Avro CF-100 whatif...

[Archibald]

One of the best all-weather fighter of the early 50's was clearly the CF-100. Sadly, it had only one export order in Belgium, in 1956 (from the RCAF stock).
The plane was sane (good handling qualities, much better than a CF-104) and served for a long time after its withdrawal as fighter (1950-1981).
Some whatifs around the clunk


USAF CF-100
After the total failure of the F-89 Scorpion program (too many vibrations led to deadly crashes) and the catastrophic beginning of the F-102 program, USAF needed an interim all weather fighter. The CF-100 was chosen, and many ADC squadrons used the type. The plane was much more powerful than the (underpowered) F-94, and had much longer range than the Sabre Dog to patrol over the artic and Alaska. Total number of aircrafts for the USAF amounted to 550.

French CF-100
Two-seat all weather Ouragan, Mystere II and Mystere I flew, but they were not adopted. Waiting for the Vautour IIN, the AdA received 80 Canucks in 1953.  

More to follow...

[The Rat]

I think a number of us have mentioned doing a recon variant. My plan is for a U2 style with long wings and centreline undercart. Back story is already written, and the old Aurora kit awaits...    

[Archibald]

I thought about that, too. Seems logical, with the side-monted engines and straight wings, you can extend the span up to a U-2 size. Cameras in the nose, but also in the ventral pack (instead of the machine guns).

Swept wing CF-100 (real-world project!). With a spectre rocket motor in the tail?
CF-100 for ground attack (with all the punch of its rockets packs)
CF-100 in Vietnam.

 

[Archibald]

CF-100 bomber (enlarged, more swept wings, two unreheated Iroquois, a real bomb bay instead of the machine-guns pack)  

[The Rat]

...two unreheated Iroquois, ...

WOW! Great minds really DO think alike! My version had tests run with the early Iroquois, and showing that the performance was good enough, given the high-lift long wings, that it flew with what were essentially development versions of the engine.  

[Archibald]

With the Arrow 3 and the recon CF-100, RCAF recon units are as well equiped as the USAF

[The Rat]

With the Arrow 3 and the recon CF-100, RCAF recon units are as well equiped as the USAF

I think the CR-100 might be better, because it's got twin-engined reliability. Here's a quick 3-view I threw together, didn't bother changing the engine pod outlines:


I'll probably go to a smaller canopy too. The rationale is that it was easier to pressurize, the true story is that after it's kicked around for 40 years I've lost the canopy.    

[Archibald]

Very nice! You have to finish this one quickly!!  

[GeorgeC]

Avro Canada, Armstrong Whitworth and Gloster were all owned by the Hawker Aircraft Company, but operated in a rather independent fashion.  If Hawker had imposed a more centralised control on the group, the CF100 might have solved the RAF's requirement for a jet night fighter in the early 50s.  CF 100 Mk3s would have replaced the Meteor NF11 series and the Mk5s the NF14, albeit with an aircraft nearly twice the size!

I rather like the idea of Hawker as an more Anglo-Canadian company, with the Arrow surviving to equip both the RAF and RCAF in the 60s, and perhaps the Hunter, Buccaneer and other British aircraft also equiping the RCAF.  Perhaps Canadian orders for TSR2 could have kept the project going as well.

Regards

GeorgeC        

[Archibald]

Ok... that explain why the RAF tested the Canuck in march 1955...Just love the idea of a RAF CF-100.

And why not a naval CF-100? with its straight wings and powerful engines, not too much problems... of course, you need a folding wing system...

PS a plane quite similar to the Canuck was the Supermarine 508 which flew in August 1951 (It was a Scimitar ancestor)

[ChuckAnderson]

I like that CR-100 long-wing version proposed by The Rat.  Done in the colours of NOAA, (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, it could have made for an interesting weather research aircraft.

[Archibald]

Just look at this http://www.whatifmodelers.com/forum//index...=0&#entry164756

[Daryl J.]

Would the ReconClunk need tandem landing gear a la U-2?   How about an RB-57 type arrangement?

RAF service and full tail hearldry seem interesting, yes?   Could it continue forward until Gulf War One?


BTW, how is the Hobbycraft kit and requisite accessories in 1/48?  I've stayed away from the kit as yours truely knows nothing of the CF-100.

[GeorgeC]

RAF service and full tail hearldry seem interesting, yes?   Could it continue forward until Gulf War One?

I think the Meteor's the CF100 would have 'replaced' came largely in green/grey camo rather than BMF, but some night have appeared in full 'heraldry'.  I forgot to mention that the RAF would probably have looked for a 4x20mm fit rather than 8x12.7mm.  

Because the RAF used the larger Canberra for combat support roles, I doubt and of the CF100 would have made it into Granby pink.  However, I think they were still in use by Martin Baker ec for ejection seat testing

Regards

GeorgeC

[rallymodeller]

Avro Canada, Armstrong Whitworth and Gloster were all owned by the Hawker Aircraft Company, but operated in a rather independent fashion.  If Hawker had imposed a more centralised control on the group, the CF100 might have solved the RAF's requirement for a jet night fighter in the early 50s.  CF 100 Mk3s would have replaced the Meteor NF11 series and the Mk5s the NF14, albeit with an aircraft nearly twice the size!

I rather like the idea of Hawker as an more Anglo-Canadian company, with the Arrow surviving to equip both the RAF and RCAF in the 60s, and perhaps the Hunter, Buccaneer and other British aircraft also equiping the RCAF.  Perhaps Canadian orders for TSR2 could have kept the project going as well.

Regards

GeorgeC

Avro Canada was actually a Crown corporation -- that is to say that the Canadian government owned more than 51% of the company until 1963 when it sold the rest to Hawker (mainly as a result of the Arrow debacle).

The USAF did look at the CF-100, but as a strike aircraft. It was evaluated in the same competition that eventually saw the purchase of the B-57, although the CF-100 Mk. 3 showed very well.

My CF-103 profile shows the use of reheated Orendas, but the original '103 proposal (I got the dates wrong, it was proposed in 1955) used Bristol BE.61 engines. Most upgrading of the Canuck also proposed the use of Bristol engines. A couple even proposed the use of Orpheus engines mounted on the wingtips (the Mk. X) and as a STOVL variant (adding Orpheus lift engines to a Mark 3/4, an early competitor to the Hawker P.1127).

The biggest stumbling block to CF-100 sales overseas was the MG-2 fire-control system.  It took a personal intervention from our government (in the person of CD Howe) to get the US to allow the Belgians to get this, as the British had previusly unsuccessfully tried to get the MG-2 for the Javelin.

As for armamet, the choice of 8xM3 .50" guns was made for two reasons: the T160 20mm was tested and fouind to be woefully unreliable, and the location of the guns made for problems with gun-gas ingestion into the engines. I don't know if Adens were ever tried, but it seems to me that the same gas ingestion problems would occur.