Clunk a Canuck: WI the CF-103 came first?

[phx1138]

The CF-100 was Canada's only indigenous fighter to enter service. In 1950, a developed version, the CF-103 (with thinner, 42deg swept wing), was proposed, but never built.

Given the Allies had access to German data, & seeing the resemblance of the CF-103 to the Heinkel P.1080...what if the CF-100 had more closely resembled the P.1080 to begin with?

How much does that change Canada's aviation industry? Does it advance things enough to see the CF-105 enter service? Does the *CF-100 see export sales anywhere?

Is the *CF-100 enough better (less problematic) to see the C.102 enter service with an American airline? (Early enough for the C.102 to dominate the short-haul jetliner market, the way the 727 did OTL?)

 

[Just Leo]

While Avro was dithering about the potential of the CF-103, Jan Zurakowski dove the CF-100 supersonic, thus exceeding the CF-103 design envelope. Since further potential problems with the CF-103 were never addressed, it's potential cannot be quantified.

The C.102 Jetliner was doomed from its genesis because there was only one government sponsored national airline, TCA, which was asked to, and did lend a performance prospectus for a jetliner, while stipulating that it was not willing to, and would not, become lead user of such a machine, and called for an unavailable engine to ensure that it could cancel such a deal without qualm. For what it's worth, being another Canadian airline in this situation was no picnic either.

I find it disappointing that the Caravelle, which did have a national sponsor, met with less success than it might have. Being a pioneer and a milestone does not always equate to runaway commercial success.

 

[Luath]

You could see a stronger Canadian Aviation industry, perhaps a north American 'SAAB', if the gestation of the 105 is longer you could end up with an even better machine thats much more versatile that its OTL counterpart. I think the RAAF might take the 103 but I'm not sure.

Give me a minute (Presses ship com button) 'THE MANN to the bridge, repeat THE MANN to the Bridge'

 

[Just Leo]

SAAB never made their own engines.

 

[Archibald]

The Caravelle was too small, and Douglas fooled Sud aviation with a possible partnership... and then they build the DC-9, a Caravelle clone with much more growth potential.

The issue with the CF-100 (and CF-103 / CF-104 swept and delta wing derivatives) was the rounded engines on the fuselage sides; the wide body had a lot of induced drag. The CF-105 had the engines inside the fuselage.

 

[Just Leo]

The issue with the CF-100 (and CF-103 / CF-104 swept and delta wing derivatives) was the rounded engines on the fuselage sides; the wide body had a lot of induced drag. The CF-105 had the engines inside the fuselage.

There are some Buccaneer fans that might resent the implications, not to mention the F-14 and Su-29 fans, et al. Your statement isn't necessarily wrong, but it is simplistic. Selling your soul to defeat induced drag led to the EE Lightning, with tremendous performance and poor fuel fraction and weapons provision. How the compromise game is played tells the tale.

 

[RazeByFire]

While Avro was dithering about the potential of the CF-103, Jan Zurakowski dove the CF-100 supersonic, thus exceeding the CF-103 design envelope. Since further potential problems with the CF-103 were never addressed, it's potential cannot be quantified.

The C.102 Jetliner was doomed from its genesis because there was only one government sponsored national airline, TCA, which was asked to, and did lend a performance prospectus for a jetliner, while stipulating that it was not willing to, and would not, become lead user of such a machine, and called for an unavailable engine to ensure that it could cancel such a deal without qualm. For what it's worth, being another Canadian airline in this situation was no picnic either.

I find it disappointing that the Caravelle, which did have a national sponsor, met with less success than it might have. Being a pioneer and a milestone does not always equate to runaway commercial success.

Sure looks sexy.

 

[phx1138]

While Avro was dithering about the potential of the CF-103, Jan Zurakowski dove the CF-100 supersonic, thus exceeding the CF-103 design envelope. Since further potential problems with the CF-103 were never addressed, it's potential cannot be quantified.

And since I'm proposing a similar design, not a CF-100 derivative, that's a moot point, isn't it?

The C.102 Jetliner was doomed from its genesis

Leaving aside the patent lunacy of TCA in all this... Do you see no prospect at all for C.102 not being dropped due to Korea? No prospect for being adopted elsewhere?

 

[Just Leo]

And since I'm proposing a similar design, not a CF-100 derivative, that's a moot point, isn't it?

Leaving aside the patent lunacy of TCA in all this... Do you see no prospect at all for C.102 not being dropped due to Korea? No prospect for being adopted elsewhere?

For purposes of fantasy fiction, the CF-103 can be assumed to be a viable alternative with a slightly improved critical mach number. In a real world crucible, vortex and shadow problems during alpha manoeuvering were never encountered nor addressed but could conceivably have brought the entire endeavor to a flaming close. There was a wooden mock-up of the F4 Phantom that was not dissimilar, and it ended up with broad chord vertical fin, severe anhedral fuselage-mounted tailplanes and a mainplane dihedral kink mid-span. These changes didn't solve the problem, but made it better.

The lunacy of the TCA business is based on the fact that the only other major Canadian airline was Canadian Pacific Airlines which did not have a route structure favoring the C.102. It operated to Asia and South America. While TCA went with Vickers Viscount and Vanguard, CPAir operated Britannias. The prospect of initiating a lead customer deal with an American airline is dubious due to the fact that Avro hadn't any prior credentials in the field, and it is a Canadian company. It wasn't until there was sheet metal in the air that Americans took any interest, and then the question arises, which American engine would you use? The Westinghouse J-46, the Allison J-33, the Pratt and Whitney J-42 or J-48 or the dirty little GE J-47? Which would YOU choose?

 

[phx1138]

For purposes of fantasy fiction, the CF-103 can be assumed to be a viable alternative with a slightly improved critical mach number. In a real world crucible, vortex and shadow problems during alpha manoeuvering were never encountered nor addressed but could conceivably have brought the entire endeavor to a flaming close. There was a wooden mock-up of the F4 Phantom that was not dissimilar, and it ended up with broad chord vertical fin, severe anhedral fuselage-mounted tailplanes and a mainplane dihedral kink mid-span. These changes didn't solve the problem, but made it better.

Does that remain true despite starting from Heinkel research, rather than HS's?

which American engine would you use? The Westinghouse J-46, the Allison J-33, the Pratt and Whitney J-42 or J-48 or the dirty little GE J-47? Which would YOU choose?

Speaking for myself, probably the J33, tho I can't say it was available to civil users at the time.

 

[Just Leo]

Does that remain true despite starting from Heinkel research, rather than HS's?

Speaking for myself, probably the J33, tho I can't say it was available to civil users at the time.

I'm not aware that Heinkel performed any flight testing on the unbuilt ramjet project aircraft. I am aware that a somewhat similar British aircraft, the DH.107, performed some fatal flight testing in the transsonic regime, and nobody else decided later to duplicate the configuration. I can't say it couldn't work. I can only say it never did.

Not a bad choice of engines. The P&W J-42 came out with slightly better calculated numbers, but the bottom line would come with availability and manufacturer's guarantees, had they been forthcoming. As you might imagine, civil jet engines were on the threshold, but not through the door.

 

[phx1138]

I'm not aware that Heinkel performed any flight testing on the unbuilt ramjet project aircraft. I am aware that a somewhat similar British aircraft, the DH.107, performed some fatal flight testing in the transsonic regime, and nobody else decided later to duplicate the configuration. I can't say it couldn't work. I can only say it never did.

So in all a bad design....

Not a bad choice of engines. The P&W J-42 came out with slightly better calculated numbers, but the bottom line would come with availability and manufacturer's guarantees, had they been forthcoming. As you might imagine, civil jet engines were on the threshold, but not through the door.

Yeah... I never realized how much a perfect set of circumstances the DH.106 really was.