FLIGHTLINE: 102

[Skyfire77]

>Ryan X-13 Vertijet with test pilot Pete Girard at Edwards AFB. | Photo: Peter F. Girard

Developed in the middle 1950s, the Ryan X-13 Vertijet was a tech demonstrator used to investigate VTOL technology and techniques.

Building on work done with the US Navy in developing a VTOL fighter for submarines, Ryan Aeronautical was awarded a contract in 1953 by the USAF to produce two experimental aircraft under the designation X-13. The aircraft were small, just 23' long and 21' wide, barely large enough to contain a RR Avon jet engine, the pilot in a tilting seat, and some fuel. The Vertijet were controlled in horizontal flight with standard maneuvering surfaces, but for hovering pitch and yaw were controlled with vectored thrust, while bleed-air puffer jets on the wingtip endplates controlled roll.

>The first X-13 undergoing test flights in 1955. | Photo: Ryan Aeronautical

The first X-13, fitted with temporary landing gear, first flew horizontally on 10 December 1955. The prototype was also put through a series of translations from horizontal and vertical flight and back again at altitude. After satisfactorily proving it was aerodynamically stable, a temporary scaffolding was added, allowing the aircraft to sit on its tail while undertaking vertical take off and hovering tests. The first VTO occurred on 28 May 1956, and tests continued through the year.

>The X-13 in a vertical attitude during initial testing. | Photo: USAF

>Ryan X-13 Vertijet (#54-1619) with tail mounted framework. | Photo: USAF

A mobile trailer was fabricated for the X-13s which was equipped with an arresting cable which the Vertijet would latch onto with a hook mounted in its nose. The platform would then be pivoted horizonal, with the aircraft's weight being supported by a pair of legs, and the trailer could then be driven off. The second prototype made its first full cycle flight on 11 April 1957, taking off vertically from the tower, transitioning to horizontal flight, then returning to the platform and transitioning back to a hover before capturing the cable.

>X-13 54-1620 approaching its landing trailer. The capture hook and support legs are notable, as is the arresting gear on the platform. | Photo: USAF

>The second X-13 on its trailer, which has been lowered to the horizontal. | Photo: USAF Museum

>A illustration of the X-13 taking off from the tower, then transitioning to horizontal flight. | Illustration: Ryan Aeronautical

In late July of 1957, the X-13 was transported to Washington DC and demonstrated for various officials, crossing the Potomac River and landing at the Pentagon.

The Vertijets produced valuable data on VTOL aircraft, but the USAF chose not to pursue the aircraft further, citing a lack of operational requirements. The technologies developed by Ryan for the Vertijet have not be utilized on following VTOL aircraft save the puffer jets, which were also used on the BAe/McDonnell Douglas Harrier, as well as on the X-32 and X-35 and the eventual F-35 Lightning II. Both X-13s were retired in 1958, with 54-1619 going to the San Diego Air & Space Museum while -1620 was remanded to the USAF Museum.

>The first X-13 at the San Diego Museum. | Photo: John Shupek

>X-13 #2 at the USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio. | Photo: Clemens Vasters

The X-13 made sufficient impact at the time that it was incorporated into Pontiac advertising:

[jminer]

@skyfire77 That is a very cool plane and reminds me how giant the balls were on test pilots in the 50s. Technology was advancing at a rapid pace, but there wasn’t the modeling or simulating we have today so it was a very dangerous job requiring very skilled pilots.

[MM54]

Very cool! This sort of test program is fascinating.

I really need to get back to the Dayton museum some time, I was there once a couple years ago but only had limited time. I'd like to go spend a whole day there, there's certainly enough to see.

[facw]

@skyfire77 said in FLIGHTLINE: 102:

The X-13 made sufficient impact at the time that it was incorporated into Buick advertising:

Did you mean Pontiac?

[Skyfire77]

@jminer Yeah, I mean, the Wrights built wind tunnels, and there were scale models tested for all sorts of aircraft, but so many programs were basically "Does this work at full scale?" "Dunno, let's build a plane and find out!". The fact that there weren't more planes like the XF-84H Thunderscreech, where the test pilot literally told the project manager "You aren't big enough and there aren't enough of you to get me in that thing again" is amazing.

[Skyfire77]

@facw Dammit.

Edit: I had the right tag, but it was wrong in the body, go figure....

[Rusty Vandura]

[ttyymmnn]

@skyfire77 said in FLIGHTLINE: 102:

"Does this work at full scale?" "Dunno, let's build a plane and find out!"

Which is precisely why I find this era of aviation so fascinating. While CFT and computer modeling has made things significantly safer, it has also made things significantly less interesting.

[Skyfire77]

@rusty-vandura All four of these VTOL tail-sitters, the X-13, XFV and XFY, and the SNECMA Coléoptère, all had pivoting seats. I wouldn't at all be surprised if that part of Slave 1 was inspired by them.

[ttyymmnn]

@skyfire77

I have made the pilgrimage, I have seen the Vertijet.

I don't know why, but looking at this photo suddenly reminded me of Wonder Woman 1984, which we just recently watched. If you haven't seen it, there is a scene where Diana Prince takes Steve Trevor to, presumably, the Udvar-Hazy Center (which is within walking distance of the DC Mall) for them to pick out a plane to fly to Egypt in (no word on how they arranged inflight refueling). Interestingly, there is a Grumman Guardian parked out there. They end up selecting a strange, side-by-side seating Tornado, which Steve can fly with zero instruction because he is obviously a Great Pilot, and they jet off into the night (and the fireworks, it's a cool scene, but it goes on too long).

[Skyfire77]

@ttyymmnn Yeah, I've seen that clip. It's obvious that they wanted an Aardvark, not a Tornado, so I'm not sure why they didn't just use an F-111. You'd be a lot more likely to find the latter at the A&SM than a Tornado. Then again, comic book movie.

[ttyymmnn]

@skyfire77 said in FLIGHTLINE: 102:

@ttyymmnn Then again, comic book movie.

Every time my boys point out bullshit in a movie, I remind them that it's not a documentary.

[Skyfire77]

@ttyymmnn The rest of the family learned not to watch aviation-related movies, especially the Airport series, with my uncle, who was an aviation mechanic. His sons and I all had a blast though.

[ttyymmnn]

@skyfire77 My wife was dating a guy in the Navy when Top Gun came out. She told me, "Never go see Top Gun with somebody who's in the Navy."

[Skyfire77]

@ttyymmnn Oh lord, I just had a bad idea: gather up some Navy and USAF airmen, and double feature Top Gun and Iron Eagle...

[Chariotoflove]

@skyfire77 said in FLIGHTLINE: 102:

@ttyymmnn Oh lord, I just had a bad idea: gather up some Navy and USAF airmen, and double feature Top Gun and Iron Eagle...

You're a monster.

[Skyfire77]

@chariotoflove

[Chariotoflove]

@skyfire77 He was fabulous in that role.

[ttyymmnn]

@chariotoflove said in FLIGHTLINE: 102:

@skyfire77 He was fabulous in that role.

For all of its flaws, Fifth Element is one of my all-time favorite movies. Oldman acts circles around everybody else in that film.

[Skyfire77]

@ttyymmnn Well, I mean that's true for pretty much any film Gary was in.