avatar_Archibald

Gloster Thin Wing Javelin...

Started by Archibald, May 02, 2006, 07:43:21 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3
User actions

GTX

#15
May 05, 2006, 01:56:54 PM
Mart,

Those 'Velvet Glove' (love the name) look almost Russian - any information on them?

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

MartG

#16
May 05, 2006, 02:17:40 PM
Murphy's 1st Law - An object at rest will be in the wrong place
Murphy's 2nd Law - An object in motion will be going in the wrong direction
Murphy's 3rd Law - For every action, there is an equal and opposite malfunction

Archibald

#17
May 05, 2006, 10:53:32 PM
I was thinking : a CF-105 with long-range AIM-47 Falcon (AN/ASG-18 radar) and ARH Sparrow II (medium range missiles) would have been the most lethal fighter in the world (roughly the equivalent of a Tomcat with Phoenix and AMRAAM... in 1963!!)
Apparently just before the cancellation of the program Avro obtain, from the americans  the AN/ASG-18 radar (and as a consequence, the AIM-47 Falcon AAM). Anyone knows more about this deal? Apparently this is not a myth (I red this in a good magazine)  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

elmayerle

#18
May 06, 2006, 08:47:02 PM
More likely the AIM-47.  The Sparrow II was an attempt that was ahead of technology.  Some 20 years later, AMRAAM was the same size airframe and a decided challenge to do.
"Reality is the leading cause of stress amongst those in touch with it."
--Jane Wagner and Lily Tomlin

Archibald

#19
May 07, 2006, 02:01:09 AM
We can say that the Sparrow was too little for an ARH, and the Red Dean which had ARH too, could have worked, but with a very prohibitive mass and drag  penalty for the plane carrying it (I scratchbuild and fixed two red hebe on the wingtip of a EE P.8... the result is awful! The missiles are really enormous comparing to the plane itself...)  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Archibald

#20
May 08, 2006, 01:36:16 AM
The Red Dean was so big and draggy that a subsonic... Canberra was a better user than a supersonic plane like the Delta III  :wacko:
So EE proposed an interim interceptor Canberra with Red Deans on the wingtips... (Canberra mk12).does someone has photos of the Canberra Red-den testbed?  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Archibald

#21
May 08, 2006, 10:36:36 AM
I know that I'm a great fan of this book.. what I search is phots orf the testbed, to see what a Canberra looked like.
Is there a good/recent Canberra kit in 1/72 scale?  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Archibald

#22
May 10, 2006, 07:57:09 AM
Last question : the Red Dean was very big and draggy. Just want to know if it worked on the Canberra testbed, or if it was a real failure...

Thought about a Canadian/American/British program of a heavy interceptor.

AN/ASG-18 + AI-18 Radar, Red Dean and AIM-47 missiles. A kind of CF-105 with podded engines underwings, to have more room in the fuselage.
On this fuselage, a big weapon bay able to carry two Red Dean and two AIM-47.

such a plane would have had fire and forget  and long range missiles, at the beginning of the 60's!
Powered by Iroquois, J-93 oR Gyrons with 14000 kgp of thrust each. Mach 2.1, 1300 km range, 26 meters long... the ultimate interceptor!!  
King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

Zen

#23
May 10, 2006, 02:14:52 PM
Errr the 'fighter' Canberra was a little earlier than F155T, I think the early 50's. It was to use the Red Dean missile, which is itself an earlier weapon.

At that time the climb and ceiling performance of the canberra was quite competative, though it was accepted the aircraft would not be as fast as a high flying bomber of the time it entered service.

But it could handle the full 'kit'.

The missile did carry trials I understand on a wing pylon but not on the wingtip as the fighter version would have had.

Red Dean and the later Red Hebe where so big as to fit the then state of the art electronics, warhead and a suitbly large dish for guidance. All this made a big rocket motor to overcome the size of that, and overtake and destroy a bomber, flying substantialy higher than the launch aircraft.
To win without fighting, that is the mastry of war.

rickshaw

#24
March 03, 2011, 08:52:49 PM
Does anybody have any good three view drawing of the thin-wing Javelin?   Vector have a silhouette plan view but that really isn't enough...
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

pyro-manic

#25
March 04, 2011, 02:18:12 AM
There's one in BSP Jet Fighters. It's not huge, but it's enough to see what goes where. :)
Some of my models can be found on my Flickr album >>>HERE<<<

Mossie

#26
March 04, 2011, 04:10:44 AM
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

PR19_Kit

#27
March 04, 2011, 09:34:24 AM
Quote from: Mossie on March 04, 2011, 04:10:44 AM
JCF posted one in the Javelin thread, reply #23:
http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,18279.msg422472/highlight,gloster+goodness.html#msg422472

That's an intriguing shape, area rule bumps on the back end and those bizarre intakes. Could be a real pain to model, but it would sure look good.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

kitnut617

#28
March 04, 2011, 10:08:33 AM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on March 04, 2011, 09:34:24 AM
and those bizarre intakes. Could be a real pain to model, but it would sure look good.

When I get around to building my Avro Atlantic K.3, I could use the Vulcan intakes that will be made redundant for something like that Kit.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

PR19_Kit

#29
March 04, 2011, 02:10:01 PM
Robert, your build programme must be DECADES long!  ;D
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3
User actions