Author Topic: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'  (Read 14953 times)

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #50 on: August 10, 2019, 11:48:55 AM »
Did Aus ever consider the Nimrod? If so then the
Spey 250/251 would make sense for the Canberra
SLEP due to commonality.

It was, apparently offered the Nimrod but chose the P-3 instead.   Nimrod would be interesting with leaping Kangaroos on it.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #51 on: August 10, 2019, 11:52:25 AM »
This could also possibly spur a Sapphire Sabre as well instead of the Avon Sabre...

I just remembered that the North American FJ-3 and FJ-4 Fury both had a J65 so perhaps my idea is not so far-fetched after all.  Therefore a RAAF B.20 fitted with Armstrong Siddeley Sapphires could also result in the CAC Sabre being the Sapphire Sabre.  this would also result in commonality with the A-4Gs squired later on.  We may even see a Sapphire Mirage development (mirroring the real world Avon Mirage).  Ah, the twists one simple change to history could take...
Wonder if that would have also seen the RAN acquiring late-model F11F-1s with the J65/Sapphire?

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #52 on: August 10, 2019, 04:27:04 PM »
Quote
Speys were available from approximate 1964 onwards. Conways were available before that in the late 1950s.  Both were turbofan engines.

Basically you'd have at this point in time from the UK, the following engines.  All could fit into the wings of the Canberra (with a little bit of a shoehorn):

-Rickshaw


Quote
The RB.168 Spey 202 OAL includes the afterburner, which obviously isn't going to be used in
a Canberra installation. The 250/251, as used in Nimrod, OAL is 117".

-jcf

Thank you Rickshaw and jcf, in truth the Spey plays into my Alternative ADF ORBAT, as you see, when I finally posted the bloody thing 😩
So does the forum think that the Spey 250/251 would fit into the existing Canberra Mk20's engine cowling (what with the difference in diameter between the existing Avon and proposed Spey? I think it goes without saying that an engine change would be a major part of this Canberra SLEP project, but so would it's cost contribution, if it nesesitated a major engineering rework or the existing engine mount......

Thanks again for your contribution and input!!

As a side note, does anyone know the specific Rolls-Royce Spey model (designation) that was proposed by Douglas to be fitted to its proposed Spey CA-4E Skyhawk design???

I'm sure in an article I read that it said it was the same non-afterburning variant as used on the Nimrod.....If so, this would be awesome in relation to my Alternative ADF ORBAT😯


M.A.D
« Last Edit: August 10, 2019, 04:33:52 PM by M.A.D »

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #53 on: August 10, 2019, 04:47:46 PM »
Quote
I had thought of LGB equipped Canberras as well - especially when i saw this image in my searches:



This was also spacifically the artwork that prompted me also Greg!

Quote
Of course there are other options too, depending upon era.  For instance, one could simply fit a AN/AVQ-10 Pave Knife targeting pod (as was used on some Vietnam era F-4s and A-6s:

Nice, very nice Greg!!
What do you think is the most efficient/effective way we'd carry the 'Pave Knife' on the Canberra Mk20 Greg? Semi-recessed in the bomb bay? Under one of the outer wings (keeping in mind the size and weight of the Rb 04 or Walleye I'm envisaging.....

M.A.D

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #54 on: August 10, 2019, 04:53:07 PM »
The B57 nose would also give you the safety of twin ejection seats, as opposed to the B(I)8 set up of ejector seat for the pilot, out the side door for the navigator.

With the B57 nose you could add the B57G equipment fit "easily" without the need to try and fit it round the B(I)8 nose set up.

Fingers twitching for B57G Style GAF Canberra profiles!!

Cheers

Mark

Love your enthusiasm Mark!! 👍
Just collating an email in response to your last mate. I'll include some thought, we'll chew the fat, and hopefully eleviate that twitch 😂😂

M.A.D

Offline Jonesthetank

  • Almost as dumb as I look
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #55 on: August 10, 2019, 07:42:13 PM »
Quote
The B57 nose would also give you the safety of twin ejection seats, as opposed to the B(I)8 set up of ejector seat for the pilot, out the side door for the navigator


I don't think so, the other crew were also on ejection seats.
Top pic shows where the two crew behind the pilot sat on theirs (for the bubble canopy variants), bottom pic shows the hatch above the navigator (for the B(I).8 types)

I hate to argue (just ask my wife!) but the B(I)8 was designed with the bombardier/navigator sitting below and to the right of the pilot.

“It was obvious to everyone that a new intruder Canberra needed the new fighter-type cockpit arrangement and it was also proposed that the navigator/bomb-aimer’s seat should be moved forward and repositioned beside the pilot, inside the fuselage. This was a logical arrangement, but only the pilot was to be given an ejection seat and it was decided that the navigator would rely instead on manual egress through the fuselage door. This was undoubtedly a bad decision for an aircraft that was destined to spend most of its fl ying time at low level and even more than fifty years later it is still difficult to understand why the “intruder” Canberra’s peculiar arrangement was adopted, especially when the Canberra had already captured the interest of the USAF and the American manufacturer Martin had swiftly devised a much better tandem seating arrangement for its B-57 derivative. Why English Electric never embraced a similar design (or simply adopted the design created by Martin) is a mystery.”
Aeroplane Illustrated – Aeroplane Icons
Canberra – Britain’s first jet bomber


British engineering at it's best.  Stick the nav inside the fuselage, where he had to shove open a door to get out!

Stages 6 to 10 of the Airfix instructions sort of show the arrangement.
https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/3/6/4/122364-67-instructions.pdf

Quote
The B57 nose would also give you the safety of twin ejection seats, as opposed to the B(I)8 set up of ejector seat for the pilot, out the side door for the navigator.

With the B57 nose you could add the B57G equipment fit "easily" without the need to try and fit it round the B(I)8 nose set up.

Fingers twitching for B57G Style GAF Canberra profiles!!

Cheers

Mark

Love your enthusiasm Mark!! 👍
Just collating an email in response to your last mate. I'll include some thought, we'll chew the fat, and hopefully eleviate that twitch 😂😂

M.A.D

Rob, I am at your disposal!

Cheers

Mark


Online Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #56 on: August 10, 2019, 08:15:26 PM »
I was thinking mid-late '70s.  The Exocet, Kormoran and Agave were all in the same timeframe there.  That said, other radars might be added might include something like the AI.23 Airpass II "Blue Parrot" as used on the Blackburn Buccaneer.  This could add in not only weapon guidance but also terrain following.  Hell, for that matter, why not consider a developed version of the Canberra as an alternative/compliment to the Bucc'.  One could also give it not only ASW missiles but also maybe a pair of AIM-9s for self defence.  If done in a later '80s scenario, one might even add in Kormoran 2s or Sea Eagles.

Wait a second! I recall being slapped down by someone a few years back for saying the bucc used a version of the Airpass, can you please provide the reference for this so if I can ever remember the forum or the person concerned I can throw it in their face?  If I recall correctly the person basically said I didn't know what I was talking about and the Bucc used the Blue Parrot not the Airpass, now it turns out the Airpass II is the frigging Blue Parrot and I've been shouted down by a half smart, half knowledgeable expert in one-upmanship yet again.

*********************************************************************************************************************************
PMSL it was on the referenced Lightening thread that I started a decade ago! Also it was an incorrect correction not a slap down, I am overly sensitive sometimes.... must be the autism.
« Last Edit: August 10, 2019, 08:42:09 PM by Volkodav »

Online Volkodav

  • Counts rivits with his abacus...
  • Much older now...but procrastinating about it
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #57 on: August 10, 2019, 10:23:45 PM »
I have postulated previously about an evolved Olympus Canberra incorporating an B-57 type tandem cockpit, I wonder if such an aircraft could result from a remanufacturing program by GAF?   Olympus was trialed very early in the aircrafts service and impressed the test pilots, while the tandem cockpit was a feature of the later Martin licenced aircraft, both would/ should have been quite easy to incorporate into the type, even as a retro fit as part of an extensive upgrade.


Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #58 on: August 11, 2019, 04:00:44 AM »
Did Aus ever consider the Nimrod? If so then the
Spey 250/251 would make sense for the Canberra
SLEP due to commonality.

It was, apparently offered the Nimrod but chose the P-3 instead.   Nimrod would be interesting with leaping Kangaroos on it.

Did you read the post immediately beforehand?
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #59 on: August 11, 2019, 04:31:15 AM »
So does the forum think that the Spey 250/251 would fit into the existing Canberra Mk20's engine cowling (what with the difference in diameter between the existing Avon and proposed Spey? I think it goes without saying that an engine change would be a major part of this Canberra SLEP project, but so would it's cost contribution, if it nesesitated a major engineering rework or the existing engine mount......

Standard Canberra B.20
Engines:  Avon R.A.3 Mk.101-3
Engine Weight: 1518kg
Engine Diameter: 0.991m
Engine Length: 3.2m
Engine Thrust: 6500lb
Nimrod MR.2 (and also potentially modified Canberra SLEP)
Engines:  Spey RB.168 Mk.250
Engine Weight: 1243kg  (thus lighter than Avons)
Engine Diameter: 0.826m (thus smaller than Avons)
Engine Length: 2.972m (thus smaller than Avons)
Engine Thrust:  11995lb

I think it goes without saying that an engine change would be a major part of this Canberra SLEP project

I actually disagree.  The Avon could have been kept and focus given more to other systems.  Remember that the RAF kept the Canberra PR9 in operational service until July 2006 with RR Avons.  There was no need to do an engine replacement even though they originally entered service between 1958 and 1962.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #60 on: August 11, 2019, 05:06:44 AM »
What do you think is the most efficient/effective way we'd carry the 'Pave Knife' on the Canberra Mk20 Greg? Semi-recessed in the bomb bay? Under one of the outer wings (keeping in mind the size and weight of the Rb 04 or Walleye I'm envisaging.....

The Pave Knife weighed 550kg and was not exactly small.  It probably depends upon what other changes one made.  For instance, if adopting the B-57's rotating bomb bay one might fit it there and rotate open in flight to use.  Not sure exact dimensions of weapons bay here either and whether there would also be room for a pair of small LGBs to be carried internally as well.

One could also just put it on a wing pylon.  If you did go for more powerful engines, one could get away with this and indeed use more pylons under wing ala the B-57:



For something more radical, maybe fit it to a wingtip ala this proposed version trialing hydrogen (I'm mainly using the image to show what a large wing tip pod might look like):

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline kitnut617

  • Measures the actual aircraft before modelling it...we have the photographic evidence.
  • I'd rather be dirtbike riding
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #61 on: August 11, 2019, 05:37:24 AM »
Quote

I don't think so, the other crew were also on ejection seats.
Top pic shows where the two crew behind the pilot sat on theirs (for the bubble canopy variants), bottom pic shows the hatch above the navigator (for the B(I).8 types)

I hate to argue (just ask my wife!) but the B(I)8 was designed with the bombardier/navigator sitting below and to the right of the pilot.

“It was obvious to everyone that a new intruder Canberra needed the new fighter-type cockpit arrangement and it was also proposed that the navigator/bomb-aimer’s seat should be moved forward and repositioned beside the pilot, inside the fuselage. This was a logical arrangement, but only the pilot was to be given an ejection seat and it was decided that the navigator would rely instead on manual egress through the fuselage door. This was undoubtedly a bad decision for an aircraft that was destined to spend most of its fl ying time at low level and even more than fifty years later it is still difficult to understand why the “intruder” Canberra’s peculiar arrangement was adopted, especially when the Canberra had already captured the interest of the USAF and the American manufacturer Martin had swiftly devised a much better tandem seating arrangement for its B-57 derivative. Why English Electric never embraced a similar design (or simply adopted the design created by Martin) is a mystery.”
Aeroplane Illustrated – Aeroplane Icons
Canberra – Britain’s first jet bomber


British engineering at it's best.  Stick the nav inside the fuselage, where he had to shove open a door to get out!

Stages 6 to 10 of the Airfix instructions sort of show the arrangement.
https://www.scalemates.com/products/img/3/6/4/122364-67-instructions.pdf

Cheers

Mark

I stand corrected  :-[

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #62 on: August 11, 2019, 11:12:18 AM »
Did Aus ever consider the Nimrod? If so then the
Spey 250/251 would make sense for the Canberra
SLEP due to commonality.

It was, apparently offered the Nimrod but chose the P-3 instead.   Nimrod would be interesting with leaping Kangaroos on it.

Did you read the post immediately beforehand?

Nope, 'cause that was on the next page to the post I replied to...

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #63 on: August 25, 2019, 04:49:04 AM »
Some more inspiration (of sorts).  Maybe do something similar to the proposed Sud-aviation upgraded Vautour, the Tsiklon.  This was to have had 2 RR Spey engines, modern electronics, pointed nose:

All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #64 on: August 25, 2019, 12:09:48 PM »
Rather like my B-57E Super Canberra




Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #65 on: August 25, 2019, 01:21:34 PM »
B-57E Super Canberra  8)

Offline M.A.D

  • Also likes a bit of arse...
  • Wrote a great story about a Christmas Air Battle

Offline Geoff

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #67 on: September 14, 2019, 09:39:32 PM »
Sorry this is a bit off piste - so admin delete if I am out of order. I was once thinking about a New Zealand upgrade for a Kahu Canberra. To save costs my idea was to fit an F-4 radome  which looks like a reasonable fit. (I am a modeller and not an engineer) This would give enough space for whatever electronics needed. These might even be fitted at a later date like out Tonka F2 "Blue Circle radars". I do like the idea of re-engining  tem with the same engine as the A-4s for commonality of spares. Really do like the idea of the B-57G nose fit though that sounds like a winner as all the R+D had been done.

Offline apophenia

  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #68 on: September 18, 2019, 06:28:55 AM »
I like your Kahu Canberra concept! On powerplants, no reason you couldn't replace the Avons with the A-4's J52s (if you can find the extra 6 cm for diameter).

But what about going further? Do a Singapore-style Super Kahu Skyhawk upgrade to F404-GE-100 ... which actually has the same diameter as the Avon, so re-engining the Kahu Canberra would be made simpler. Plus you're getting a much more fuel-efficient modern engine for both airframes.
Auferstanden aus Ruinen; Glück für Menschen und Maschinen ...

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #69 on: September 18, 2019, 06:43:52 AM »
Of course, with F404's you also have to redesign the nacelles to accommodate the AMAD gearbox they use instead of engine mounted accessories.  Singapore did it on their Super Skyhawks but it only shows on the bottom where there are new access panels and an exhaust for the air turbine starter - these are not depicted on the Hasegawa 1/38 A-4S kits.  Still, it wouldn't be impossible to add such to the Canberras and nacelles would be easier to modify than fuselages.

Offline Kerick

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #70 on: September 18, 2019, 10:52:28 AM »
In the timeframe mentioned earlier was it possible to buy used or new Canberras to use as refuelers? Extra fuel and the hose system in the bomb bay. The question for me would there be dedicated refuelers or kits that could be switched from one aircraft to another.
The Buccaneer radar sounds like a great idea. Sounds like it would give the best variety of stores. The Pave Knife pod sounds great too. While we are at it a SLEP should include reinforcement of the airframe to allow additional hard points for weapons or ECM pods.

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #71 on: September 18, 2019, 01:53:42 PM »
If  you are going to do a major SLEP, why not go with a rotating bomb bay like that of the B-57 and Buccaneer?  ISTR that EE schemed one up for the Canberra, but there was no official interest.  That would allow you to develop several "plug and play" modules for different roles - refueling, reconnaissance, ECM, etc. - much as was done with, and proposed for the Buccaneer.

Offline Geoff

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #72 on: September 20, 2019, 05:20:59 AM »
I did think that a big problem for kiwi was cost. I like the idea of the F-404s though, and that could role on to the A-4 fleet later as well. I don't think they could afford such things as rotating bomb bays. As it stands the bay can be used for cannon or weapons. An air to air refuelling set up was also flown as was shown earlier, with AAR boom. The biggest improvement to my mind is an anti-ship missile system, perhaps Sea eagle or even Exocet, or Harpoon.
The other need would be for a defence system - chaff/flare - ECM etc. We killed the Argentine Cans with Sidewinders IIRC
« Last Edit: September 21, 2019, 06:05:23 PM by Geoff »

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #73 on: September 20, 2019, 09:19:34 AM »
In the timeframe mentioned earlier was it possible to buy used or new Canberras to use as refuelers?

The British had large numbers of ex-RAF machines after ~1960 when the V-Bombers had replaced them in Bomber Command.  The Canberra might have only been classed as a medium bomber but in the early-mid-1950s because of a lack of availability of real strategic bombers, it was used in that role.  This meant that they were quite willing and able to refurbish them and sell them off to various South American countries.   What they didn't sell, they broke up.  If the Kiwis came to them in say the early 1970s, they'd be able to show them a large range of low mark Canberras.   I'm sure, if the Kiwis wanted to buy them, they would also be quite willing to offer to refurbish them however the customer wanted.  Australia also had a few Canberras spare in the mid-late-1960s after they had been replaced by the F-111s.  I'm sure a deal could be worked out for them as well.


Offline Kerick

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: RAAF English Electric Canberra 'SLEP Program'
« Reply #74 on: September 20, 2019, 10:17:25 AM »
I’m imagining a Canberra force performing long range strike, anti shipping and recon. Would a camera pack in the bomb bay be practical? Buccaneer radar for the strike role with missiles as mentioned. Then a set of Canberras as refuelers for other Canberras and Skyhawks plus what other aircraft might arrive. The ability to refuel allied aircraft being considered a major help to regional security.
I’m just talking off the top of my head here so I hope this makes sense. I find this discussion very interesting. Full of some nice whiff possibilities.