Avro 720 and derivatives

6

607TSR2

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
20 August 2007
Messages
8
Reaction score
3
I'm new to this great site and this is my first post. Does anyone have any pictures or profiles of the Avro 720 mixed-power interceptor? (Not the Avro 730 bomber). I have only seen photos of the mock-up, sometimes incorrectly described as the first prototype. Thanks
 
- Avro 720 with pure rocket propulsion
- Avro 720 with an additional jet engine (type unspecified),
built as mock-up
- Avro 720 with an additional Gyro Junior engine
 

Attachments

  • 720.GIF
    720.GIF
    64.1 KB · Views: 1,182
  • 720-jet.GIF
    720-jet.GIF
    89.2 KB · Views: 1,095
  • 720-gyron.GIF
    720-gyron.GIF
    76.7 KB · Views: 1,128
Thanks very much for these references and drawings.Tony Buttler's books are excellent in their accuracy and detail, but for inside knowledge and pithiness I think it is hard to beat Bill Gunston.

If I had any talent for this kind of thing I would produce colour profiles and 3-views of the Avro 720 like those of the Avro 730 and SR-177 that are around these days, but there loads of other neglected planes too. Some that spring to mind are the XP-92 and XF-92A and the Saab 210 'Lill Draken'
 
607TSR2 said:
Thanks very much for these references and drawings.Tony Buttler's books are excellent in their accuracy and detail, but for inside knowledge and pithiness I think it is hard to beat Bill Gunston.
Click to expand...

Bill Gunston's sole advantage over Tony is age (having been around at the time) but in terms of research he's not particularly accurate and prone to bringing his own opinion to the book regardless of the facts in my opinion. Nevertheless, he's done a lot of good work over the years.
 
Well. ok, he does have strong opinions but backed up by a lifetime of wide-ranging industrial, journalistic and service knowledge. Also, in my opinion, an incisive, analytical and well-structured prose style. A real writer.
 
But still a journalist from the period not and not part of the Aviation establishment. Just because its been written in a book does not mean its Gospel. Bills bit about about a fighter version of TSR2 being offered to the RCAF in Wings of Fame vol4 has provoked a lot of arguments because he glossed over the fact, some of the Vickers 571 inspired projects from the late 50's were probably proposed along the lines of the ER206, but the TSR2 itself was specialised for its intended role.

To be honest you should read Project Cancelled by Derek Wood again a journalist but one who was more inspired by the history of the cancelled projects. Project Cancelled also includes a bit on the Avro 720 including a cutaway drawing from what i recall.

G
 
Project Cancelled also includes a bit on the Avro 720 including a cutaway drawing from what i recall.
Click to expand...

Avro 720: 3 view drawing on page 58, cutaway drawing on page 60

Avro 728 (720's version for the Royal Navy): 3 view drawing on page 59
 
I have these drawings from Secret Projects and project Cancelled, which I have read carefully. I was hoping that someone might know of any colour profiles along 'what-if' lines.

It seems strange to me to criticise an author because of his age
 
For some colors , I can suggest you
'The RAF Rocket Fighters' by Michael JF Bowyer
in Air Pictorial September and October 1996.

Color illustration with imaginative Sqn. markings by Alf Anderson.
 
Its nothing at all to do with his age! Bill Gunston is a good aviation writer, but he's not really good at documenting his sources and sometimes says things that just aren't supported with evidence.

For instance he says the P.1121 was called the Hurricane II by Hawker, yet Ralph Hooper, who actually worked on P.1121, said that's not true (it was internally called the "New Fighter" or its project number, from P.1103 onward). I believe Ralph over Bill Gunston on this. In contrast Tony is very careful to research everything from primary sources.
 
The point is that BG was professionally involved in aviation for his entire career and understood it completely. He was a witness to the political and industrial developments at the time. TB, on the other hand, I feel is doing a different job- cataloguing, archiving, researching, but at a much greater distance in terms of involvement, timing and breadth of vision. He does it very well, but his is not polemical, argumentative and incisive. Also BG was very careful with his research too.
 
He does it very well, but his is not polemical, argumentative and incisive.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure "polemical" and "argumentative" are always desirable traits in reference writing.
 
Why not? When BG was writing, these were current ideas and projects of great political and national importance. It was vitally important to make the case for Britain's aerospace industry and defence procurement.
 
"Why not"

There's a difference, I think, if you're reading an article in a current magazine about a
current theme, or a book, which is intended to be used as a kind of source for researches.
Nevertheless, I'm afraid, there's no neutral writing. Even when just listing data, there's
always a way to influence it with ones opinion !
 
TB, on the other hand, I feel is doing a different job- cataloguing, archiving, researching
Click to expand...

Both are excellent professionals so, at the end I think it is a matter of personal preferences.
For me, I like Bill Gunson but Tony Buttler does exactly what I want to read. I love cataloguing, archiving and researching.
 
607TSR2 said:
I was hoping that someone might know of any colour profiles along 'what-if' lines.
Click to expand...

You REALLY have to become member of "the whatif modelers forum" in this case. You'll find tons of interesting stuff there ;)
 
overscan said:
Its nothing at all to do with his age! Bill Gunston is a good aviation writer, but he's not really good at documenting his sources and sometimes says things that just aren't supported with evidence.

For instance he says the P.1121 was called the Hurricane II by Hawker, yet Ralph Hooper, who actually worked on P.1121, said that's not true (it was internally called the "New Fighter" or its project number, from P.1103 onward). I believe Ralph over Bill Gunston on this. In contrast Tony is very careful to research everything from primary sources.
Click to expand...

The P1121 was called publically the Hurricane II but internally the companies designated test pilots called it the “Mach 2.4 Fighter”
 
Jemiba said:
- Avro 720 with pure rocket propulsion
- Avro 720 with an additional jet engine (type unspecified),
built as mock-up
- Avro 720 with an additional Gyro Junior engine
Click to expand...

Hi,
The Avro 720 jet engine was the ASM viper
 
Spark said:
The P1121 was called publically the Hurricane II but internally the companies designated test pilots called it the “Mach 2.4 Fighter”
Click to expand...

I had a 3 hour chat with Ralph Hooper this week who was one of the designers of the P.1121 and then worked on P.1127/Harrier.

He did not recall "Hurricane II" ever being used. I have some letters from the CTP (Bill Bedford) to Sir Sydney which use "new fighter" or "P.1121", not "Mach 2.4 fighter".

What is your source for this?
 
overscan said:
Spark said:
The P1121 was called publically the Hurricane II but internally the companies designated test pilots called it the “Mach 2.4 Fighter”
Click to expand...

I had a 3 hour chat with Ralph Hooper this week who was one of the designers of the P.1121 and then worked on P.1127/Harrier.

He did not recall "Hurricane II" ever being used. I have some letters from the CTP (Bill Bedford) to Sir Sydney which use "new fighter" or "P.1121", not "Mach 2.4 fighter".

What is your source for this?
Click to expand...

Casual conversation with a former Hawker test pilot following a talk at Hamilton Place. Not Bill Bedford, since his death; He said it was used between the pilots when referring to the prototype P1121. The Gyron for that aircraft was to be limited to 23,000lb? So this makes sense the service aircraft if ordered was to deliver 27,000lb which would give it a top speed at altitude in excess of the airframe limit of Mach 2.5. He said that he thought it would have had the 35,000lb engine fitted.
The term “Hurricane” was used on the wireless about the time of cancellation which I thought was a silly idea; have seen in print since then but not in official documents.
returning to the Avro 720 I was told by the chief designer that the naval verion would have had a front wing to help take off and supersonic flight.
 
returning to the Avro 720 I was told by the chief designer that the naval verion would have had a front wing to help take off and supersonic flight.
Click to expand...

Fascenating, thats what I predicted when looking at the design, though I read no mention of it.
 
overscan said:
I've got a drawing of the Avro 729 design for F155T which is a canard "delta" similar in configuration to the Avro 730.
Click to expand...

Hi overscan,
One assumes the Naval aircraft would have been smaller than the Avro 729, could you post the drawing please. On the subject of the F155 there was an obscure reference to two airborne digital electronic computers by two UK companies cancelled early 1957 for use by the RAF. No details but a guess was they were for use either on the Avro 730 or the Fairey Fighter, no other UK aircraft would have been big enough. Have not traced any other details Any ideas?

Hi Zen,

There was also a similar proposal for a low level aircraft, maybe Avro 721? But this could be wrong

The MoS blocked the completion of work on the application of area–rule to the Avro 720 which is a pity because it looked pretty and added performance.
 
Here's a very small copy of the drawing.

Hoping to publish it in my P.1121 book eventually. Will have a fairly good section on F155T.
 

Attachments

  • 729.jpg
    729.jpg
    5.4 KB · Views: 1,409
What a small pic ;) Still nevermind and much thanks for posting it! Even from that its clear its a substantialy different machine from the standard 720. Shades of 730 perhaps?

As for the 721 Spark, I can't remember, I'll check my resources but I doubt its any better than yours.

Computers.......two of them?
Considering the size of even a small computer at the time, I would guess thats for the 730 bomber, perhaps navigation, but it might be a bit of loose language for some system. Options would seem likely are:-
Something relating to the guided weapons on the Delta III?
Something relating to datalinks for GCI?
 
zen said:
What a small pic ;) Still nevermind and much thanks for posting it! Even from that its clear its a substantialy different machine from the standard 720. Shades of 730 perhaps?
Click to expand...

Its a bit like a Canberra front with Avro 730 layout. Twin seat side-by-side cockpit.

It is small but I am trying to resist the temptation to post everything I find here, which will inevitably reduce the appeal of my book a bit.
 
Be strong overscan!
Harden your heart and just think that I and others here are likely going to buy your book! ;D
 
:)
 

Attachments

  • scan0012a.jpg
    scan0012a.jpg
    106.3 KB · Views: 401
  • scan0007a.jpg
    scan0007a.jpg
    157.3 KB · Views: 334
  • scan0006a.jpg
    scan0006a.jpg
    42 KB · Views: 996
  • scan0005a.jpg
    scan0005a.jpg
    110.1 KB · Views: 1,083
  • scan0004a.jpg
    scan0004a.jpg
    57.2 KB · Views: 1,080
  • scan0003a.jpg
    scan0003a.jpg
    24.5 KB · Views: 1,278
  • scan0001a.jpg
    scan0001a.jpg
    68.9 KB · Views: 1,283
I picked up that little gem at a book fair some time ago.

Its packed with interesting information and diagrams and covers rocket engine development alongside the aircraft.
 
Avro 727 (Type 720 Variant)

British submission to NATO tactical fighter program.

Do you think that this design was OK? would it need canard? or a redesign of wing leading edge, à la avro vulcan?

BTW: I searched 'Avro 727' and didn't find any proper devoted thread.

See this too: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,758.0
 

Attachments

  • avro727.jpg
    avro727.jpg
    68.3 KB · Views: 427
  • NATO.JPG
    NATO.JPG
    29.6 KB · Views: 421
Re: Avro 727

Its a strange wing configuration for a subsonic attack aircraft.

Sources for the images?
 
Re: Avro 727

^^^^^^
1st pic: Combat Aircraft Prototypes since 1945 by Robert Jackson (1985)
2nd pic: this very forum.
 
Re: Avro 727

"Its a strange wing configuration for a subsonic attack aircraft."

According to Tony Buttler, BSP Jet Bombers, Avro promised an "unequalled
combination of flying qualities" and that the 727 could "switch to the fighter
role after delivering it ground ordnance".
Maybe the 727 was seen as an easy way to enter the NATO competition for
a light ground attacker ?
 
Photos by Duncan Baxter from Avro Heritage visit - cutout from background.
 

Attachments

  • Avro720.JPG
    Avro720.JPG
    21.4 KB · Views: 401
  • Avro 720 developed.JPG
    Avro 720 developed.JPG
    22 KB · Views: 342

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom