Avro Canada VTOL Fighters

[apophenia]

My entry is going to be some musings on Avro Canada VTOL fighter designs. The starting point is the RW 1956 submission for the US Navy Type Specification 140. Avro Canada's answer was an 'X-Wing' daylight fighter powered by four Orenda-licenced Bristol Siddeley Orpheus BOr.11 turbojets (5,760 lb st each).

Each of the bedpost-arranged Orpheus had a diverter valve in its jetpipe feeding a patented Avro Canada 'eyelid' nozzle for VTOL. That 'eyelid' nozzle was controllable for fine pitch control. With the turbojet's diverter valve closed, forward thrust was provided in the conventional way.

AFAIK, there is no record of why the US Navy rejected Avro Canada's proposal. Complexity has been suggested but other TS-140 submissions were even more complex -- Bell's D-188, for example, had eight engines (four of them tilting wingtip pods!). In the end, the US Navy abandoned the entire TS-140 program. But what if ...

[apophenia]

First up is a simple re-spray of Avro Canada's TS-140 submission. Had the US Navy nibbled, it stands to reason that a training squadron would be the first user. So, here's is the Avro Canada FA Arion* in the markings of 'The Professionals', VT-23.

Below the USN FA, is a Royal Canadian Navy Arion 1F of VF 870, the fighter squadron aboard HMCS Bonaventure. The Arion replaced RCN Banshees in 1962, the Avro fighters being embarked in time for the Cuban missile crisis fleet-at-sea patrol.

[* I've used the 'A' manufacturers code for Avro Canada since Brewster wasn't around anymore. The serial is the first in a series of cancelled Grumman F11F-1P Tigers.]

[Silver Fox]

Seriously cool looking! Especially the RCN example, I don't much like training schemes... all that bright red almost screams "Here I am! Here's the plane wreckage!". As a former maintainer, that attitude just bugs me. :)
But, if they are X-Wings, where is the R2 unit? :)
Someone was going to say it... best get it out of the way quick. 

[apophenia]

Seriously cool looking! Especially the RCN example, I don't much like training schemes... all that bright red almost screams "Here I am! Here's the plane wreckage!". As a former maintainer, that attitude just bugs me.

Thanks Silver Fox. To my eyes, most of the schemes from that era are pretty dull. And great swaths of red don't help much. Besides, anything as weird-looking as the Avro TS-140 submission is going to stand out all by itself   

But, if they are X-Wings, where is the R2 unit?

The 'backseater' doesn't appear until the Arion 2F 

[Silver Fox]

Instead of a GIB (Guy In Back) it can have a BIB('bot In Back). 

[Brian da Basher]

That Canadian one is proof that Maple Leaf roundels are always a fine addition to any aircraft!

Looking forward to seeing more!

Brian da Basher

[apophenia]

AltHist: In the aftermath of its TS-140 submission being rejected, the VTOL Section of Avro Canada's Advanced Projects Group considered alternative designs. In review, the TS-140 submission was seen to have three key disadvanges: a wheel-less undercarriage (which required a separate mover/loader); the complexity and expense of four main engines; and the need to licence another firm's engine design.

The 'X-Wing' design had been closely tailored to the US Navy's TS-140 specification. And a major redesign would be required to address its perceived shortcomings. To that end, in early 1958, VTOL Section proposed a twin-engined design using the Iroquois turbojet from Avro's Orenda Engines division.

Without afterburning, each Iroquois produced 19,250 lb of thrust -- almost the same as the combined thrust from all four of the TS-140 submission's Orpheus. VTOL Section was confident that two unreheated Iroquois would be more than enough power for a Mach 2 fighter. Initially this design was designated Project Study 14.

For vertical take-off and landing, the PS-14's Iroquois engines had larger versions of the 'eyelid' diverter valves used on the 'X-Wing' design. Downward thrust from the diverters was to be balanced by two dedicated lift-jet engines installed in the forward fuselage. These would be the 2,400 lb thrust RB.108 single-spool turbojet from Rolls-Royce.

In layout, PS-14 was a canard with main engines mounted on the rear wingtips. In VTOL mode, downward thrust was, therefore, in a three-legged stance with the paired RB.108s placed just aft of the cockpit and the diverted Iroquois on either wingtip. Fine balance was to be acheived with reaction control nozzles in the nose and tail. These 'puffer jets' were fed by bleed air piped from the Iroquis engines.*

Senior management was pleased with the resulting PS-14 concept and approval was given to pitch the new design to the RCAF as the Avro Canada C.114 VTOL high-altitude fighter. Avro believed that the C.114 would be an ideal Sabre 6 replacement. Armament would be contained in interchangable belly packs. Principle armament would be 2.75" rockets in a extensible pack. Rockets could be exchanged for a gun pack or, for ferry purposes, a long-range fuel tank.

RCAF reaction to the C.114 proposal was luke-warm. On the one hand, the Avro Canada fighter represented a considerable advance on Sabre performance. On the deficit side, the armament proposed for the C.114 was regarded as too light but with limited scope for improvement. As Canada would need a fighter with strike capabilities to satisfy its NATO commitments, the RCAF could not support further development of the Avro Canada C.114 project.

[* This choice was influenced by required RB.108 thrust which would drop to 2,200 lb with bleed. The Iroquois had power to spare, offsetting the added weight of longer piping runs.]

[Brian da Basher]

Awesome art and a great backstory too, apophenia! I really like how you gave us an internal view in the Avro up top!

Brian da Basher

[taiidantomcat]

Woweee!! 

[apophenia]

Thanks guys ... more to come on Avro Canada VTOLs 

... I really like how you gave us an internal view in the Avro up top!

Cheers Brian. I'll be trying to do that for all of them (it's not always obvious what's going on with many of these VTOL designs ... real, might-have-been, or in this case, whiffy).

[Empty Handed]

Fascinating stuff!

[apophenia]

Cheer EH. The next installment in Avro Canada VTOL fighter development ...

While the PS-14 group explored mixed lift-jet and diverted thrust VTOL fighter concepts, another sub-section of Avro Canada's Advanced Projects Group considered tilting propulsion. The PS-23 concept was a tilt-wing design with wingtip engines.

Following a senior management directive, the PS-23 was to employ Orenda powerplants exclusively. The Iroquois turbojet was quickly eliminated from consideration due to its great length (even without its afterburner). This focused attention on Orenda's proposed high-bypass turbofan engine. While much less powerful than the Iroquois, the turbofan -- which would be named the Oread -- was short enough to ensure ground clearance along with a minimal balance shift when tilting the wing.

In its early incarnations, the PS-23 fuselage and vertical fin strongly resembled those of the 'X-wing' TS-140 submission. Later, the PS-23 -- or C.113 as it had been designated -- received a tail arrangement more like that of the C.103 fighter. This was to make space in the tailcone for a 12,000 lb thrust Orenda Orcus booster rocket. This was intended to provide a degree of interceptor capability to what was considered to be primarily a strike fighter.

The PS-23/C.113 concept was eclipsed by the more advanced PS-27/C.117 design series.

[Silver Fox]

Very cool. I like tilt-wings, especially Canadian ones. :)

[apophenia]

Cheers Silver Fox. This next one is tilt-y too ... but nacelle only 

While previous Avro Canada VTOL concepts had been aimed at pure fighter or fighter-bomber designs, the C.116 was to be a lighter, dedicated attack aircraft. Avro Canada management were convinced that the Fiat G.91 was passed its prime and that NATO must soon issue a Basic Military Requirement to replace the 'Gina' and similar types.

The PS-26 design began as a tilt-nacelle concept. Main power would be from two rear-mounted Orenda Oread high-bypass turbofans. Two smaller engines (2,400 lb thrust Rolls-Royce RB.108) would be mounted on short, anhedralled canard wing surfaces. Airflow and jet efflux were seen as potentially problematic. Moreover, Rolls-Royce advised Avro Canada that its single-spool turbojet was not intended for continuous use.

The revised PS-26 design became the C.116 proposal. Here, RB.108s were installed as pure lift-jets (à la the C.114) while the Oread high-bypass turbofans provided motive power as well as rotating for STOL or VTOL landings. To minimize development cost (and risk), some components were taken from other designs -- notably CF-100 outer wing panels (joined on the centre line) and horizontal tailplane. The vertical tail was inspired by Avro Canada's earlier C.103 fighter design.

Another C.116 inspiration came from the Arrow PS-2 concept. This resulted in fixed wing pods containing fuel, the main undercarriage, and interchangable front sections. The latter could carry 2.75" rockets or more fuel. Additional rocket pods or fuel tanks could be mounted on the wing tips.

As it turned out, no NBMR was issued for Fiat G.91 replacements. The RCAF reviewed the C.116 but found the design to be underarmed for its size while lacking true fighter performance. Thus the C.116 design group found themselves without a market. The RCAF was primarily interested in a new fighter with strike capabilities to replace its Sabre 6s. To meet that requirement, Avro Canada focused on their higher-performing C.117 fighter-bomber concept.

[apophenia]

The next installment in Avro Canada VTOL fighter development is the C.117 ...

The final aircraft springing from the Avro Canada submission to TS-140 changed dramatically during its design progression. As begun, the PS-27 was similar to the TS-140 proposal but reduced from four to three engines using thrust deflectors. The '3-poster' undercarriage arrangement was retained but each leg now had wheels (the double-wheeled central gear leg doing the steering).

Aware that the unreheated Orenda Iroquois was too large, Avro Canada was forced to look outside for powerplants. Bristol Siddeley suggested its Gyron Junior, a 7,100 lb st turbojet. But a more appealing choice was presented by Rolls-Royce with a militarized version of its new RB.163 (in effect a reduced-scale Conway) optimized for low-level performance and producing 10,400 lb st.

In its intial C.117/1 form, the PS-27 was to be powered by three RB.163 low-bypass turbofan engines. The C.117/2 was to incorporate an Orcus booster rocket but this design was eclipsed by the C.117/3 which introduced twin wing-mounted Orenda Oread high-bypass turbofans in an attempt to improve fuel economy. The C.117/4 was similar to the C.117/3 other than having canard wings of reduced chord. Avro Canada senior management was not overly impressed by any of these concepts.

The C.117/5 resembled the C.117/3 but introduced a conventional tricycle landing gear. The canard wings were reduced in area with horizontal tail surfaces added (base on those of the C.113/9). The C.117/6 introduced a small armaments bay which could also house extra fuel tanks. This would lead to yet another C.117 redesign ...

[Silver Fox]

Wild!
Not where I was imagining this going!

[taiidantomcat]

Awesome!!  The latest design looks great

[Brian da Basher]

Your C.117 takes the cake, apophenia! That's some wonderfully imaginative and flawlessly executed work!

Any chance of a head-on pic and maybe even a 3/4 view?

Stunning!!!

Brian da Basher

[apophenia]

Cheers guys. Brian: hoping to get to do some 3-views but I want to first the sequence first. Now if the RW would just b@gger off for a while ... 
-------

Avro Canada VTOL fighter -- the C.117 [Part 2]

The C.117/7 introduced an entirely new 'T' tail onto the C.117/6 airframe. Power was provided three deflector-nozzled turbofans -- two stub-wing mounted Orenda Oreads and a single RB.163 in the tail. The C.117/8 was essentially the same apart from having an Orcus booster rocket mounted between RB.163 exhaust and rudder.

The C.117/7 concept was shown unofficially to members of the Defence Research Board for comments. The DRB reaction was generally positive but critical of both range and armament options. Rather than proceed to an official RCAF submission, the C.117 sub-section of Avro Canada's Advanced Projects Group elected to undertake a major redesign.

The result was the C.117/9. Power remained the same -- three deflector-nozzled turbofans -- but the airframe was very different. The canard arrangement was dropped along with the forward stub-wings. The wings were enlarged and became gulled. On each wing tip was mounted an Orenda Oread turbofan. The tail-mounted RB.163 retained its exhaust deflector valve but each of the wingtip engines now rotated for VTOL performance.

The new C.117/9 airframe arrangement freed space in the forward fuselage. The armaments bay pioneered by the C.117/6 was doubled in size. This bay could accommodate a ferry fuel tank; a single, retractable 'container' for large rockets; twin retractable 'containers' for 2.75" rockets; or a single 2.75" rocket 'container'. In the latter case, the rear bay space was filled with an extra fuel tank with optional, external rails for GAR-8 (Sidewinder IA) infrared guided missiles.

With its very revised C.117/9 concept, the C.117 APG believed itself ready for an official submission to the RCAF. Unbeknowst to the Advanced Projects Group, NATO and the RCAF had already bowled them a googly...

[Silver Fox]

Very pretty!
Has a very 50's feel to it. The C.117/9 look like it's going to suffer from pitch-up instability just like the Voodoo when the wing blanks the horizontal stab... but they didn't know that then. A little fatal-flaw that makes it more real.

[Brian da Basher]

This just keeps getting better and better with each update! I really like the additional details and I nominate "Bowled them a Googly" as the catchphrase of the year!

Brian da Basher

[taiidantomcat]

They look extremely powerful 

[apophenia]

Cheers guys.

taiidan': All the early VTOL jet designers seemed to underestimate fuel requirements. Something like the Hawker P.1127 would have trouble lifting the pilots lunch box ... but they sure did look cool 

Brian: That phrase always spoke to me (although, I must admit, cricket leaves me mystified!)

Silver Fox: I do like the flaws that pop up in the design process. Limitations are part of what make life interesting :)

[apophenia]

Avro Canada VTOL fighter -- the C.117 [Part 3]

Once it had become all but certain that the standard NATO fighter was to be the Lockheed F-104G Starfighter, Avro Canada entered negotiations with the Lockheed Aircraft Corporation. The C.117 APG was instructed by Avro senior management to adapt its C.117/9 concept to as much of the F-104G structure as possible. This meant going even further outside the company.

If the F-104G was chosen by Canada, policy dictated that the Starfighters would be licence built by Canadair. The C.117 APG would need to coordinate with their erstwhile rivals in Montreal. However, this turn of events also opened other possibilities for cooperation. After inquiries were made, risk-sharing agreements were made with Fokker in the Netherlands and SABCA in Belgium.

The C.117/10 was, to all effects, the C.117/9 concept reinvented with Starfighter fuselage components and tailplane. The wings and engine arrangement remained essentially unchanged although intakes were revised to reduce the likelyhood of FOD.

Armament options were also sketched out in great detail. Standard armament was considered to be twin retractable 'containers' of 2.75" rockets. One alternative was a single 'container' with larger missiles derived from Bristol's work on the Black Brant series. These were the Bristol Bretteur 5" rocket, Briseur cratering munition, or Brûlet anti-shipping missile. Another alternative was external rails for GAR-8 Sidewinder IA with an extra fuel tank in the bay.

[Silver Fox]

A worthy reason to sacrifice an F-104 and a Lear (engines) if I ever saw one. :)

[apophenia]

A worthy reason to sacrifice an F-104 and a Lear (engines) if I ever saw one. :)

Ah but what about the wings?    I'm thinking maybe F4U wings with tips glued to the 104 fuselage and former wing roots holding the engines?

[apophenia]

Avro Canada VTO Attack Aircraft -- the ZELL C.121

The PS.21/C.121 project ran in parallel with the C.113 and C.114. In some senses, the C.121 anticipated the C.116 as a dedicated attack aircraft with no pretentions to being a fighter. What differentiated the C.121 was its adoption of the ZELL (Zero Length Launch) approach then being proposed for the C.105 Arrow interceptor.

In preparation for operations, the C.121 would be dispensed on a mobile erector-launcher vehicle. With jet engines running at maximum thrust, a rocket catapult would propel the aircraft to flying speed. Recovery was by conventional landing with a wheeled undercarriage (consisting of bicycle nose and main gears with 'outriders' extending from wingtip nacelles.

The C.121 airframe retained the fuselage of the TS-140 submission almost unchanged. A new horizontal tailplane was fitted of similar profile to the vertical fin. Like the C.116 proposal, the wings were CF-100 Canuck outer panels joined on the centre line. Like the CF-100 Mk.X project, Bristol Siddeley Orpheus turbojets were mounted on each wing tip (but in this case, being the main power source).

The C.121/1 was powered by twin 4,850 lb st Orpheus BOr.3 (Mk 703) turbojets. Armament was housed in a retractable fuselage container but wing pylons were an option. The C.121/2 had an Orenda Orcus booster rocket motor for better take-off performance. The C.121/3 featured higher power Orpheus BOr.11 engines (5,760 lb st) and had a new cruciform tail to allow Orcus installation without major airframe changes.

The C.121/4 was similar to the C.121/3 but had a prominent fuselage keel. This keel was to be reinforced to permit wheel-less landings on soft surfaces like grass or snow. No detail design was done on the C.121/4 since the Advanced Projects Group was instructed to shift its priority to the more conventional C.122 concept.

[apophenia]

Avro Canada VTO Attack Aircraft -- the ZELL C.122 and C.123

The C.122 and C.123 series can be seen as the conventional landing equivalents to the C.117. The absense of the anticipated NATO requirement for a Fiat G.91 replacement necessitated a higher performance than the C.121 was capable of.

The C.122 was powered by a single, unheated Orenda Iroquois PS-13U turbojet of 19,250 lb st. Take off, as per the C.121 series, was a rocket-propelled Zero Length Launch from a wheeled erector-launcher vehicle. Also inherited from the C.121 were CF-100 wings although the main undercarriage was now in the style of the C.116. For the C.122/2, the cruciform tail was replaced by a new T-tail arrangement (similar to that of the C.117/2).

While the C.122 represented a considerable advance over the C.121, Avro Canada senior management requested a more fighter-like performance using the same engine. The resulting C.123 was a straightforward evolution of the C.122. The former's CF-100 wings were replaced by the outer panels from the CF-105 Arrow. This turned the design into a tailed delta. In most other respects, the airframe remained the same.

The emergence of the F-104G Starfighter as the likely standard NATO fighter threatened the continuation of the C.123. However, the Advanced Projects Group believed that the project has sufficient merit to proceed assuming export orders. This too was overruled by senior management which ordered concentration on an entirely new STOL concept --  the P.450, a canard thrust-ejector design by John Frost ...

[Brian da Basher]

Most excellent, apophenia! I'm really enjoying following this wonderfully illustrated alt. history!
Brian da Basher

[apophenia]

Many thanks Brian! I'm a little surprised anyone is still following this. Next time I prepare an outline before diving in    Anyhoo, here's the final installment with ... a top view 
____________________________________________________________

Avro Canada STOL Fighter Aircraft -- the thrust-ejector augmenter lift C.124

Having finally abandoned their explorations of VTOL disc aircraft, the Avro Canada Special Projects Group under John Frost turned their attention to a high-speed STOL fighter under a generic Project 450 designation. The P-450 concept employed four spanwise underwing thrust ejector augmenters to provide very short take-off and landing.

While Frost's team wind-tunnel tested models for a Mach 2 P-450 concept, the VTOL Section of Avro Canada's Advanced Projects Group worked at adapting the design to the airframe of the C.121-C.123 series of VTOL fighters. The result was the C.124.

Frost's concept meant that only the forward fuselage of the original designs and general C.123 wing construction was retained. The fixed tanks/undercarriage housing of the original P-450 concept were moved inboard. This resulted in a small interruption to thrust ejector flow but also reduced structural weight and left space for twin, outboard wing pylons.

Special Projects Group was anything but happy with the C.124, seeing it as a compromised version of the P-450. Always the darling of Avro Canada senior management, Frost was allowed to continue development of the 'full-sized' P-450. But the VTOL APG was also to further develop the C.124 concept. Both teams believed that they could have aircraft flying by 1961. Of course, neither thrust-ejector project was to be complete. The C.124 and P-450 projects died alongside the Arrow interceptor in February of 1959. By 1962, A.V. Roe Canada had ceased to exist altogether.
_________________________________________

[apophenia]

Whif note: Avro Canada did submit its 'X-Wing' VTOL visual fighter concept to the US Navy for TS-140 in 1956. The Avro Canada TS-140 submission lost out to Bell's D-188 (lift-jet + tilt-engines, other losing bids were the Lockheed CL-349 and Ryan 112 concepts).

John Frost's Special Projects Group did belatedly give up on 'flying saucer' designs and turned out the P-450 (which got no further than the wind tunnel model). The CF-100 Mk.X with its wing tip Orpheus booster engines was also a real project. All the other designs shown here are pure whif!

In the notes on the Starfighter-based C.117, I mentioned Fokker and SABCA. RW Fokker joined with Republic Aviation to develop the unbuilt D.24 Alliance variable geometry VTOL fighter project (1 x 38,500 lb st BS.100-3 -- a scaled-up Pegasus). The later VFW-Fokker VAK191B VTOL fighter was built but never ordered. Like Fokker, SABCA also assembled Starfighters (at their Gosselies plant, along with Avions Fairey).

-------------------------------
For those keeping score (or, indeed still reading!), the final tally is:

Avro Canada submission to US Navy TS-140 (Visual Fighter)
 - http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg9958#msg9958

C.113 (PS-23) tilt-wing/jets + optional booster rocket (2 x Oread + 1 x Orcus)
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg10634#msg10634

C.114 (PS-14) lift-jets + deflected thrust (2 x RB.108 + 2 x unreheated Iroquois)
-http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg10048#msg10048

C.115 [unrelated C.105 Arrow development series]

C.116 (PS-26) lift-jets + tilt-jets (2 x RB.108 + 2 x Orenda Oread)
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg11886#msg11886

C.117 (PS-27) deflected thrust (3 x RB.163) - C.117/1 & C.117/3
 - http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12199#msg12199

C.117 (PS-27) deflected thrust (2 x Oread + 1 RB.163) - C.117/7 & C.117/9
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12413#msg12413

C.117 (PS-27) deflected thrust (2 x Oread + 1 RB.163) - C.117/7 & C.117/9
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12685#msg12685

C.118 [unrelated light fighter development - 2 x GE J85-GE-13]
C.119 [unrelated design, possibly a continuation of Project 'Y']
C.120 [unrelated C.105 Arrow development series]

C.121 (PS-31) VTO ZELL fighter (2 x Orpheus BOr.3/.11) - C.121/1 & C.121/3
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12903#msg12903

C.122 (PS-32) VTO ZELL fighter (1 x Iroquois PS-13U) - C.122/2
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12904#msg12904

C.123 (PS-33) VTO ZELL fighter (1 x Iroquois PS-13U) - C.123/1
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12904#msg12904

C.124 (PS-34) four-port thrust-ejector augmenter lift (unspec. engines)
- http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=910.msg12980#msg12980

C.125 [unrelated C.105 Arrow development series]
____________________________________________

[GTX_Admin]

That last profile is sweet.

[Silver Fox]

Great Work!
I think for the wings on the C.117/10 I would go with using card stock to extend the (relocated) wings of the F-104. A little detail added to the tip gives you the look of the rotation mechanism.
The one change from your excellent artwork I might consider is building in a "passive" variable dihedral system which would allow the wings to droop. The engines are hard to service as drawn, and I have doubts it would fit in a Hardened Aircraft Shelter at CFB Baden with the engines up and out.
I wonder what it would look like in 441 (Silver Fox) TFS `Checkerbird` markings. :)

[apophenia]

Thanks lads!

I wonder what it would look like in 441 (Silver Fox) TFS `Checkerbird` markings. :)

Here's my stab at an in-service C.117/10 (which I've called the CF-117 Ares). I put her in the phase-out markings of 441 at Baden-Soellingen in late 1985.

http://beyondthesprues.com/Forum/index.php?topic=351.msg13131#msg13131

BTW: this profiles borrows heavily from work by Lieuwe de Vries (as does the C.117/10). He's done huge numbers of goregeous, RW Starfighter profiles. Check him out: http://www.lieuwedevries.com/

[apophenia]

I think for the wings on the C.117/10 I would go with using card stock to extend the (relocated) wings of the F-104. A little detail added to the tip gives you the look of the rotation mechanism.
The one change from your excellent artwork I might consider is building in a "passive" variable dihedral system which would allow the wings to droop. The engines are hard to service as drawn, and I have doubts it would fit in a Hardened Aircraft Shelter at CFB Baden with the engines up and out.

Good point about the shelters. Any idea if the Baden HAS were built for the Lawn Darts ... or did they date further back?

I went with a gull wing cuz I wanted a sort of 'Praying Mantis' look to the front view    Severly impractical I know ... but then what VTOL fighter design wasn't?

Amazing to think that with all the effort put into VTOL combat aircraft designs, only one got it right! But, then again, that Sidney Camm bloke was reputed to 'have some game' 

[Dr. YoKai]

 All beautiful work, colleague-I like the four-engined birds you started with best, but its all
 terrific.

[Silver Fox]

apophenia, the HAS's were a NATO priority after the Israelis demonstrated what happened to unprotected aircraft vs Egypt in 1967. Canada's HAS's differed only slightly from the ones Germany built, the only real physical difference noticeable being the blast diverter behind the rear tunnel. The Germans used a curved, segmented ramp and Canada used an angled splitter. I've got a Revell Germany 1/72 HAS in the stash to convert to a Baden example. I just have to decide what type of bird to stuff in the tube, it's a momento piece of my tour... so real world.

[apophenia]

Dr. Yokai: Thanks Doc ... I'm keen on the look of that TS-140 submission too.

Silver Fox: Thanks for the details. So, if the 'CF-117' had been accepted for service, they'd have tailored the HAS to fit ... and maybe with engine mtx platforms suspended from the ceilings 

Where are you leaning on the RW HAS, CF-18?

[Silver Fox]

The shelter designs were NATO-standard, so they wouldn't have tailored the HAS, just chosen a series that fit. Series 3 shelters certainly would, but those were a later design. They would have figured something out. :)
For a plane to stuff in the tube, I'm undecided. I didn't work on aircraft on that tour, I was in support ops. Baden had T-birds and Hornets, so one of those. I'm leaning toward the T-Bird actually, it lets the inside of the HAS be more visible and I have a connection to the Base Flight T-Birds from when they would come to CFB North Bay for maintenance.

[apophenia]

Thanks Silver Fox. What year(s) are we talking about for the CT-133s?

Pre-'73 silver with red tanks would look great inside the HAS ... while bouncing some extra light around the interior    Leading Edge does 1/72 decals for this scheme or there's the all-in-one Belcher Bits sheet.

I'm partial to the 1974 Starfighter-style olive-on-top scheme, a CT-133 scheme that I don't recall having seen modeled before: http://www.airfighters.com/photo_55471.jpg

[Silver Fox]

Most likely I would go with the scheme shown here: http://www.airliners.net/photo/Canada---Air/Canadair-CT-133-Silver/1651961/M/ on 133094. I worked on '094 in North Bay and it was in Baden at the same time I was.

[apophenia]

Nice. The lo-viz camo scheme was sharp ... and all the basic markings are in that Belcher sheet.

[Tophe]

Frost's concept meant that only the forward fuselage of the original designs and general C.123 wing construction was retained. The fixed tanks/undercarriage housing of the original P-450 concept were moved inboard. This resulted in a small interruption to thrust ejector flow but also reduced structural weight and left space for twin, outboard wing pylons.

Would a Twin-P-450 with two fuselages improve stability on take off and landing? hehe...

[apophenia]

As Tophe rightly points out, I have inadvertently omitted the even more obscure Avro Canada C.124/2 concept (aka P.450 TOF).

Would a Twin-P-450 with two fuselages improve stability on take off and landing? hehe...

It couldn't have hurt Tophe! As far as I know, no Real World application of thrust-ejector augmenter lift ever succeeded in leaving the ground 

[Tophe]

  Wonderful! Thanks! There you have a winner, I am sure!