their way backwards

[-]

Squrton_Cummings@reddit

I refuse to believe anyone can say ATACMS with a straight face.

[-]

EvenBar3094@reddit

Attack em’s

[-]

DarthBrooks69420@reddit

A-ta-cams

[-]

Professor_Smartax@reddit

Ack ack mass

[-]

deltavdeltat@reddit

Backronym. Maybe its bacronym.

[-]

Professor_Smartax@reddit

Not the Small Platform for Light Aerial Transport, SPLAT?

[-]

P1xelHunter78@reddit

I could see that in aliens

[-]

Archididelphis@reddit

I've mentioned thinking of posting on the GI Joe Sky Hawk. This does bring it to mind. I honestly think the toy was probably designed without the direct influence of this or any other particular aircraft. If anything, this looks less like a conventional aircraft than the toy.

[-]

One-Internal4240@reddit

Man, the SkyHawk had serious balance/control problems. Unless that empennage had, like, a nuclear reactor inside of it, there's zero chance it isn't going to trebuchet Joe right into the dirt face first.

No, I didn't really have . . friends . . as a child, but why do you ask?

[-]

Archididelphis@reddit

The Sky Hawk did at least have control surfaces that were recognizable as such. Whether they would work is a separate question...

[-]

CptKeyes123@reddit (OP)

Yeah it is hard to say!

Especially because a lot of the classic Joe Vehicles were inspired by real ones. You have the MOBAT, that's pretty much an M60 tank, you have the AWE Striker(old prototype desert vehicle, and Mauler was inspired by a very specific prototype, the High Survivability Test Vehicle. Having seen a prototype up close, you can see the connections.

[-]

FxckFxntxnyl@reddit

I could see a today built version being functional and fast but man I can think of so many ways this thing is 100% gonna end up as a smoking hole.

[-]

One-Internal4240@reddit

I had a Marine corps buddy who said they had some kind of scoreboard comparing VEHICLES and TERRORISTS, in terms of dead Marines. I think I remember him saying that there was like one month where terror won. All other times, rotary wing is the Deadliest Foe.

It might have all been bullshit but it was very funny listening to all these poor ass men crack wise.

[-]