Vickers Type 559 (F155T) fighter

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
27 December 2005
Messages
16,315
Reaction score
18,558
Tailed designs
 

Attachments

  • VickersA2.jpg
    VickersA2.jpg
    22.6 KB · Views: 1,135
  • VickersA3.jpg
    VickersA3.jpg
    18.5 KB · Views: 1,019
  • VickersA4.jpg
    VickersA4.jpg
    16.9 KB · Views: 958
  • VickersA1.jpg
    VickersA1.jpg
    17.5 KB · Views: 913
more
 

Attachments

  • VickersA8.jpg
    VickersA8.jpg
    21 KB · Views: 108
  • VickersA7.jpg
    VickersA7.jpg
    20.5 KB · Views: 110
  • VickersA6.jpg
    VickersA6.jpg
    22.7 KB · Views: 119
  • VickersA5.jpg
    VickersA5.jpg
    17.1 KB · Views: 885
B: Canard designs
 

Attachments

  • VickersB1.jpg
    VickersB1.jpg
    19.1 KB · Views: 87
  • VickersB2.jpg
    VickersB2.jpg
    14.5 KB · Views: 94
  • VickersB3.jpg
    VickersB3.jpg
    19.1 KB · Views: 92
  • VickersB4.jpg
    VickersB4.jpg
    17.9 KB · Views: 95
And the last 2
 

Attachments

  • VickersB6.jpg
    VickersB6.jpg
    12.8 KB · Views: 105
  • VickersB5.jpg
    VickersB5.jpg
    16 KB · Views: 134
These pictures were taken from the brochure for the Vickers 559. They were very small in the original, they are pleasingly odd.
 
Fascenating, stuff. Where did you get to see the brochure?
 
The more convertional designs appear similar to the Type 799 and Type 583; Especially B3 with the multiple engines. It goes to show the research required to create something that could achieve F1/55's far reaching requirements!!
 
A couple of my pics of the Vickers 559 model from RAF Stafford collection.
 

Attachments

  • Vickers559-1.jpg
    Vickers559-1.jpg
    44.6 KB · Views: 939
  • Vickers559-2.jpg
    Vickers559-2.jpg
    40.7 KB · Views: 371
overscan said:
A couple of my pics of the Vickers 559 model from RAF Stafford collection.

Arming that beast would have been quite a task! That said, it is my favourite F.155 submission - very Thunderbirds-esque.

Also, this is the first time I've seen the 559 with a Red Top missile fit - my gut feeling is that the staggered ventral carriage of the Red Dean and Red Tops would have imposed a rigid sequential pattern - Deans away before Tops.
 
starviking said:
overscan said:
A couple of my pics of the Vickers 559 model from RAF Stafford collection.

Arming that beast would have been quite a task! That said, it is my favourite F.155 submission - very Thunderbirds-esque.

Also, this is the first time I've seen the 559 with a Red Top missile fit - my gut feeling is that the staggered ventral carriage of the Red Dean and Red Tops would have imposed a rigid sequential pattern - Deans away before Tops.
That would make sense IMHO - better to first take down (some of) the bombers from a "safe" distance before having to chase either bombers or (escort?) fighters.
 
Red Hebe's are for the head on, first pass, Red Tops for the follow up stern chase. Idea being to break up formations and get them to abandon the attack.

Thus the idea of fitting Red Hebe with a nuclear warhead, increasing lethality and making bomber formations a dangerous way to approach UK airdefences.
 
Model of Vickers Type 559 held by RAF Museum Cosford Curator Nick Sturgess.

Source:
http://www.warbirdsnews.com/avaition-museum-news/raf-museum-cosford-exhibits-models-cancelled-concept-aircraft.html#more-5849
 

Attachments

  • Nick-Sturgess-with-two-concept-models2.jpg
    Nick-Sturgess-with-two-concept-models2.jpg
    257.8 KB · Views: 787
Triton said:
Model of Vickers Type 559 held by RAF Museum Cosford Curator Nick Sturgess.


I don't recall seeing that missile configuration on the 559 before. Certainly requires a fixed firing sequence for the missiles: the Red Tops are going last.
 
Judging from the misalignment on the aft pylon(s) - I have to wonder if the model re-assembly is incorrect... ?
 
The pylons are alternatives, only one pair can be used at once. This is not a real configuration.
 
I do not understand, the idea to put the Pylons on top of Aircraft ?
 
According to the brochure:


Best fit for conforming to Area Rule is just ahead of wing
Fuselage mounted weapons possibly lower drag than wing mounted
Little possibilty of buffet from weapon wake
 
A brochure drawing with perplexing perspective.
 

Attachments

  • 559-drawing.png
    559-drawing.png
    337.6 KB · Views: 720
"Fuselage mounted weapons possibly lower drag than wing mounted"

...and less assymetric drag effects if one missle was fired. Air Staff reckoned that a Midge with tip-mounted Blue Jays would have been difficult to control unless both were fired at once. See Battle Flight Page 141

I wonder if a large store such as Red Hebe would have the same effect on a large fighter such as the Vickers 559?

Paul, any mention of this in relation to the Hawker P.1103 and tip=mounted Red Hebes?

Chris
 
this bird is near to top of my internal buffer what to do. I hope I will do only planes from this buffer
 

Attachments

  • 559.jpg
    559.jpg
    169.4 KB · Views: 616
PlanesPictures said:
this bird is near to top of my internal buffer what to do. I hope I will do only planes from this buffer

that are two De Havilland Spectre Junior kerosene/hydrogen peroxide rocket motor, with thrust of 5,000 lbf (22 kN) each
 
Some details for modelling purposes.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1216.jpg
    IMG_1216.jpg
    299.8 KB · Views: 565
  • IMG_1218.jpg
    IMG_1218.jpg
    321.4 KB · Views: 531
  • IMG_1219.jpg
    IMG_1219.jpg
    280.8 KB · Views: 315
  • IMG_1226.jpg
    IMG_1226.jpg
    233.1 KB · Views: 320
Cutaway Vickers Type 559 (F155T) Fighter retouched by Motocar
 

Attachments

  • Cutaway Vickers Type 559 Fighter en limpio en blanco y negro.jpg
    Cutaway Vickers Type 559 Fighter en limpio en blanco y negro.jpg
    595.5 KB · Views: 738
Motocar said:
Cutaway Vickers Type 559 (F155T) Fighter retouched by Motocar

What happened to the Vickers Type 559? Was it too advanced for its time or did it suffer a similar fate like the TSR-2? Either way it is a stunning aircraft.
 
Detail from another brochure pic...

559.jpg
 
andy_d said:
It seems an awful lot of aircraft to carry just two missiles.

YF-12 or F-108 would have only carried 3. Back then though they had more airplanes. 12 planes with 2 missiles each vs 2 planes with 12 missiles. Probably figured by the time they reached the bombers they'd only have enough gas to go after one of them anyway.
 
Hopefully not too much off topic - the F155T designs were obviously intended for similar performance to the Lightning, but with greater range. Was this because, even before the Lightning entered service, its range was recognised as being inadequate for interceptions over the North Sea? Bill Gunston said that the first Lightnings had about enough fuel "to defend one English county."
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom