QSRA all that well known, so nice work making that link, but to your question, the YC-14 is for all intents and purposes the QSRA’s older brother, the DNA matches are numerous, and they have at least one parent in common.
QSRA was designed and built by the Boeing Commercial Airplane Co — is a modified de Havilland C-8A Buffalo, with new wing and nacelles and four AVCO-Lycoming YF-102 engines.
NASA makes specific note of the QSRA’s high performance in the low speed regime, very low noise levels, and versatile flight control system — first one has obvious lineage via AMST aka the YC-14, also Boeing did a bunch of research into acoustics related to the USB engine configuration, much of that was interior noise measurements (see here) however also included exterior measurements and more to the point, analysis of USB acoustics in general, furthermore they did quite a bit of work on advanced flight control systems, computers, architecture, and so on (see here)
Boeing had followed along with NASA’s work on External Blown Flaps and Upper Surface Blowing for over a decade at this point, taking part in a number of wing tunnel test campaigns, and gobbling up any NASA treats à la USB if and when they appeared. From the handful of papers I have read discussing the QSRA design process, the YC-14 makes guest appearances throughout.
Virtual_Area8230@reddit
A damn shame we didn't buy those.
Jessie_C_2646@reddit
The problem is that they couldn't really do anything better than the Herks they were intended to replace.
Virtual_Area8230@reddit
Have you actually read the stats? Basically an Airbus A400 in the 70s.
Jessie_C_2646@reddit
Thing is, they already had Herks, and they could buy more of them cheaper than Boeing could have sold this.
The program was cancelled and the requirement developed into the C-17 from the rival YC-15.
Thakkmatic@reddit
Came here to say that.
dreaminginteal@reddit
I wonder how it relates to the C-8A Buffalo that NASA-Ames had back in the day?
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:C-8A_Buffalo_Augmentor_Wing_Jet_STOL_Research_Aircraft.jpg
HumpyPocock@reddit
QSRA all that well known, so nice work making that link, but to your question, the YC-14 is for all intents and purposes the QSRA’s older brother, the DNA matches are numerous, and they have at least one parent in common.
Quote via QSRA Familiarization Doc R1 via NASA
QSRA was designed and built by the Boeing Commercial Airplane Co — is a modified de Havilland C-8A Buffalo, with new wing and nacelles and four AVCO-Lycoming YF-102 engines.
NASA makes specific note of the QSRA’s high performance in the low speed regime, very low noise levels, and versatile flight control system — first one has obvious lineage via AMST aka the YC-14, also Boeing did a bunch of research into acoustics related to the USB engine configuration, much of that was interior noise measurements (see here) however also included exterior measurements and more to the point, analysis of USB acoustics in general, furthermore they did quite a bit of work on advanced flight control systems, computers, architecture, and so on (see here)
Boeing had followed along with NASA’s work on External Blown Flaps and Upper Surface Blowing for over a decade at this point, taking part in a number of wing tunnel test campaigns, and gobbling up any NASA treats à la USB if and when they appeared. From the handful of papers I have read discussing the QSRA design process, the YC-14 makes guest appearances throughout.
thetrappster@reddit
Got to see the QSRA fly a few times in the 1980s. Incredible aircraft.
Just watch this thing! (Action starts at 1:10) https://youtu.be/_4QiW-ROJtg?si=JNHePdSWrJlMo3nF
dreaminginteal@reddit
That video may have been one of its last flights. I don't remember it ever flying when I worked there (started in 87).
AverageAircraftFan@reddit
Both used Coanda effect and a supercritical airfoil. Just convergent evolution, i guess
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
Both aircraft were part of the 1970s push for advanced STOL technology . Actually ended up influencing the C-17 Globemaster III program 👍🏻
LimoncelloLightsaber@reddit
Mom, can we have AN-72?
No, we have AN-72 at home.
AverageAircraftFan@reddit
The AN-72 stole the design of the YC-14 dawg
GrumpyOldGrognard@reddit
The YC-14 and the whole AMST program happened before the AN-72 existed.
oz81dog@reddit
What? I didnt hear you?
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
HAPPY CAKE DAY MY FRIEND 🥳🎊
cosmo7@reddit
WHAAT?
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
Lool , looks like the son of the C-141
Inner_Speaker_335@reddit
The C-130’s third cousin twice removed?
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
That's a C-141 baby
fullouterjoin@reddit
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_YC-14
Zcube73@reddit
USB equipped 👌
nealoc187@reddit
Saw this at Pima. So cool.
BobbiePinns@reddit
The other one is across the road at davis monthan
Illustrious-Run3591@reddit
Yup, that's a weird plane alright. That's a completely new concept to me.
furrynoy96@reddit
Those don't go there
Afraid_Stuff_History@reddit
NGL I had to look this up; thought it was made up
Bubblybathtime@reddit
That thing never skipped shoulder day. Goddamn.
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
😂😂
Uranium-Sandwich657@reddit
Engine: yes
Even_Kiwi_1166@reddit (OP)
2 big ones please lol
DiverDiver1@reddit
From the Mickey Mouse school of engine placement
Fluffy_Muffins_415@reddit
The engine placement is utilizing the coanda effect
Competitive_Cheek607@reddit
Goose Gobbler 9000
letsbuildasnowman@reddit
It still exists!