Vickers Supermarine Type-582

The type 582 had the same asymmetrical design as the similarly unbuilt Type 581.
 
seems like this would have better rolling capabilities than say... a P-38 and if done right you could have a 2 man crew one on each side. 1 pilot 1 copilot/radar/guidance system operator
 
It's potentially good for a FMCW system using separate Tx and Rx dishes.

Also potential for a 4 man crew version
 
Q. on this - I made a digital model for 3D print a while back and am just updating it to redo in resin rather than FDM

In the picture https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/at...pe-20582-20twin-20line-20drawing_1-jpg.61602/ the bomb drawn in seems to overlap with where the right mainwheel bay is. Anyone fathom how or why?

In my attached updated version I interpret the front nosewheels as retracting in different directions between fuselages but haven’t puzzled out either the bombbay or where and how the arrestor hook for the RN version would sit
 

Attachments

  • F7C6241F-C59F-4587-809D-45F6AA9BDB69.jpeg
    F7C6241F-C59F-4587-809D-45F6AA9BDB69.jpeg
    197.4 KB · Views: 124
Interesting designs...

FWIW, the link in first post seems to have perished...
 
lostcosmonauts said:
Q. on this - I made a digital model for 3D print a while back and am just updating it to redo in resin rather than FDM

In the picture https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/at...pe-20582-20twin-20line-20drawing_1-jpg.61602/ the bomb drawn in seems to overlap with where the right mainwheel bay is. Anyone fathom how or why?

In my attached updated version I interpret the front nosewheels as retracting in different directions between fuselages but haven’t puzzled out either the bombbay or where and how the arrestor hook for the RN version would sit
Click to expand...
Hi Lostcosmonauts. Great model!

This is how I interpret the drawings:
Vickers Supermarine Type 582 Twin Line Drawing_2.png
Both front wheels should retract rearward and rotate 90° into a stowed flat position (I've highlighted in red what I believe to be the stowed wheels).

Looking at the top view, the main landing gear operates at an angle that clears the bomb bay just enough for the bomb to sit sligthly off the center of the fuselages.

The arrestor hook, I speculate, would go under the tail of both fuselages (so a twin hook - one for each fuselage). The only alternative would otherwise be a hook under the center wing, but that would sit way too up.

Hope this helps.

Edit:
at a second glance, you might actually be right in thinking that the front wheel of the crewed fuselage retracts forward. The square in front of the wheel might depict the stowed wheel instead, rather than the part I've highlighted (which is quite too far back for the landing gear to reach).
 
CiTrus90 said:
lostcosmonauts said:
Q. on this - I made a digital model for 3D print a while back and am just updating it to redo in resin rather than FDM

In the picture https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/at...pe-20582-20twin-20line-20drawing_1-jpg.61602/ the bomb drawn in seems to overlap with where the right mainwheel bay is. Anyone fathom how or why?

In my attached updated version I interpret the front nosewheels as retracting in different directions between fuselages but haven’t puzzled out either the bombbay or where and how the arrestor hook for the RN version would sit
Click to expand...
Hi Lostcosmonauts. Great model!

This is how I interpret the drawings:
View attachment 685287
Both front wheels should retract rearward and rotate 90° into a stowed flat position (I've highlighted in red what I believe to be the stowed wheels).

Looking at the top view, the main landing gear operates at an angle that clears the bomb bay just enough for the bomb to sit sligthly off the center of the fuselages.

The arrestor hook, I speculate, would go under the tail of both fuselages (so a twin hook - one for each fuselage). The only alternative would otherwise be a hook under the center wing, but that would sit way too up.

Hope this helps.

Edit:
at a second glance, you might actually be right in thinking that the front wheel of the crewed fuselage retracts forward. The square in front of the wheel might depict the stowed wheel instead, rather than the part I've highlighted (which is quite too far back for the landing gear to reach).
Click to expand...
On the RAF version of the Type 582 it looks like the forward left fuselage landing gear leg retracts forward. The thing that's been highlighted in red, just behind and below the WSOs' seat looks like doppler-radar antenna.

There's a diagram of the naval Type 582 variant in The Admiralty and AEW where the forward left fuselage landing gear leg retracts aft, with the wheel is stored under and between the pilot's and WSOs' seats. It's worth pointing out that the the doppler radar antenna is in the same position as in the RAF variant.

The naval variant also has since sets of wheels on all four landing legs.

As for weapons bays, there is one in each fuselage. An electronics bay in the right fuselage takes up half the length between the landing gear, starting at the nose wheel compartment, with the right weapon bay immediately aft of it.

The left fuselage weapon bay is slightly longer, stretching from immediately aft of the doppler-radar antenna, terminating just forward of where the aft landing gears wheels are stored (the leg intersects with the weapons bay).
 
;)
And then some-one says, 'Hey, what if we put a 'Pegasus' jump-jet engine in each fuselage... ??'
 
Naval variant NLG apparently retracts aft in recess between operators legs and I doubt it's different on other fuselage or version in sake of commonality.

1665663364830.png
 
One thing that concerns me about the naval Vickers 582 is that according to the British Secret Project 2, the aircraft contains 8 RR Spey engine that is scaled down, and each of them will deliver 8.0KN of dry thrust. I believe that is not sufficient for a large aircraft to reach MACH 2.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom