Canberra PR.9 Prototype

[rickshaw]

Building on the experience gained with the PR3 and PR7, the RAF decided that it wanted a new high-altitude reconnaissance Canberra for strategic reconnaissance. The new Canberra PR9 married the same fuselage used by the PR3 and PR7, with an enlarged wing and more powerful Rolls Royce Avon 206 (RA24) engines. A PR7 (WH793) was modified by Napier to this configuration and served as the prototype for all future PR9s. The bigger wing and powerful engines improved the all ready excellent high altitude performance of the PR7 and the new PR9 soon demonstrated an operational ceiling in excess of 60,000ft.

Well, that is what they'd like you to believe.  The truth though is a little different.  When the RAF decided that wanted a high altitude reconnaissance aircraft they of course wanted to build on the experience gained during WWII with such aircraft and the obvious choice was the Canberra for modification.  Working on that WWII experience the obvious requirement was for a larger wing.  So they stretched the Canberra's wing and so the prototype Canberra PR.9, XH128 was created:









The model was created after the Canberra F.12 had been built.  I found myself with a left over PR9 fuselage and no wings.  Looking around my eyes alighted on a Highplanes B-57E.  "Ah, ha!"  I thought to myself, the very thing.  So, it was that I mated the PR9 fuselage to the very long span B-57E "Patricia Lynne".  Unfortunately the wings proved heavier than the very hefty weight of metal I placed in the nose (along with a fairly heavy brass strip I used for a spar) and this is the first plane I've built in a very long time which is a tail dragger.  Hence the need for that little stand they give you in the Canberra kits!   

Now, who was it that advises that, "Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings"?  He should like this one.

[Martin H]

Kit Spackman will love you for this LOL.

[Old Wombat]

Kit Spackman will love you for this LOL.

You stole my thoughts!

Cool beastie, Brian!

[PR19_Kit]

Now, who was it that advises that, "Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings"?  He should like this one.

OH YES!!!!!  

MY kind of aeroplane, yes siree!  

But donning a JMN hat, weren't the 'Patricia Lynns' the B-57Es with standard length wings and IR seekers used to look for the Viet Cong convoys? Those monster wings look like those from an RB-57D, the first long winged USAF Canberras. The later, even LONGER, RB-57Fs had wings with more taper on the leading edge than the trailing edge.

[/JMN mode]

[JayBee]

I do believe the honourable gentleman is correct in his various statements, especially the first one

[Pablo1965]

It is a nice plane,and a plausible concept of the fifties, may be a future version in black like the U2.... 

[Thorvic]

Nice model, although you do realise your going to have to do one at the end of its service in the Hemp scheme and low vis roundels.

Hmmn might be interesting in a RAAF scheme for high level recon    

[tc2324]

That is outstanding. Love the new `span` and the silver finish is very 50`s.

[rickshaw]

I regret to say that this prototype was not successful.  The long span wing proved troubleprone with it breaking its mainspar after the first flight.  BAC decided instead to go with a short-span, long chord wing because of those inherent strength deficiencies in such a large, lightwight structure.  An experience the USAF also encountered with their B-57Ds (as Kit so right corrected.  I will now shoot my copywriter! ), although they chose to replace the entire wing in the B-57F instead of following the RAF's lead.

This was not an enjoyable build.  The reason why I ended up putting a fairly large hunk of Brass strip in as a mainspar was for the same reason these long span aircraft failed in real life.  The blasted wings kept falling off.  Highplanes use a different attachment method to Airfix's old "tab-and-slot", preferring a stronger inset wing.   I was also really annoyed that putting twice the indicated weight in the nose _still_ failed to make the nose stay down.  Highplane's use of thick, heavy plastic certainly shows what happens when most of its behind the C-of-G!

With all the left-over parts I now have enough to do a B-57B.  That will soon grace these pages (have to figure out what scheme to put it in.  I'm thinking of Thai at the moment ).

[Green Dragon]

Kit's right, any plane can be improved with longer wings! Lovely job! 

Paul Harrison

[Weaver]

Splendid job - well done.

[PR19_Kit]

Rick,

Why does your version look better than the USAF RB-57D though? There's something about that offset cockpit that gets to you somehow. 

[rickshaw]

Rick,

Why does your version look better than the USAF RB-57D though? There's something about that offset cockpit that gets to you somehow. 

Combination perhaps of the longer fuselage and the single-seat fighter cockpit, I suspect.   I actually quite like the RB-57D and will more than likely make a RW one (I like the ROC markings in the Hiplanes kit), some point in the future.  This is a huge (by my standards) 1/72 model, with a wingspan of over 45cm.  I'm also tempted towards the RB-57F but its a Mach 2 kit and I've heard mixed reports on their quality....

[NARSES2]

 

[lancer]

Beautiful!!! It's a damm shame that and Kit's PR19 can't be disp[layed together. It's really get heads turning!!!