
Ask HN: What happened to the Williams Xjet and why no modern equivalent? - eth0up
Most folks have neither seen or heard of the Williams Aerial Systems Platform (WASP Xjet), a functional VTOL aircraft abandoned by the US military in the 1980s, purportedly due to lack of practical application. Videos of the vehicle in operation are fascinating, arguably exhibiting a concept at least as appealing as the Wingsuit or Gyroplane - both of which have vigorous followings and aren&#x27;t cheap to own and operate. Perhaps its role in warfare is impractical, but the Xjet would very practically tempt my hypothetical wallet if it were available. Why has such a neat design fallen into obscurity rather than public domain and recreation?<p>https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Williams_X-Jet
======
pinewurst
For the same reason all of the other 50s, 60s and 70s flying platform/personal
VTOL vehicles did. They're expensive, relatively hard to fly, have low
endurance/range and not enough payload to be useful. Those F107s are much more
cost effective cruising one-way at tree-top with a few hundred pounds (or KT)
of boom for their recipient.

~~~
eth0up
> They're expensive, relatively hard to fly, have low endurance/range and not
> enough payload to be useful.

Both the Wingsuit and gyroplane suffer these attributes too, yet there are
many enthusiasts actively engaged in them.

Note the potential altitude of the Xjet (1970-80s version) is 10,000' and the
operation-time is near 45 minutes - not trivial! The usefulness of the
gyroplane isn't terribly extensive, and the Wingsuit less. Affordability seems
a valid point of discouragement, but with modern availability of material,
manufacturing, etc., maybe not. Sidenote: A former room-mate was building a
gyroplane in our living room.

~~~
pinewurst
I don't believe the 10,000' ceiling number. There's no attribution on the
Wikipedia page for it, directly or in references. The duration number is a
range but at least the lower 30 min bound seems independently validated by
other mentions of the X-Jet's predecessor.

~~~
eth0up
First, a possibly interesting article:
[https://partners.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20000611m...](https://partners.nytimes.com/library/magazine/home/20000611mag-
phenomenon.html)

Another article by The Guardian, states that the unabridged explanation for
discontinuing the Xjet remains classified; but as you intimate, citations seem
on walkabout. I combed some patents for refs on the ceiling-limit and found
nothing, to my surprise. I also visited (virtually) both the National Museum
of the US Air Force, and Museum of Flight, but curiously couldn't find any
results for "X-jet", "Xjet", or "X jet" nor other related keywords. NoScript?
Your replies are appreciated, but I remain sincerely perplexed by the
persistent obscurity of this fantastic machine. More particularly perplexing
is the present year, 2016, where despite solid evidence of a bona fide,
functional dream-machine from the 80s offering ballistic capabilities that
most humans still futilely fantasize about, we have no tangible modern
counterpart to. Even if the X-jet could scarcely tower a hunched inch above
the treeline as you mention, it's an inch more free and exhilarating than the
best scripted and predictable tangent of any popular rollercoaster. So,
respectfully, my question endures.

PS: I am no adversary of sausages and am wondering if pinewurst is a genuine
product. I immediately think of rosemary, which is a necessary spice in many
recipes.

~~~
pinewurst
I think the answer is that both don't have websites designed for people doing
research beyond "what's the cafe menu?" I've been physically to both museums
and the USAF museum is truly breathtaking. The Museum of Flight is far less
so.

I think civilian flying platforms, without some sort of modern fail-safe
stability augmentation, would be a regulatory and liability nightmare. Plus
the costs would be crazy, if not to buy and operate, to maintain. Zero-timing
a jet engine is not a small expense and it's continual.

P.S. My nom-de-HN is a tribute to a defunct project's code name. It was a
sausage with a thin skin of delusion well stuffed with bad judgment and
strongly seasoned with incompetence. Not to my taste at all.

P.P.S. There seems to be a lot more info under "WASP" than "X-jet".

