M148T - Early Buccaneer and it's rivals

hesham said:
hesham said:
but the Percival P.97 was a jet naval aircraft Project ?.
Click to expand...

I correct that at first,

and for my dear Lucamax,I can't ID them,maybe my dear Tony Buttler knows ?.
Click to expand...

I’d suggest you check out Tony Butler’s excellent series of books on these topics for the answers and details you seek.
As opposed to your suggestion of him giving you all of that... for free....

https://www.amazon.co.uk/British-Se...59431732&s=gateway&sprefix=british+sec&sr=8-2
 
kaiserd said:
I’d suggest you check out Tony Butler’s excellent series of books on these topics for the answers and details you seek.
As opposed to your suggestion of him giving you all of that... for free....
Click to expand...

Who said that I want to give his Info for free,impossible of course,I just answer my dear Lucamax that,if
Mr. Tony Buttler had only the names of competitors,that's all.
 
Tony Buttler says:

"For the M.148T competition, the manufacturers who submitted designs were Armstrong Whitworth, Blackburn, Fairey, Hawker, Shorts and Westland. The original Ministry documents that assessed the competitors make NO reference to anybody else. Initially Percival asked for permission to submit, but then found they were unable to produce a complete design for such a complex aircraft, and so withdrew their interest. Saunders-Roe did draw some 'M.148-type' designs, but this was two months before the initial specification was issued and 8 months before the main proposals were submitted. Saro did NOT take part in the competition."
Click to expand...
 
Many thanks to you my dears Overscan and Tony Buttler,

and as I remember the L+K magazine who said that,and of course the invitation was for more than 12 companies,
but most of them withdrew except the six main firms which mentioned here.
 
Hesham, you are getting mixed up between "invited to submit" and "submitted a proposal". 'Invited to submit' means a letter was sent to each of 12 companies informing them of the requirement and asking if they were interested in submitting a proposal. Of the 6 companies who declined to submit, Percival started a design but abandoned it.

Do you want to know the six companies who received the invitation but didn't respond?
 
No my dear Paul,

I just explain from where I get this Info and what happened to the contest to be in this form,and of course
invitation to submit differs from submit a proposal,I only confirm Mr. Tony's saying.
 
overscan said:
Hesham, you are getting mixed up between "invited to submit" and "submitted a proposal". 'Invited to submit' means a letter was sent to each of 12 companies informing them of the requirement and asking if they were interested in submitting a proposal. Of the 6 companies who declined to submit, Percival started a design but abandoned it.

Do you want to know the six companies who received the invitation but didn't respond?
Click to expand...

Dear,
I suppose that the Percival initial or preliminary design is impossible to find, right? :D
In any case: thank you all for your help!
Best regards.
--
Lucamax
 
lucamax said:
overscan said:
Hesham, you are getting mixed up between "invited to submit" and "submitted a proposal". 'Invited to submit' means a letter was sent to each of 12 companies informing them of the requirement and asking if they were interested in submitting a proposal. Of the 6 companies who declined to submit, Percival started a design but abandoned it.

Do you want to know the six companies who received the invitation but didn't respond?
Click to expand...

Dear,
I suppose that the Percival initial or preliminary design is impossible to find, right? :D
In any case: thank you all for your help!
Best regards.
--
Lucamax
Click to expand...

Impossible, no, but it's not in the National Archives as they didn't submit a brochure. It depends on how much work was done and whether any drawings or brochures survive.
 
I would suppose that the Percival 'ghost' design to research the aerodynamic use of engine compressor air would have been examined by the MoS, after all they did commission Percival to do the research work. I would guess there might be an RAE Tech Memo on the subject, so its possible a copy survives at Kew. But there are a lot of 'ifs' in my supposition.
But it will probably by a technical study with lots of algebra and tunnel tests rather than an aircraft study. It would be a generic datum design based on the requirements for M.148T, not a detailed aircraft proposal.
 
Hi! A.W.168 mockup.
Source : US & British Experimental & Projected Aircraft after W.W.Ⅱ, DELTA Publishing , Tokyo.
 

Attachments

  • A.W.168.JPG
    A.W.168.JPG
    167.9 KB · Views: 288
Obviously a rush job by Hawker. Clearly with enough time they could have figured out how to over complicate the windscreen, give it bubble side windows, transition the design to a T-tail, imbed air intakes into the wing, and create a curved compound wing that took twice as long to build. Maybe even add another engine to each wing. But I have to give them credit for the short amount of time they had, it looks pretty nice.
 
Hood said:
No Percival did not submit a design to M.148T.
Tony Buttler in the new edition BSP:2 shed some light on this.
Basically Percival wanted badly to tender until the MoS actually sat down and discussed what was wanted and then the firm felt the design would be too complicated for them to submit in time.
Therefore they were invited to design a 'ghost' aircraft focusing on using engine compressor air for aerodynamic purposes based around M.148T, but was purely a paper research study based on work they were doing connected with their helicopter research work.
Click to expand...

Is that de Havilland Gyron Junior an engine compressor air ?.
 

Attachments

  • 19.png
    19.png
    74.8 KB · Views: 55

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom