Bristol T.188 works properly....?

[zen]

What happens if the Bristol T.188 research aircraft doesn't underperform?
What happens if it flies upto Mach 2.8 and reaches the thermal limit of the windscreen?

We now know that it's underperformance is related to lack of interest and investment in the Gyron Junior engines after the cancellation of the P.177 fighter and the AWA F.155 alternative to the Fairey Delta III.
We also know of the flawed inlet transducer issue.

What happens if this is performing as desired in 1962?

 

[uk 75]

Very much an engineer's thread I hope. T188 was a dramatic looking aircraft.

Like TSR2 Marx made a battery toy version, though like Japanese toy Boeing SSTs it put on weight.

THE BRISTOL 188 BY MARX

MARX BRISTOL 188, BRISTOL 188

projectswordtoys.blogspot.com

I would love to hear ways in which it could have been made to work.

 

[zen]

Several things to note...

1. Depictions of a variant with AAMs from the era.
2. Slated concept for a navalised version.
3. High speed and altitude lends itself to certain Canberra reconasense missions.

As a side note AWAs submission along with scaled up F.155 seem to have had early RSS CCV, relaxed stability artificially stabilised by 'computer'.

It's certainly the case as I've mentioned that the higher dry thrust Gyron Junior would have been of interest to upgrade Buccaneers.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

One of my local libraries had a book called "Back to the Drawing Board: Aircraft That Flew But Never Took Off" by Bill Gunston and one of the aircraft in the book was the Bristol 188.

• IIRC (1) He wrote that it should have had reheated Bristol Olympus engines instead of DH Gyron Juniors.
  • Would that have helped?
  • And would a Bristol 188 with reheated Olympus engines have helped with the development of the reheated Olympus intended for heavy fighters, TSR.2 and Concorde?
• IIRC (2) He said that it was originally to have been capable of Mach 2.2, but then they changed it to Mach 2.5. The change put the first flight date back by several years and increased the cost to the extent that the number of aircraft was reduced from 5 to 2 plus the static test article. Are those statements true?

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

Yes the T188 “raison d’être” was as an engine test bed so the nacelle were sized to take a larger engine but I can’t remember if it was sized for a supersonic Olympus (21R/22R). Mind you, given the early flight test issues with 22R in TSR2 I don’t think it would have been a happy experience. Supersonic Spey in the F4 was in it’s early flight testing, also miserable….. Maybe using T188 in its intended role may have ironed out these problems with benefits to those programs. I think Supersonic Avon in its 300 version was a little too small to unlock T188 full performance. The J58 would really have worked wonders and maybe a pair of J79.

I’ve seen drawings for a T188 fitted with Concorde type two dimensional variable geometry intakes on front of the Necelles. Also there was a scheme to install a Buccaneer S1 folding air to air refuel probe.

As for developments, the Shah of Iran saw the T188 flying at Farnborough, so enquired as to military version. BAC rapidly produced a proposal with an air search radar and air to air missiles. I couldn’t find how far it got.

Weight and the puddle welding process were the major problems during development. Any airframer will jump on specification changes to get more cash. From the files I remember it was more complicated than pure top speed, it was all about thermal stability during sustained cruise at Mach ie heat generated equals heat dissipated. This, as per Mach number, is all density altitude dependent. The cruise time to achieve thermal stability was remarkably short in the range of 8-15mins. Certainly one of the key missions in the specification was a supersonic cruise at Mach 2.7. I can’t remember if this was in issue one. The analysis indicated flyable positive stability margin at Mach 2.8 so BAC were keen to demonstrate this just as a test point although not required in the Specification.

The T188 was the first British aircraft to use real time flight test data telemetry. The radio receiver used all thermonic valves that operated in the hundreds of volts range. There was a lovely memo telling guys working with this kit to wear rubber boots to avoid electrocution…. Different times indeed.

 

[red admiral]

I want to say that nothing happens? The relevant projects that the technologies could have been exploited onto were 1. Already cancelled 2. Cancelled for reasons that weren't the technical viability

e.g. even if the all steel structure works fine, then no one exploits this as where's the need for extended cruise at Mach 2.5-3.0?

I can see potentially as a flying engine test bed for reheated Olympus and Spey. But given the different installations compared to TSR2/Concorde/Buccaneer then I'm not sure that this gives you much over what ground tests NGTE could do. None of them really had engine installation issues(?) so resucing the risk a little doesn't reallt change anything? Maybe the 22R goes bang whilst in the air at Mach 2 rather than under the Vulcan on the ground?

 

[CJGibson]

Blue Steel 'might' have reached service on time and not been perceived by many as a waste of time.

Chris

 

[alertken]

The way in which MoS disseminated Research findings was through joint Committees, Scientific Civil Service+industry. 2 were the Gas Turbine Collaboration Committee and the Swept Wings Advisory Committee. In 1953 RAE/Aerodynamics+NGTE had judged that the optimal layout for high supersonic cruise was Meteor-esque straight wing+stainless steel+reheated Big Axial.

In 1953 we did not simulate much; we could not deal purely on paper with high altitude (RR/Sinfin Altitude Test Facility opened in 1958). So we built Proof Vehicles and Flying Test Beds, optimised for the Research Task. So, M52 was a bullet to go fast in a straight line with no payload. Militarily useless.

MoS/RAE's sponsor of high supersonics was (to be) Sir Morien Morgan (to be DD/RAE, Chief Scientific Advisor/Air Ministry, D/RAE). In 1953 he extracted MoS funds for a >M2.2 proof vehicle. Big Guys tended to take little interest in exotic one-offs: they had better things to do, and anyway would access the results of flight test. The Contractor for the Experimental type had no advantage to Bid for any later Application, which is why these jobs went to people like MIles (M52), Boulton Paul (BP.111 delta), Hunting (Jet Flap).

MoS put out an Invitation to Tender for 2xflight, 1x(Iron Maiden) specimen, RA.24R. AWA and Bristol could not be ranked; AWA's Design credibility had long since been tarnished, their Prodn long since been esteemed, so MoS made Bristol Main Contractor, AWA fabrication lead (in part as business cousin of High Duty Alloys, so at least aware of the art of metallurgy). Cost-plus contract, 4/1/54 (all these Research jobs were cost-plus, as, by definition, no-one had a cost clue).

Air Ministry decided Medium Bombers must fly higher, faster, so Required such a thing. Avro 730 (T.188-esque) won, 1/11/55, ASM 3/56 winning its reheated Big Axial P.176. Ahead of that 3 more T.188s were added, 9/55* as military proof vehicles, with P.176 (I do not know if the first 2 were to have P.176 as well). These, P.176, and Avro 730 were all chopped 4/4/57. M.Morgan, by then Chairman, Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee, persuaded Ministers to continue with the 2+1 on MoS' Aircraft Research budget, to give him a vehicle for High Fast Research. (Maybe because RR were then in the ordure trying to make reheat work on P.1B's Avon) MoS judged DH, having lost Big Wet Gyron, could readily, cheaply, put reheat on N.A.39's Gy.Jr, so inserted that, 7/57.

So: to Gunston's Why, 7/57, not Big Olympus? Because B.Ol 100/Vulcan B.1 as B.Ol 200 had just beaten Conway for Vulcan B.2, so Bristol had better things to do.

(* amended 19/04/23: Air-Britain #25 below says 11/5/55)

 

[Archibald]

Neat thing with the T-188: the Gyron jrs may be piece of junk - since they were on nacelles on a straight wing it wouldn't be too hard to make an engine swap. Which engine, I have no clue - you British had so many good ones (unlike goddamn SNECMA and its Atar 9...)

EDIT Drats, ninja'd by the whole entire thread above. I should sleep more at night...

 

[Archibald]

Very much an engineer's thread I hope. T188 was a dramatic looking aircraft.

Like TSR2 Marx made a battery toy version, though like Japanese toy Boeing SSTs it put on weight.

THE BRISTOL 188 BY MARX

MARX BRISTOL 188, BRISTOL 188

projectswordtoys.blogspot.com

I would love to hear ways in which it could have been made to work.

hey, do you know that Marx was Louis Marx (not Groucho, not Karl - another Marx !) a major toy czar in 1960's America ?

he had two daughters with rather interesting lives: Patricia and Barbara.

Barbara in 1972 tried to fund an Apollo mission through private money, repaying via selling moon rocks.

Patricia had more down to earth worries, the same year: she had married Ellsberg of "Pentagon papers" fame.

What a family, really. The sunday lunches must have been animated: toys, Apollo and Ellsberg...

 

[red admiral]

Blue Steel 'might' have reached service on time and not been perceived by many as a waste of time.

Chris

How would 188 influence that though?

Knowledge transfer of steel structures from Bristol to Avro? Probably difficult in practice unless the people move.

 

[CJGibson]

Haven't read Vulcan's Hammer lately?

Chris

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Hey, do you know that Marx was Louis Marx (not Groucho, not Karl - another Marx !) a major toy czar in 1960's America ?

For what it's worth there was also a well-known British actor called Alfred Marx.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Haven't read Vulcan's Hammer lately?

Chris

No and found it very heavy going when I did.

Nomis

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Haven't read Vulcan's Hammer lately?

Chris

One of the things I do remember is that one reason for the delay was a shortage of suitable aircraft (i.e. V-Bombers) for the test programme. If the money spent on the Bristol 188 had been spent on about 20 extra V-Bombers that problem may have been avoided. Or it could have been spent on more Blue Steel missiles.

 

[red admiral]

Haven't read Vulcan's Hammer lately?

Chris

Not for a few years

Even if zero issues with Blue Steel development what's really the impact of that? Maybe one of the later MKs/Phases gets funded... and then cut later due to cost? Or goes ahead and the V force is a more credible (but still unused) deterrent for 2-3 years in the mid 60s before Polaris?

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

How would 188 influence that though?

Knowledge transfer of steel structures from Bristol to Avro? Probably difficult in practice unless the people move.

I’ve been told that some of the Blue Steel detail structural design was subcontracted to Gloster’s, about 30 miles up the road from Bristol… There may be some method in the madness.

 

[alertken]

ZT: GAC built concept/trials aluminium vehicles (might we call them mock-ups).

We need Tony Buttler here (ex-High Duty Alloys) to explain spars and such in stainless steel: why that was a pain to extract from a metals industry unenthused for high-pain for low volume. (T.188 ITP 4/1/54; first flight 14/4/62).

Much the same explains why UK-Aero took so long to comprehend they had become junior to sparks: that Systems Rule, OK but leckie firms took much greater interest in ship-loads of $-earning brown goods (radiograms) than in a few dozen AI radars.

 

[CJGibson]

How would 188 influence that though?

Knowledge transfer of steel structures from Bristol to Avro? Probably difficult in practice unless the people move.

I’ve been told that some of the Blue Steel detail structural design was subcontracted to Gloster’s, about 30 miles up the road from Bristol… There may be some method in the madness.

They built the Dural test vehicles. It's all in Vulcan's Hammer.

Chris

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

Chris/Alertken
I was told the following by Mr David Barber who worked at GAC from 1955-1966, indeed was at one time the GAC drawing office manager… the chap who locked the drawing office door for the last time. (From my notes from approx 92)
“When the GA6 was cancelled, there was a big effort in the HSA group to move work to GAC for continuity. Chad/Woodford were swamped with Vulcan, so moved urgent Blue Steel development work. This kept the GAC drawing office very busy until the early 1960’s, the Andover rear fuselage design package arrived in 60 and after that the Aw681 rear fuselage design package 64 ”
He did mention doing structural design work with stainless steel and the aluminium 5/8 scale WS101 wouldn’t have gone on for that duration. To be fair he was very nervous about talking about this so I’m making some projections.

He also told me the Blue Steel project was managed from Conquest House in London, one floor above where the Blue Streak project was being managed. He made several visits including a number to view flight test results which couldn’t leave the building.

Most of the T188 structure was made up from razor blade thickness stainless frames, ribs, and longerons with puddle welding in place of rivets. Blue Steel was razor blade thickness stainless corrugated liner brazed to a skin.

A chap who was in the Bristol test facility all his career told me he conducted a static load test on a Blue Steel mk2 structural demo airframe in the early sixties. When I asked how that had come to be, he said Bristol’s had a available heated static loading test frame (ex T188), one of only two in the country… the other being at the RAe Farnborough.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Hey, do you know that Marx was Louis Marx (not Groucho, not Karl - another Marx !) a major toy czar in 1960's America ?

For what it's worth there was also a well-known British actor called Alfred Marx.

@Archibald. As you enjoyed that. Norman Stanley Fletcher did his courting in Highgate Cemetery on the tomb of Karl Marx.

"But Ingrid! Your mum and I had something behind us. Karl Mark's tomb!"​

 

[Dagger]

One of my local libraries had a book called "Back to the Drawing Board: Aircraft That Flew But Never Took Off" by Bill Gunston and one of the aircraft in the book was the Bristol 188.

• IIRC (1) He wrote that it should have had reheated Bristol Olympus engines instead of DH Gyron Juniors.
  • Would that have helped?
  • And would a Bristol 188 with reheated Olympus engines have helped with the development of the reheated Olympus intended for heavy fighters, TSR.2 and Concorde?
• IIRC (2) He said that it was originally to have been capable of Mach 2.2, but then they changed it to Mach 2.5. The change put the first flight date back by several years and increased the cost to the extent that the number of aircraft was reduced from 5 to 2 plus the static test article. Are those statements true?

This is what Gunston actually wrote:

 

[alertken]

We can today disparage all UK's Experimental oddjobs as not having guided us to production (Gillette wings, flying wings, sucking wings, blown wings: dead ends; Avro 707, HP.115, Bristol T.221, BP.111, FD.1: too late to inform Vulcan, Concorde, Javelin). Due in part to lack of urgency in teams that would not benefit from production (the shipyard curse). But the title of the Budget was Aircraft Research, that is Experimental, that is known+unknown unknowns. A cheap but slow dead end is just as valuable as...a busy, expensive road to nowhere.

 

[Archibald]

Gillette wings

To fly at Mach 3, obviously... (runs for cover)

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

One of my local libraries had a book called "Back to the Drawing Board: Aircraft That Flew But Never Took Off" by Bill Gunston and one of the aircraft in the book was the Bristol 188.

• IIRC (1) He wrote that it should have had reheated Bristol Olympus engines instead of DH Gyron Juniors.
  • Would that have helped?
  • And would a Bristol 188 with reheated Olympus engines have helped with the development of the reheated Olympus intended for heavy fighters, TSR.2 and Concorde?
• IIRC (2) He said that it was originally to have been capable of Mach 2.2, but then they changed it to Mach 2.5. The change put the first flight date back by several years and increased the cost to the extent that the number of aircraft was reduced from 5 to 2 plus the static test article. Are those statements true?

This is what Gunston actually wrote:

So I didn't remember 100% correctly. Fair enough.

For what it's worth Air Britain's "Aeromilitaria" magazine ran a series of articles on Post-1950 British Aircraft Specifications which was based on research for a sequel to the "British Aircraft Specification File" which (logically) was about the Pre-1950 British Aircraft Specifications.

Specification ER.134 was included in the article "Pre-1950 Specifications - Part 9" which appeared in the magazine's March 2013 edition. (Pages 29 to 32 of the magazine and Pages 29 to 32 of the PDF.)

ER.134T
Research Aircraft for flight at Mach 2.0 dated 9.12.52

Issued to Tender, to Armstrong Whitworth, Boulton Paul, Bristol, English Electric, Hawker, Saunders Roe and Supermarine. The resulting tenders produced no less than eleven distinct design submissions: Armstrong Whitworth AW.166 (two ASM Sapphires); Boulton Paul P.128 (two Sapphires), Bristol Type 188 (two Rolls-Royce RA.24R); English Electric P.6 in several variants based on Sapphire-powered developments of the P.1B; Hawker with the P. 1096 and P. 1097, Saunders Roe with the P. 163, and Supermarine with the Type 553, powered by a Rolls-Royce RB.106R. Analysis of the design proposals led to the selection of the Bristol 188 for further development under ER.134D.

And.

ER.134D
Mach 2.5 Research Aircraft, dated 11.3.54. Issued to Bristol.

This Specification called for a research aircraft to fulfil two related tasks - first to obtain information on the fabrication of steel aircraft structures, and second to obtain actual flight experience at high Mach numbers, up to 2.5. The 'Class 1' structure (critical to structural integrity and pilot safety) subject to generation of aerodynamic heat was required to be of steel. The design firm and RAE Farnborough were required to agree the wing plan form, power control system and arrangements for auto stabilisation. It was envisaged that the first two of an (initially) unspecified number of prototypes would be powered by Rolls-Royce RA.24R engines. The contractor was required to prepare a 'heat balance statement' for the entire aircraft, after analysing the effects of kinetic heating on its structure at the design Mach number. The first two aircraft were allotted the serial numbers XF923 & XF926 on 4.1.54, against Contract 6/Aircraft/10144, which also called for an un-numbered structural test airframe. A further three aircraft (XK429, XK434, XK436) were assigned these numbers on 11.5.55 under a new contract (6/Aircraft/12176) although these examples were later cancelled. Due to long delays in obtaining suitable steel to fabricate the structure, and also in developing suitable welding processes, the first aircraft did not fly until 14.4.62. In the meantime, the intended RA.24R Avons had given way to De Havilland DGJ.10 Gyron Juniors, a decision that delayed the project further, as the engine suffered its own development problems. No doubt a great deal was learned about the use of steel in aircraft structures, but the flight test elements of the project could not be described as successful. The Gyron Junior engines consumed too much fuel to permit prolonged flight at high Mach numbers, thus failing to achieve sufficient flight time to obtain data on the desired kinetic heating effects.

Editions of "Aeromilitaria" from 1975 to 2017 (including the one that I am referring to) can be downloaded from this website.

Digital Archive – Aeromilitaria

air-britain.com

 

[Dagger]

So I didn't remember 100% correctly. Fair enough.

[.....]

Specification ER.134 was included in the article "Pre-1950 Specifications - Part 9" which appeared in the magazine's March 1913 edition. (Pages 29 to 32 of the magazine and Pages 29 to 32 of the PDF.)

Nothing wrong with your memory. I was merely dotting the i's and give others the chance to read it too.

Here's another dotted i: Specification ER.134 was actually included in the March 2013 edition.

Tony Buttler wrote an interesting ten page article about the Bristol Type 188 in 'Wings Of Fame 18'.

Others wrote articles in 'Aeroplane Monthly' of August 1983 and 'Aeroplane' of February 2015.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Here's another dotted i: Specification ER.134 was actually included in the March 2013 edition.

Typo corrected and you didn't have to write it like that.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

What happens if the Bristol T.188 research aircraft doesn't underperform?
What happens if it flies upto Mach 2.8 and reaches the thermal limit of the windscreen?

We now know that it's underperformance is related to lack of interest and investment in the Gyron Junior engines after the cancellation of the P.177 fighter and the AWA F.155 alternative to the Fairey Delta III.
We also know of the flawed inlet transducer issue.

What happens if this is performing as desired in 1962?

In addition to not performing as desired the Bristol 188 was about 5 years behind schedule.

Therefore "What happens if it is performing as desired in 1957?"​

 

[zen]

Therefore "What happens if it is performing as desired in 1957?"

Getting this version of the Gyron Junior working at that time, opens up the Buccaneer S.1 order changing over to it after prototype trials. As gaining an additional 3,000lb unreheated of static sea level thrust per engine, would cure the S.1 of It's deficiencies in performance.

It's also likely to be driven forward until '57 by the expectations of F.177 and several other aircraft designs or variations of such that would use the Gyron Junior.

Yet further, Brough used such developed Gyron Junior for the 'interim' OR.339 offering....

And .... to the RN with the reheated versions for an CAP Fighter.

So simply by getting the T.188 built on time and the engines working properly opens up a series of knock on effects. Which if anything seem the 'easy option' for the period to solve a series of issues.

 

[NOMISYRRUC]

Therefore "What happens if it is performing as desired in 1957?"

Getting this version of the Gyron Junior working at that time, opens up the Buccaneer S.1 order changing over to it after prototype trials. As gaining an additional 3,000lb un-reheated of static sea level thrust per engine, would cure the S.1 of It's deficiencies in performance.

It's also likely to be driven forward until '57 by the expectations of F.177 and several other aircraft designs or variations of such that would use the Gyron Junior.

Yet further, Brough used such developed Gyron Junior for the 'interim' OR.339 offering....

And .... to the RN with the reheated versions for an CAP Fighter.

So simply by getting the T.188 built on time and the engines working properly opens up a series of knock on effects. Which if anything seem the 'easy option' for the period to solve a series of issues.

As the chapter from Bill Gunston's book that @Dagger provided said that 6 Type 188s were wanted and the Aeromilitaria article that I copied said that 5 Type 188s were ordered (plus a static test article) could some test the Gyron Junior and some the Olympus?

Then we could "have our cake and eat it".

Are there any other engines that would have benefitted from using the Type 188 as a flying test-bed?

 

[zen]

Are there any other engines that would have benefitted from using the Type 188 as a flying test-bed?

Depends really.
As it was a host of design proposals and a few partially funded would have used it.
Armstrong Siddeley Engines, mostly intended for the supersonic recce bomber. P.176
Though the P.151 scaled Sapphire development for smaller diameter fighter engines....
RR's two spool titanium next generation turbojets. RB.106, RB.122, RB.123, RB.126, RB.128.
Even RB.153 in later design.
RB.142 Medway, RB.168 Spey etc....

DH Gyron and Gyron Junior
Bristol Olympus versions, BS.30 Zeus, BS.33, Pegasus in BS.59 straight through configuration, Janus in straight through configuration (BS.100), BS.75 etc....M.45
Even the RB.199.

 

[Grey Havoc]

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