Gloster Javelin Projects

[GTX]

I may have asked this elsewhere but does anyone know of any Naval carrier based proposals related to the Javelin?

 

[pathology_doc]

I can add more if people are interested.

Hell, yeah.

In fact, I think it would be fair to say that we would happily accept PDF uploads of your entire personal collection (whether this is feasible or desirable is another matter, of course, and your choice... but a man may dream, may he not? )

You've given us a tantalizing glimpse at the factors which might have cost the project its existence, although there's a part of me which says "A faster Javelin is surely a better Javelin, given that the subsonic version lasted till 1968. Surely better, for all its flaws, to ditch that and build this instead?"

 

[shedofdread]

Gloster F-153 D (mock-up?) found in the wonderful world of social media.

 

[acegeek9992]

The May 2009 issue of Aviation News included an article I had written about some proposed variants of the Gloster Javelin. One of the projects was the P.293 and I'm afraid the drawing was missed. Therefore, please find it attached. Hope you like it!
Best Wishes to all.
Tony.

Dang. Looks like visibility's going to be a total crapshot on this one!

 

[Kiltonge]

Found when looking for something else, 1964 overhead shot showing the surprising size of the Javelin. Makes a Thunderchief look average.

Wing areas, square metres:

F-104	18.2
Mirage III	34.85
F-105	35.76
Javelin	86.1
Canberra ( for reference )	97.1

 

[F.L.]

Found when looking for something else, 1964 overhead shot showing the surprising size of the Javelin. Makes a Thunderchief look average.

 

[zen]

Then again at 40,000ft I bet the Javelin's wingloading told in superior turning performance.

I wouldn't want to get into a turning fight against this beast.

 

[Kiltonge]

So much drag. Yet, internal fuel was 1,140 US Gallons in the Javelin and 1,180 in the Thud...

In July 1954 the flyaway cost of a Javelin under offshore procurement was between $360,000 and $420,000 versus $590,000 for a FIAT-built F-86K. The escalating cost of the Italian-built Sabres, which rose to nearly $1 million once spares, shipping and assistance from NA was included, led to consideration of swapping FIAT to building the Javelin instead. They had originally tooled-up for production of the Venom until a last-minute change to the Sabre.

For comparison, other offshore procurement costs:

Type	Program cost	Units	Unit cost
Hunter, UK	$140 million	465	$207,000
Sea Hawk, UK	$12.8 million	107	$119,720
Mystere IV, France	$86.5 million	225	$280,000
Hunter, Netherlands	$18 million	48	$234,206
Hunter, Belgium	$24 million	64	$234,206

 

[Pioneer]

Drawing of the F.153D. I have not seen this before. It is from RAF Fying Review April 1962. Hope this is the right place for this.
Updated with pictures of the wind tunnel model. I think you are right Paul about the missing tailplanes.

Nice find RAP
As seemingly the trend of the era for the Britain/RAF, that seems a lot of aeroplane for just two missiles, especially when one considers the reliability of early AAM's

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Kiltonge]

More about the nearly-Italian-Javelins.

Fabrique Nationale, Fokker and FIAT were all jostling to build the Javelin under Mutual Security Agency funding as the NATO-standard night-fighter. Around March 1953 FIAT were selected as preferred manufacturer, largely on grounds of maintaining an aeronautical workforce in Italy, for an initial $25 million contract.

Brig Gen Al Boyd and Lt Col Dick Johnson flew the Javelin in February / March and it appears to have passed technical assessment.

However the contract was changed to the F-86D in April 1953 as Gloster could not establish the FIAT production line until 1956, a year later than the F-86D. North American received a royalty of $5,500 on each FIAT-built Sabre.

---

However the British kept heckling for a second, subsidised, production line for the Javelin. Their argument was that the FIAT Sabre production contract was inadequate to meet NATO needs. Through early 1955 Gloster ran advertising for the Javelin in the US press, but despite the unit cost FIAT continued to build the Sabre, additionally supplying France, Netherlands and Norway.

 

[Basil]

More about the nearly-Italian-Javelins.

How is it possible that the single engine and much smaller F-86K is much more expensive than a Javelin?

 

[Kiltonge]

How is it possible that the single engine and much smaller F-86K is much more expensive than a Javelin?

I don't have a conclusive answer though I found this report in AvWeek, Nov 1953, suggesting that shipping components to Italy was part of the cause. It was also the first US design built under the offshore system so there was probably a steep learning curve.

Bear in mind as well the UK had benefited from $112 million of machine tooling from the USA for both airframe and engine manufacture, and UK aero-production was ( perhaps surprisingly ) rated as very efficient by the USA. Neither of these advantages applied to FIAT...

At $420k a unit, less than twice that of a Hunter, the Javelin does seem to have been quite a bargain for the N/AW capability it provided.

 

[BLACK_MAMBA]

Rocket Javelin

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rock..._medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via

Investigation into the drag reduction of TW P.376 Javelin. Interestingly, at subsonic speeds it was not much better if at all due to increased base drag...

 

[Basil]

Rocket Javelin
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/rocket-javelin-steve-liddle-ceng-fraes?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via

Investigation into the drag reduction of TW P.376 Javelin. Interestingly, at subsonic speeds it was not much better if at all due to increased base drag...

Does this link work?

 

[Jemiba]

link edited, should be working now

 

[TsrJoe]

Science Museum, London

 

[Basil]

link edited, should be working now

Excellent article.

 

[pathology_doc]

The Tony Buttler article that this article links to in turn is very interesting, because it shows (on its 9th page, p.94 of the publication as a whole) a silhouette superposition of the Fairey Delta 2 on the Delta 3. Because we already know* that the FD.2 is very nearly the same size (in length, wing area and span) as the Mirage III, it offers a useful bit of context into how big the Delta 3 actually would have been.


* from the Project Cancelled superposition image of Mirage III and FD.2