Avro Canada « Silver Bug » flying saucer (Project 1794)

[Justo Miranda]

- Canadian Flying Saucers Bibliography

​

‘Canada’s Flying Saucer’, by Bill Zuk, The Boston Mills Press, 2001.

‘Flying Saucers Avro’s Secrets’, by Bill Rose, Air Pictorial, May 2001.

Air Intelligence Digest, December 1954, Volume 7, Nº12.

‘Man-made Flying Saucers’, Royal Air Force Flying Review Nº1, October 1955.

‘The Project Silver Bug Report: ATIC TR-AC-47, 15 February 1955’, by Roger D. Cook, SD Publications, June 2000.

‘The (almost) Flying Saucer’, by Ernest Ball, Air Enthusiast International/June 1974.

‘The Pentagon Flying Saucer Problem’, by Graham Chandler, Air & Space, April/May 2003.

‘Is this real Flying Saucer?’ by Thomas Turner, Look Magazine, Volume 19, June 1955.

‘Flying Saucers are real’, People Today Magazine, September 1952.

‘The Secret Saucer’, Product Engineering, December 15, 1958.

J.C.M. Frost Patents - 3,024,966 (March 13, 1962), 3,020,002 (February 6, 1962), 3,022,963 (February 27, 1962), 3,018,068 (January 23, 1962), 3,062,482 (November 6, 1962), 3,124,323 (March 10, 1964), 3,051,414 (August 28, 1962).

‘Project Omega’ New York Times, September 17, 1953.

Toronto Daily Star, Mach 13, 1953.

Toronto Daily Star, April 21, 1953.

‘Avro Canada’s Omega’, Aeroplane, January 5, 1954.

London Times, April 22, 1953.

London Times, April 23, 1953.

Ali Nº 12, May 17, 1953.

Ali Nuove, June 1953.

‘Canada Builds Flying Saucers’, Fate magazine, October 1953.

‘How the Flying Saucer Works’, by Willy Ley, Mechanix Illustrated, March 1956.

‘Cold War Tech War’ by Randall Whitcomb, Apogee Books, 2008.

‘The UFO Files: The Canadian Connection Exposed’ by Palmiro Campagna, Toronto: Stoddart Publishing, 1998.

‘Saucer Attack (pop culture in the golden age of flying saucers)’, Eric & Leif Nesheim, General Publishing Knc. CA.1997.

 

[dan_inbox]

And a cutaway, from a recently posted link:

 

[publiusr]

Any design where the top and bottom separated to not only form a wider intake-but be craft wide control surface? Surround a central impeller with vertical shock like actuators...bleed gas air-ride..inflate. Make the whole saucer lids as flaps from any direction.

 

[Graham1973]

A recent YouTube video on the 'Silver Bug'.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6l9pyaRaJ5A

 

[royabulgaf]

- Canadian Flying Saucers Bibliography

​

‘Canada’s Flying Saucer’, by Bill Zuk, The Boston Mills Press, 2001.

‘Flying Saucers Avro’s Secrets’, by Bill Rose, Air Pictorial, May 2001.

Air Intelligence Digest, December 1954, Volume 7, Nº12.

‘Man-made Flying Saucers’, Royal Air Force Flying Review Nº1, October 1955.

‘The Project Silver Bug Report: ATIC TR-AC-47, 15 February 1955’, by Roger D. Cook, SD Publications, June 2000.

‘The (almost) Flying Saucer’, by Ernest Ball, Air Enthusiast International/June 1974.

‘The Pentagon Flying Saucer Problem’, by Graham Chandler, Air & Space, April/May 2003.

‘Is this real Flying Saucer?’ by Thomas Turner, Look Magazine, Volume 19, June 1955.

‘Flying Saucers are real’, People Today Magazine, September 1952.

‘The Secret Saucer’, Product Engineering, December 15, 1958.

J.C.M. Frost Patents - 3,024,966 (March 13, 1962), 3,020,002 (February 6, 1962), 3,022,963 (February 27, 1962), 3,018,068 (January 23, 1962), 3,062,482 (November 6, 1962), 3,124,323 (March 10, 1964), 3,051,414 (August 28, 1962).

‘Project Omega’ New York Times, September 17, 1953.

Toronto Daily Star, Mach 13, 1953.

Toronto Daily Star, April 21, 1953.

‘Avro Canada’s Omega’, Aeroplane, January 5, 1954.

London Times, April 22, 1953.

London Times, April 23, 1953.

Ali Nº 12, May 17, 1953.

Ali Nuove, June 1953.

‘Canada Builds Flying Saucers’, Fate magazine, October 1953.

‘How the Flying Saucer Works’, by Willy Ley, Mechanix Illustrated, March 1956.

‘Cold War Tech War’ by Randall Whitcomb, Apogee Books, 2008.

‘The UFO Files: The Canadian Connection Exposed’ by Palmiro Campagna, Toronto: Stoddart Publishing, 1998.

‘Saucer Attack (pop culture in the golden age of flying saucers)’, Eric & Leif Nesheim, General Publishing Knc. CA.1997.

The top view of the Bug in 4/11 looks like some sort of Illuminati symbol. Just saying.

 

[Scott Kenny]

the Most Famous UFO case

June 24. 1947 a pilot, Kenneth Arnold saw something he never saw before

Which was not shaped like a saucer, just moved like a saucer skipping across the water.

IIRC, the shape of what Arnold says he saw was more like the Horten flying wing.

Not a terrible idea, as it's my understanding centrifugal compressors are a lot cheaper for the same capability vs axial compressors

centrifugal compressors can also get a lot more compression per stage than an axial compressor. Axials get about 1.2x compression, centrifugals can get up to 7x compression.

but I can't imagine the engine's gases love being pipes around so acutely.

They wouldn't.

I also have to wonder if the torque from the compressor and turbine wheels would be enough to induce a gyroscopic roll during pitch rotations.

You'd need counter-rotating compressors. Even the F-35 uses counter-rotating fans in the LiftFan.

 

[Archibald]

I've red Bill Rose monography. And I wonder about the value of John Frost RFGT projects, circa 1956. Frost was trying to bring together a Harrier and a MiG-25 through re-inventing the very turbojet principles: the RFGT.

RFGT: Radial Flow Gas Turbine https://www.swri.org/radial-flow-gas-turbine

Had John Frost suceeded, we could have had Mach 4 VSTOL interceptors. Something entirely different from the 1960's VSTOL craze with all the lift jets.

But was his RFGT concept workable in the first place ?

 

[Justo Miranda]

I've red Bill Rose monography. And I wonder about the value of John Frost RFGT projects, circa 1956. Frost was trying to bring together a Harrier and a MiG-25 through re-inventing the very turbojet principles: the RFGT.

RFGT: Radial Flow Gas Turbine https://www.swri.org/radial-flow-gas-turbine

Had John Frost suceeded, we could have had Mach 4 VSTOL interceptors. Something entirely different from the 1960's VSTOL craze with all the lift jets.

But was his RFGT concept workable in the first place ?

-The radial-flow turbojet designed by the Frost team had twenty feet of diameter, 42,000 lbf minimum thrust at low pressure and an outstanding power-to-weight ratio of 1.73 to 1.

The horizontal Pelton-wheel turbine had a large multi-stage centrifugal compressor with the rotor blades mounted on the inner disc ring and the stator blades in the outer disc ring. The separate combustion system consisted of several combustion chambers with individual burners and nozzle guide vanes distributed in a radial pattern between the ribs of the vehicle.

On August 23, 1953 Frost patented the Air Cushion Effect and in June 1954 published the report ‘Project Y-2: Flat Vertical Take-off Gyroplane’ a proof-of-concept vehicle named Project P.724.

The Y-2 was a true flying saucer design powered by one radial flow gas turbine which utilizes compressed air as its only means of lubrication.

Their VTOL capability was achieved by ducting engine exhaust to the periphery of the disc and deflecting the air flow downwards by means of the Coanda Effect. For transition to forward flight, the air flow would be gradually redistributed backwards by means of trim flaps.

The proposed Avro Y-2 Project P.724 (Patent April 18, 1955) had 44 ft. (13.4 m) of diameter and 5.9 ft. (1.8 m) of height. A new proposed version (Patent May 9, 1955) with 49 ft. (14.97 m) of diameter and 6.9 ft. (2 m) height, was powered by eight radially mounted Armstrong-Siddeley ASM Viper 5 axial-flow turbojets with 1,900 lbs. thrust each.

On January 17, 1955, the USAF re-designated it as Project Silver Bug, a supersonic interceptor powered by one improved Orenda radial flow gas turbine, with both upper and forward-facing air intakes for VTOL and forward flight configurations.

A low-speed research vehicle was proposed to investigate stability, control systems and Air Cushion Effect, before development of a supersonic operational aircraft.

This planned prototype had 21 ft 6 in (6.55 m) of diameter, 4 ft (1.2 m) height and was powered by eight radially mounted Armstrong-Siddeley Viper A.S.V. 8 turbojets, with 4,188 lbs. thrust each, radial diffuser ducts and Coanda peripheral ring.

The final development aircraft had a turbo-ramjet propulsion system with one Lundström compressor/turbine powered by three Viper A.S.V. 5 turbojets, a single-stage axial impeller and 144 flame tubes.

On November 4, 1955, Avro Canada proposed the PV.704 project to develop the radial-flow engine to eliminate any delays in the development of the Project 1794 propulsion system.

In the PV.704 power plant the incoming air sucked through the upper and lower intakes was fed into the hollow cylinder of Lundström turbo-rotor, pressurized by means of the four-stage upper and lower impellers and directed towards the peripheral air intakes of six radially mounted Viper A.S.V. 8 turbojets. Partial flow of compressed air proceeds radially to 24 peripheral combustion chambers and finally expelled through 96 flight control shutters.

The turbojets were used as gas generators, their exhaust gases proceeded radially inwards, ducted to the central turbine ring by means of six exhaust diffusers and were finally expelled through a central exhaust on the under surface of the aircraft.

In October 1956, the design was tested in a six Viper test rig, early in 1957 the Lundström turbine/compressor combination (with 8.5 ft of diameter and 10,450 pounds max weight) was sent to Burbank California.

In January 1959 Avro issued Technical Report Nº 276 with preliminary performance calculations of a single seat Mach 3 tactical bomber, with GETOL and VTOL capabilities, known as ‘Configuration A’.

Propulsion was provided by one radial-flow turbine, twelve combustion chambers and six Marquardt ramjet engines. Exhaust from the turbine was ducted radially outwards to the combustion chambers and to the propulsive nozzle system mounted around the wing periphery.



During test-rig trials conducted in October 1956 the turbine blew so hot (1,750º K) it melted the steel structure and its violent shaking would pop the rivets, causing three fires, hazardous oil leaks and nearly a catastrophic incident occurred with a Viper turbojet running out of control.

Noise and vibrations made the prospects of a manned vehicle frightening. The Lundström compressor produced a dangerous sonic boom at the point that observers were afraid of the machine.

During the flight tests of the XF-84F performed in July 1955 the USAF have had bad experiences with the sonic waves produced by the supersonic propeller of the prototype. The ground crews were incapacitated getting nauseous and suffering headaches.

The wind tunnel tests suggested that the GETOL configuration had severe stability problems and the craft was in constant danger of flipping over during take-off. The circular wing was displaying none of the theoretical advantages and a lot of practical shortcomings.

 

[Archibald]

Interesting. There were severe issues with the whole thing, or so it seemed (noise, vibrations...)

 

[edwest4]

There were no issues. The saucer or disc design could be built. In a response to the Commander of U.S. Air Forces, Nathan Twining sent "AMC Opinion regarding Flying Discs." This was in 1947. AMC was Air Materiel Command located at Wright Field in Dayton, Ohio.

Along with a description of the objects, it states:

"e. The apparent common description is as follows:
(1) Metallic or light reflecting surface.
(2) Absence of trail, except in a few instances where the object apparently was operating under high performance conditions.
(3) Circular or elliptical in shape, flat on bottom and domed on top.
(4) Several reports of well kept formation flights varying from three to nine objects.
(5) Normally no associated sound, except in three instances a substantial rumbling roar was noted.
(6) Level flight speeds normally above 300 knots are estimated.


"f. It is possible within the present U.S. knowledge—provided extensive detailed development is undertaken—to construct a piloted aircraft which has the general description of the object in subparagraph (e) above which would be capable of an approximate range of 7000 miles at subsonic speeds."

Where did this "present U.S. knowledge" come from?

In a post-war interview, Henri Coanda spoke about his Lenticular Aerodyne. Mr. Coanda was the discoverer of the Coanda Effect. He patented the design in 1938. When the Germans invaded France where he was living and working, they took the idea and developed it further. This was 1940. Development was ongoing when the war ended. Two things occurred with his work. The others working with him were captured by the Russians. He was being sought by the French government for collaboration. An Anglo-American intelligence team located him first, sparing him any further trouble from the French and Russians. His design was a classic flying disc.

Then there was Rene Couzinet in France who came up with the same idea. The Americans were quite concerned. Photos of a scale model were published, along with specifications. Nothing further was done since both he and his wife died by suicide.

 

[Scott Kenny]

There were no issues. The saucer or disc design could be built. In a response to the Commander of U.S. Air Forces, Nathan Twining sent "AMC Opinion regarding Flying Discs." This was in 1947.

Yet by 1955, people actually building a flying saucer found all sorts of troubles...

 

[edwest4]

Yet by 1955, people actually building a flying saucer found all sorts of troubles...

When the USAF contracted with AVRO Canada, engine test stands were built, and a finished product was delivered. Recall the Avrocar - a design failure. Yet it and the supersonic disc had the same designation: WS606A. The only difference is that the larger craft also had (Supersonic Application) on its document cover sheet.

 

[edwest4]

Perhaps this AVRO patent will help explain things.

US3022963A - Disc-type aircraft with peripheral jet control - Google Patents

 

[publiusr]

If you had four very powerful such saucers as air-cushion feet...perhaps some of the thrust could be moved to Wing-in-ground-effect designs to move heavy loads to the arctic.

 

[Arjen]

When the USAF contracted with AVRO Canada, engine test stands were built, and a finished product was delivered. Recall the Avrocar - a design failure. Yet it and the supersonic disc had the same designation: WS606A. The only difference is that the larger craft also had (Supersonic Application) on its document cover sheet.

This aircraft was manned and became a highly secret reconnaissance aircraft which operates to this day.

Evidence?

 

[CJGibson]

Must be nearly 30 years ago, Bill Rose and I were digging up stuff on RFGTs. Bill turned up a couple of drawings of the RFGT. I sent them to Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust with a description of how it worked.

The curator passed these on to a retired engineer. His reply included the sentence 'Mr Gibson obviously can't read drawings as this is a standard axial flow turbojet.'

Suffice to say I was somewhat peeved, but did get a steer towards Ricardo. I phoned a bloke there, described the RFGT and he said they had dabbled with something like that for a compact APU for armoured vehicles.

I vaguely recall a list of (can't remember and I can't check) DH or Napier engines, with one entry that sounded like an RFGT.

Not paid much attention to them since, so this thread has tweaked my curiosity.

Chris

 

[Scott Kenny]

When the USAF contracted with AVRO Canada, engine test stands were built, and a finished product was delivered. Recall the Avrocar - a design failure. Yet it and the supersonic disc had the same designation: WS606A. The only difference is that the larger craft also had (Supersonic Application) on its document cover sheet.

Lots of WSs never were produced.

This aircraft was manned and became a highly secret reconnaissance aircraft which operates to this day.

Produce proof, please.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I get the feeling it was a leg pull........

 

[Arjen]

I hope so.

 

[CJGibson]

Morning All,

Back home, 5 days late, after New Year (a two day holiday in Scotland), bad weather and the ultimate insult, being bumped off the flight due to weight. Too much chocolate over the festive period methinks.

Anyway, had a rummage and this is the beast:

'BS302 VTOL 'pancake' engine. Stag Lane project previously numbered PS103'

That's all I have. Stag Lane suggests this was a de Havilland project that was taken on by BSEL during the rationalisation.

Chris