Canadair CL-44 for the USAF?

Spark

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
361
Reaction score
48
According to a Canadian site at one time it was considered possible that 200 Canadian built Britannia type transports for the USAAF would be purchased in place of Boeing K135 with all its operational shortcomings.
What were the advantages of this aircraft over the K135?
It was implicit this was in the fifties if so was this a CL44 type Britannia upgrade with the Bristol Orion engine and would it have the original type wing or the thin section high speed wing?
 

frank

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
617
Reaction score
20
The USAAF was changed to USAF in 1946, IIRC, so that part's not correct for sure.
 

TinWing

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2006
Messages
893
Reaction score
98
Spark said:
According to a Canadian site at one time it was considered possible that 200 Canadian built Britannia type transports for the USAAF would be purchased in place of Boeing K135 with all its operational shortcomings.
What were the advantages of this aircraft over the K135?
It was implicit this was in the fifties if so was this a CL44 type Britannia upgrade with the Bristol Orion engine and would it have the original type wing or the thin section high speed wing?

Could you post a link to the "Canadian site" in question?
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,226
Reaction score
763
Interesting, I didn't know that. Wonder though what it was that the Yukon could do that a bunch of updated DC-7s or Convair 580s couldn't... not to mention the cargo types still in the inventory (C-119, C-123, C-124, C-133) that could fit the bill... Did I miss something?
 

Jos Heyman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 15, 2007
Messages
597
Reaction score
23
In those days the USAF gave frequently consideration to aircraft manufactured in Canada (eg T-36) so may be this was some wishful thinking by Canadair without too much of a real proposal.
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,792
Reaction score
1,356
Stargazer2006 said:
... Did I miss something?

MATS wasn't interested in Yukons, they wanted the swing-tail CL-44D4. So unless those DC-7s or Convair 580s were going to be pretty heavily modified ...

BTW, the Convair wasn't really in the same class. The RCAF operated both 'Cosmos' and Yukons.
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,792
Reaction score
1,356
A bit more on the CL-44 for the USAF. The sub-type in question was the unbuilt CL-44D4-5 (RR Tyne 12s, the BE.25 Orions had already been abandoned), this sub-type designation being assigned on 15 June 1959. The CL-44D4-5 was intended as a cargo/passenger model for MATS by way of the USAF.

From the date, cargo/pax combination, and powerplants, it seems safe to assume that the aircraft for MATS/USAF would have been similar to the 'D4-3 model built for Flying Tigers.

According to Ron Pickler, this 1960 plan originated with the DOD not Canadair. The deal was that the USAF would take 232 CL-44D4-5s for MATS "in exchange for 100 F-101 Voodoo fighters [for the RCAF] plus possible participation in the maintenance of the Pinetree early warning radar line."

Pickler says that the deal was shot down by John Diefenbaker's Conservative government. Members of Dief's caucus from Ontario complained about this aerospace work going to Quebec so soon after the cancellation of the CF-105 Arrow program.

The Chairman of Avro Canada, AVM WA Curtis, and others pointed out that Malton would receive considerable contract work from Canadair fulfilling this MATS/USAF contract. But the damage was already done. The USAF went with C-135s and the RCAF got 66 ex-USAF Voodoos and Canada had to maintain the Pinetree line on its own.

'Swingtail: the CL-44 story' (Porter, Air-Britain)
'Canadair: the first 50 years' (Pickler/Milberry, CANAV).
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,226
Reaction score
763
Very interesting indeed... Thanks a lot for this! But why "CL-144" in the title? Shouldn't it be "CL-44"?
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,792
Reaction score
1,356
Stargazer2006 said:
Very interesting indeed... Thanks a lot for this! But why "CL-144" in the title? Shouldn't it be "CL-44"?

Yes indeed. (Mods: if the title is changed, you might want to drop the "Yukon" part as well. There's major differences between the CL-44-6/CC-106 Yukon and the later CL-44D series.)

[ Cheers Matej! Now I wish I'd ask about changing that "USAAF" as well :) ]
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
28,125
Reaction score
5,638
Spark said:
According to a Canadian site at one time it was considered possible that 200 Canadian built Britannia type transports for the USAAF would be purchased in place of Boeing K135 with all its operational shortcomings.
What were the advantages of this aircraft over the K135?
It was implicit this was in the fifties if so was this a CL44 type Britannia upgrade with the Bristol Orion engine and would it have the original type wing or the thin section high speed wing?


Hi Spark,


I think you meant this aircraft,but the Convair was also in the team of development,that's
included; thin wing,special propellers,blown flaps and developed the BE-25 engines.


Air Pictorial 12/1955.
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    141.1 KB · Views: 304

LowObservable

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,219
Reaction score
222
Is that FRI?


I'd never heard of blown flaps for anything like a CL-44, unless they were talking about the natural blowing from the props.
 

Stargazer2006

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,226
Reaction score
763
frank said:
The USAAF was changed to USAF in 1946, IIRC, so that part's not correct for sure.

Apophenia said:
Now I wish I'd ask about changing that "USAAF" as well :)

Can this one be fixed once and for all? Thanks.

Fixed once and for all
 
Top