Thread the examine potential developments of AW.58...
And to develop scenario for a British F4 type aircraft.
As per NOMISYRRUC's AH efforts.
Extrapolations from supersonic research. A dalliance to near theory, but still alternative history.
AWA.58 variant with twin engines .
60 degree swept wing with drooped leading edge slats and elevons.
BP.114 twin engines
Bristol 177 twin engines
EE. P.1 twin engines
Fairey scheme 2 (seat not prone) twin engines
Gloster would need to scale up to a twin it's P.285
Hawker also needs to scale up to a twin.
Of these AWA.58 was actually ordered alongside EE (two each) to Specification E.16/49 and OR.282
However this was the single engined option AWA had put more effort into and was preferred by Ministery.
A more far-sighted decision would be to order the twin.
Serials WD466 and WD472 assigned.
Cranked wing of 40 degrees on outer portion.
Meeting 27 September 1949 to choose which to cancel Fairey or AWA.
AWA was asked to develop medium sweep option. Cranked wing was a result.
Revised high wing of delta form at 48 degees sweep and much musing on low tailplane or canard options. Though high T tail was the result (RAE really didn't like the low tailplane option as EE also encountered and seems to be down to RAE's Handel Davies).
Scaled model powered by Adder.
Which in theory could have tested low tail positions as well....
16 May 1950 AWA informed it was cancelled in favour of Fairey's Delta.
Had twin engined option been selected poor performance estimate might have been different and would certainly be a better basis for development into a fighter.
This element does stray into near hypothetical but it's a reasonable extrapolation from the real.
The high mounted delta is actually quite attractive for weapons pylons and fusilage waisting for Area Ruling ought to narrow majoritively behind the main gear stowage.
Seperating the engine inlet into two around a reprofiled nose ought to accommodate a decent AI scanner.
Main gear is fusilage mounted and so narrow of track, but various aircraft managed.
We can assume an increase in fusilage width and weight translates to increase in span to at absolute least 30ft and area to 350sqft.
Wing loading of 42lb/sqft.
A military version might have to raise wing area further to above 450sqft and thus span of at least 38ft, probably 42ft.
But this could rise to 500sqft and 45-50ft span.
Irony is Fairey efforts delayed due to superpriority for Gannet and that rather undermines the pessimistic view of AWA held by AR/ARD(Res) and RAE.
DMARD was contact involved in giving AWA the chance to revise a delta wing submission.
Tunnel testing Nov 1950 showed high T tail showed instability at certain lift coefficients.
Tunnel testing also validated Fairey's wing root inlets, despite RAE preference for nose inlet.
Applied to twin AW.58 ought to leave room in the nose or alternatively the D section side inlets as used in Swift and Scimitar programs. Designated AW.58B
F.23/49 OR.268 issued for supersonic interceptor fighter. Issued April 1951
Decision '51 On inlets, RAE notes AW.58 is better configured for this than EE P.1.
Additional Prototypes ordered '52
reissued Specification F.23/49 3 June '53
Prototype flight by '54
Admiralty investigation early 1954 to NR/A.38 meeting speed, climb, ceiling, acceleration and potentially endurance.
order for navalised prototype September '54
AW.5B flight '56
FAW mk8 Javelin sacrificed to provide funding for RAF Achilles.
Ministerial priority to AW.58B over P.1 which is felt less ideal for a Weapon System. Noting not only better inlet potential, better radar electronics space but engines remove vertically for easier maintenance.
Armament fit for four Firestreak was found reasonable and vertical fin area could be increased along with ventral fins if necessary.
Approval for AW.58C navalised FAW given March 1957
Prototype flight 1958
Production aircraft arrive 1960
IOC '62.
And to develop scenario for a British F4 type aircraft.
As per NOMISYRRUC's AH efforts.
Relevant history and images threadExtrapolations from supersonic research. A dalliance to near theory, but still alternative history.
AWA.58 variant with twin engines .
60 degree swept wing with drooped leading edge slats and elevons.
BP.114 twin engines
Bristol 177 twin engines
EE. P.1 twin engines
Fairey scheme 2 (seat not prone) twin engines
Gloster would need to scale up to a twin it's P.285
Hawker also needs to scale up to a twin.
Of these AWA.58 was actually ordered alongside EE (two each) to Specification E.16/49 and OR.282
However this was the single engined option AWA had put more effort into and was preferred by Ministery.
A more far-sighted decision would be to order the twin.
Serials WD466 and WD472 assigned.
Cranked wing of 40 degrees on outer portion.
Meeting 27 September 1949 to choose which to cancel Fairey or AWA.
AWA was asked to develop medium sweep option. Cranked wing was a result.
Revised high wing of delta form at 48 degees sweep and much musing on low tailplane or canard options. Though high T tail was the result (RAE really didn't like the low tailplane option as EE also encountered and seems to be down to RAE's Handel Davies).
Scaled model powered by Adder.
Which in theory could have tested low tail positions as well....
16 May 1950 AWA informed it was cancelled in favour of Fairey's Delta.
Had twin engined option been selected poor performance estimate might have been different and would certainly be a better basis for development into a fighter.
This element does stray into near hypothetical but it's a reasonable extrapolation from the real.
The high mounted delta is actually quite attractive for weapons pylons and fusilage waisting for Area Ruling ought to narrow majoritively behind the main gear stowage.
Seperating the engine inlet into two around a reprofiled nose ought to accommodate a decent AI scanner.
Main gear is fusilage mounted and so narrow of track, but various aircraft managed.
We can assume an increase in fusilage width and weight translates to increase in span to at absolute least 30ft and area to 350sqft.
Wing loading of 42lb/sqft.
A military version might have to raise wing area further to above 450sqft and thus span of at least 38ft, probably 42ft.
But this could rise to 500sqft and 45-50ft span.
Irony is Fairey efforts delayed due to superpriority for Gannet and that rather undermines the pessimistic view of AWA held by AR/ARD(Res) and RAE.
DMARD was contact involved in giving AWA the chance to revise a delta wing submission.
Tunnel testing Nov 1950 showed high T tail showed instability at certain lift coefficients.
Tunnel testing also validated Fairey's wing root inlets, despite RAE preference for nose inlet.
Applied to twin AW.58 ought to leave room in the nose or alternatively the D section side inlets as used in Swift and Scimitar programs. Designated AW.58B
F.23/49 OR.268 issued for supersonic interceptor fighter. Issued April 1951
Decision '51 On inlets, RAE notes AW.58 is better configured for this than EE P.1.
Additional Prototypes ordered '52
reissued Specification F.23/49 3 June '53
Prototype flight by '54
Admiralty investigation early 1954 to NR/A.38 meeting speed, climb, ceiling, acceleration and potentially endurance.
order for navalised prototype September '54
AW.5B flight '56
FAW mk8 Javelin sacrificed to provide funding for RAF Achilles.
Ministerial priority to AW.58B over P.1 which is felt less ideal for a Weapon System. Noting not only better inlet potential, better radar electronics space but engines remove vertically for easier maintenance.
Armament fit for four Firestreak was found reasonable and vertical fin area could be increased along with ventral fins if necessary.
Approval for AW.58C navalised FAW given March 1957
Prototype flight 1958
Production aircraft arrive 1960
IOC '62.
Last edited:
