Gloster CXP-1001 fighter and bomber project for Taiwan

[Deino]

Just as I thought I have recognised a model of this fighter proposal at TsrJoe's tread (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2019.msg17221/topicseen.html#msg17221)
I was searching for some more on this unknown project. .... sadly that was all I found: ???

Taiwan's lightweight Indigenous Defensive Fighter, the Ching-Kuo, is by no means the first aircraft of its type to be considered by the leaders of Taiwan's Nationalist Party. In 1946, the then Chinese government despatched a delegation to Britain. The team was charged with arranging for the design of a turbojet, a jet fighter, and a jet bomber suitable for manufacture in Nationalist factories. The Gloster company agreed to undertake design of the fighter under the designation CXP-1001.

The CXP-1001 was a single-seater designed around the existing Rolls-Royce Nene turbojet. It was 41 ft 10 in long, spanned 38 ft, and weighed 13,900 lbs loaded for a normal mission. Armament was to be four 20-mm cannon arranged around the air intake or a pair of the forthcoming 30-mm weapons. Design maximum speed was 600 mph. Ceiling was 40,000 ft. Range was 1000 miles with two drop tanks and a Meteor-style faired belly tank.

A full-scale mockup and a number of component parts were finished. However, the collapse of the Nationalist army in 1949 and the subsequent flight from the mainland brought the work to an abrupt halt. In any case, Gloster was now deeply involved in the competition for a new RAF all-weather fighter with the Javelin. It had few resources to spare. Taiwan's future defense would rest on American-manufactured airplanes for many years.

As a source this is quoted: © 1997 by Robert Craig Johnson. Part of a series first published, in abbreviated form, in Eagle Droppings, the Newsletter of the Rocky Mountain Chapter, IPMS/USA.
http://worldatwar.net/chandelle/v2/v2n3/cxp-1001.html

Does anyone have some more information an esp. about the jet bomber mentioned above !

Cheers, Deino

 

[Deino]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

ARRRGGGG .... I'm stupid ! Just take a look at Tony Buttler's book "British Secret Projects - Jet Fighters since 1950" page 123 + 124 !

Cheers, Deino

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Some time ago there was an article in the Air Enthusiast on British unbuit jet-aircraft from the WW2 period. Amongst many others a jet-bomber project from Gloster was described. It was to be a scaled-up Gloster Meteor with four jet-engines mounted in two nacelles (i.e. in pairs).
Perhaps a similar project was then offered to the Chinese government alongside the CXP-1001?

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Well, Tony Butler in his 'British Secret Projects. Jet Fighters Since 1945' says that the Chinese mission to the UK "was split into three with one section investigating the design and construction of a jet fighter, the second a bomber and the third a jet engine. Negotiations brought proposals to collaborate with Gloster on the fighter" (page 123).

Note that a 'bomber' not a jet bomber is mentioned. Hence I am not sure what kind of propulsion the bomber project (if there was actually any project) would have had. Perhaps there was a propeller-driven aircraft in question?
And of course Gloster didn't have to be the company that the Chinese cooperated with the bomber project. I thought so but now I think that it could be quite another company.

Best regards,
Piotrr

 

[Deino]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Does anyone know a model called Lockheed + AIDC LT-21 trainer!?? ???

Just found this on my harddrive ....

Cheers, Deino

 

[windingroad]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

there are only 20 chinese engineer work in uk.so they can't be able to design a bomber.
they have designed a light transport called 'zhongyun-1',and want to make it like a bomber,but this simple project also failed as lack of money

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Here is a drawing of the CXP-1001 which was published in 'British Secret Projects. Jet Fighters since 1950' by Tony Buttler.
In this drawing the aircraft apparently has no belly tank which may be seen in others pictures. It is interesting whether the CXP-1001 would have such Meteor-like tank under its belly or not.

Best regards,
Piotr

[image removed - see below]

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Scan posted was too large (see forum rules). Also Ian Allan have requested no scans from any of their publications.

 

[Jemiba]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

"...no scans from any of their publications!

 

[zanenobbs]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

There is now a 1/72 resin model kit of the Gloster CXP-1001 available at: http://internationalresinmodellers.com/new_releases.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Nice! Thanks for the info.

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

I have just concluded it's rather odd that the CXP-1001 is called a "light" fighter. Actually it was considerably larger than most of comparable fighters of its era. Its main (length/wingspan) dimensions were: 41ft 10in/38 ft while - for example - those of the F-86 were 37ft 6in/37in 1 in and the F-84B's were: 37ft 5 in/36ft 5in. So probably the fighter for China might have been even heavier than other, smaller aircraft. Perhaps the Nationalist government of China wanted a long-range fighter (China is quite large a country), so it must have a sizeable fuselage to accomodate capacious fuel tanks.

Question: do you have any idea how much fuel the CXP-1001 was to carry?

Piotr

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

I have just found an on-line database that contains information on publications regarding particular types of aircraft (http://www.aeroknow.com/ADImisc/ENGLA2-ADI.htm)... There is an entry on the CXP-1001 (scroll down up to Gloster CXP-1001) whose information I've deciphered using a key (http://www.aeroknow.com/abbreviations.htm).
If I haven't made a mistake there was an article and a three-view drawing of the airplane published in the "Flying Review" magazine of May 1962.

Could you confirm this information (or deny it), please?

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[joncarrfarrelly]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

I have just concluded it's rather odd that the CXP-1001 is called a "light" fighter. Actually it was considerably larger than most of comparable fighters of its era. Its main (length/wingspan) dimensions were: 41ft 10in/38 ft while - for example - those of the F-86 were 37ft 6in/37in 1 in and the F-84B's were: 37ft 5 in/36ft 5in. So probably the fighter for China might have been even heavier than other, smaller aircraft. Perhaps the Nationalist government of China wanted a long-range fighter (China is quite large a country), so it must have a sizeable fuselage to accomodate capacious fuel tanks.

Question: do you have any idea how much fuel the CXP-1001 was to carry?

Piotr

From Gloster Aircraft since 1917, Derek N James, Putnam (2nd edition 1987)
CXP-1001
Span: 38 ft
Length: 41 ft 10 in
Height: 14 ft 10 in
Wing: area, 360 sq ft; thickness/chord ratio, 0.011; incidence, 1 deg; sweepback: 20 deg
Weight: 8,960 lb (empty); 13,900 lb (loaded)
Fuel: 470 gal (internal); provisions for two 200 gal underwing drop tanks

Jon

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

From Gloster Aircraft since 1917, Derek N James, Putnam (2nd edition 1987)

(...)

Fuel: 470 gal (internal); provisions for two 200 gal underwing drop tanks

470 gal (2137 lit) of fuel in internal tanks was a huge amount by the standards of the late 1940s, when the CXP-1001 was being projected (its smaller cousin, the E.1/44 could take only 295 gal - 1341 lit for comparison) . And the drop tanks twice as big as 100-gal tanks used with most of other British fighters of the period. Interestingly, in some drawings of the aircraft that have been published (e.g. in "Combat Aircraft Prototypes since 1945" by Robert Jackson) there is a ventral tank visible, which resembles that of the Gloster Meteor. Perhaps it would have added another 200 or so gallons of fuel (if my memory serves me well, the underbelly tank of the Meteor could hold 195 gal*).

All this would have made the fighter for China a really long-range plane indeed (it appears my intuition has been quite right)...

Best regards,
Piotr

* I've checked it recently. My memory is not very well, unfortunately: the Meteor's ventral tank had capacity of 180-gal.

 

[Barrington Bond]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Royal Airforce Flying Review April 1962 1s. 9d.

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Royal Airforce Flying Review April 1962 1s. 9d.

Thank you for posting the info from the RAF Flying Review. Interestingly the magazine says the CXP-1001 would carry 100-gal tanks under wings and a 200-gal tank under the fuselage, which differs from what "Gloster Aircraft since 1917" says (two 200-gal underwing tanks). Presumably it cannot be ruled out who has been right on the matter.

By the way, most sources on the CXP-1001 mention that the Chinese mission had three objectives: a jet fighter (which took shape of the CXP-1001), a jet engine (of course it must have been the RR Nene, for it was to be installed in the Gloster fighter) and a bomber. Well, most authors, e.g. Tony Butler in his "British Secret Projects. Jet Fighters", say about 'a bomber' while referring to the fighter design as 'a jet fighter', which may be interpreted that the bomber was not to be a jet-engined aircraft. Now the note in the RAF Flying Review refers to the bomber as 'a jet bomber', so the note's author must have beyond any doubt meant a jet aircraft.

So, do you know what a bomber, whatever its engine(s) would be, the Chinese wanted to purchase along with the CXP-1001? Any idea woud be appreciated.

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 (E.1/44 fuel tankage)

Recently I've written here that the Gloster E.1/44's fuel tanks had capacity of 295-gal (1341-lit), which information came from Tony Butler's article on early British jet projects in the 'Air Enthusiast' magazine (issue 105 from May/June 2003).

Now I must correct the info, for I've just found in an invaluable archive of the 'Flight' magazine a splendid article on the E.1/44 (http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1948/1948%20-%200521.html which says beyond any doubt that the Gloster fighter could carry 428-gal (1946-lit) in internal tanks. Under each wing it could have a drop-tank as well (probably of 100-gal capacity). The article doesn't mention any ventral tank, so the E.1/44 must have had none (have you ever heard of such a feature of the E.1/44?).

I think that what Tony Butler wrote in the 'Air Enthusiast' could regard earlier versions of the E.1/44 project.

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[screenworx]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Here is a rendition of the Gloster Bomber mentioned earlier based on the information available, though not necessarily the aircraft proposed obviously, but still may be of interest to some. Will post a P109 when I get the chance.

http://www.screenworx.net/Aviationart/PORTFOLIO/Pages/UNFRAMED_PRINTS.html#0

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Interesting to see that relations between UK and China were so good back then.

 

[dy031101]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Interesting to see that relations between UK and China were so good back then.

Before WWII began the UK still had enough political influences to make sure that China had to put up with the UK screwing them over; after WWII the UK knew that if they didn't assist China, someone else would have and would have profitted from the venture (that was of course when the outcome of the Chinese Civil War remained unclear).

But then that's politics......

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Interesting to see that relations between UK and China were so good back then.

Before WWII began the UK still had enough political influences to make sure that China had to put up with the UK screwing them over; after WWII the UK knew that if they didn't assist China, someone else would have and would have profitted from the venture (that was of course when the outcome of the Chinese Civil War remained unclear).

But then that's politics......

I see, thanks.

 

[alertken]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

dy: no-one "screws over" the Chinese. Is the thrust of your comment surprise that Nationalist Chiang Kai Shek sent a Mission to explore a UK-design, rather than, say an F-80 variant? In 1946 China was embroiled in a Civil War, to be called "Liberation" by the victor. The country had suffered in WW2 about as much as had USSR, and was shattered, broke and hungry. USMC sat in port enclaves, but US Pres.Truman had no wish to continue US' subsidies to CKS, which had been to fight/tie up Japan. Hence the later, continuing Republican charge that leftie Democrats "lost" China to the Commies. CKS wanted Air, not to deal with USSR, which in 1946 was US/UK's valiant co-victor, but to strafe Mao Tse Tung's Reds. UK was willing to not to enquire closely why CKS wanted a jet fighter-bomber (and/or a "bomber"), and to find ways, through Hong Kong trade, to fund the Gloster scheme without leeching out much hard cash. All fell apart when the wrong team won.

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Here is a rendition of the Gloster Bomber mentioned earlier based on the information available, though not necessarily the aircraft proposed obviously, but still may be of interest to some. Will post a P109 when I get the chance.

http://www.screenworx.net/Aviationart/PORTFOLIO/Pages/UNFRAMED_PRINTS.html#0

Actually, that link shows the DH Hornet. Here's the Gloster (Jet) Bomber:
http://www.screenworx.net/Aviationart/PORTFOLIO/Pages/UNFRAMED_PRINTS.html#1
But your link was still useful, so, thanks.

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

I wonder if the EE Canberra had still been built if that Gloster Jet Bomber had been developed. ???

 

[screenworx]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Sorry about the link it will update every time I add another so just use the thumbnails at the top to select the correct image.

I think due to the rapid and continuous development of technology in mid war period the Gloster Bomber was pretty much obsolete before it could have got off the drawing board. The Whittle engines, even 4 of them would not have given particularly outstanding performance I suspect and to be honest the Canberra design (from 1945) was just about the first point that any real stability of the jet concept was occurring, especially in terms of its use of axial flow engines which was crucial to any longevity in the design.

It is ironic however that the Canberra itself took much of its concept and basic design philosophy from the Meteor too (indeed pilots from Lincolns trained for the Canberra on the Meteor, 3 hours considered enough) so there is a link. The Canberra was however still considered an intermediate design till something 'more sophisticated' could be conceived and built ie. the eventual V bombers. Funny then that it was such an outstanding aircraft widely exported, made under license in the US and in fact stayed in RAF operational service after the V bombers had actually been decomissioned. It would have been a shame if it had not been built though I suppose it is conceivable that if something designed earlier had been built that aircraft may have been the 'stop gap' in its place. However it could never have taken on all the Canberra's roles or done them remotely as successfully and would have struggled to do so in the front line till the V bombers took over. Indeed it is the Canberra's concept of the most powerful available engines in the smallest possible airframe that has ultimate prevailed.

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

My guess is then that the Gloster Bomber would have been built if 1) WWII taking longer giving a need for an Allied jet bomber, 2) RAF having other priorities so it would have been built earlier, or 3) it would be the only jet bomber China could hope to get, either because a) no one would let China get more advance planes that could fall in wrong hands or b) because the Chinese industry wouldn't be able to produce more advance planes.

If alternative 1 or 2 had happened, Gloster Bomber would probably serve as a stop-gap instead of Canberra, considering how long time it took for post-Meteor jets like Hawker Sea Hawk and Hunter to get in service. If alternative 3 had happened, my guess is that the British Government would be happy to let Gloster export or get licence fees, while English Electric would provide a better bomber for RAF Bomber Command.

 

[screenworx]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

My guess is then that the Gloster Bomber would have been built if 1) WWII taking longer giving a need for an Allied jet bomber, 2) RAF having other priorities so it would have been built earlier, or 3) it would be the only jet bomber China could hope to get, either because a) no one would let China more advance planes that could fall in wrong hands or b) because the Chinese industry wouldn't be able to produce more advance planes.

If alternative 1 or 2 had happened, Gloster Bomber would probably serve as a stop-gap instead of Canberra, considering how long time it took for post-Meteor jets like Hawker Sea Hawk and Hunter to get in service. If alternative 3 had happened, my guess is that the British Government would be happy to let Gloster have exports/licence fees, while English Electric providing a better bomber for RAF Bomber Command.

I think that is a reasonable assumption, timing and circumstances were certainly the killer.

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Imagine that China, back then and for a long time later a developing country, could have been the third country in the world to have a jet bomber (after Germany and UK).

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

It remains unclear for me whether the Chinese actually looked for a jet bomber. Every source I know says that the Chinese mission in Britain, whose actions led to development of the CXP-1001, was divided into three sections. One of them was investigating the design of a jet fighter, another - a jet engine and the third - a bomber. Some sources use indeed the term 'jet-bomber' indicating that this was to be an airplane with jet-engines, but others, e.g. "British Secret Projects. Jet Fighters since 1950" by Tony Butler, say "jet-fighter" and simply "bomber". So the bomber that the Chinese wanted not necessarily must have had jet-engines. It wouldn't be so surprising; during the Korean War the USAF used jet fighters but all bombers that they used there (i.e. B-29s and B-26s) were propeller-driven. The Chinese air force in 1946, when they sent their mission to the UK, could quite possibly thought of jet-fighters and piston-engined bombers.
If however they actually had wanted a jet-bomber from Britain, it certainly (in my opinion) would have had the Rolls-Royce Nenes as its engines. It seems (to me, again) highly unlikely that the bomber would have had different engines than the fighter (i.e. CXP-1001). The Chinese nationalist government wanted to build both types of aircraft as well as the engine under license, so they must have opted for one type of engine. Besides, from the start the British were very reluctant in transferring state of the art technology to China. More modern engines, e.g. the Metrovick, the Avon, the Sapphire, were too advanced to be released for sale to China which leaves the Nene, the engine that apparently was considered by the RAF at that time a second-rate engine, as the only type that could ever be sold to China.

Piotr

 

[Petrus]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Sorry for posting again... but a strange thought has just come to my mind as I recalled that China (i.e. Chiang Kai-shek's China) actually acquired a number of British bombers. So I've checked the idea out in Wikipedia and at http://www.vectorsite.net/avmoss_2.html and it's turned out I was right. According to the Vectorsite webpage

About 200 Mosquitos of various types served with the Chinese Nationalists beginning in the fall of 1948, and saw some action against the Red Chinese until the expulsion of the Nationalists to Taiwan the next year. The survivors made their way to Taiwan and served into the 1950s.

Elsewhere I've found an artwork showing a Mosquito in the Chinese air force's colours:

Thus perhaps the bomber that the Chinese mission to Britain looked for in 1946 was simply the Mosquito. If the Mosquitos had been delivered in 1948, negotiations that led to this deal must have been started some time earlier...

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[frank]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan


Should this subject get changed to the "Gloster Bomber" since it's clearly no longer about the CXP-1001? ???

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Thanks Petrus and Joe.

 

[Deino]

Re: Gloster CXP-1001 fighter project for Taiwan

Should this subject get changed to the "Gloster Bomber" since it's clearly no longer about the CXP-1001? ???

Topic title changed as You suggested !

Deino

 

[screenworx]

Rendering of the Gloster P109 as promised.


http://www.screenworx.net/Aviationart/PORTFOLIO/Pages/UNFRAMED_PRINTS.html#0

 

[zanenobbs]

Hello all,

I am a bit confused about the CXP-1001 project. My organization, the International Resin Modellers Association, has made this our first kit (1/72). Part of the selection process was based on visitor and member suggestions and more by the intrigue of this possibly being China's first jet fighter.

My confusion is based on the part in Tony Butler's book: British Secret Projects Jet Fighters Since 1950, page 124 where it says "The Ministry refused because it objected to an overseas Air Force being equipped with a British design comparable to or in advance of that in UK service . . ." The advanced portion is understandable, however, from my understanding the CXP-1001 was basically a redesigned E.1/44. While this did make the project unique to the Chinese Air Force, why would the UK want to avoid just selling some older Meteors or the basic E.1/44 to China? Just curious.

 

[Antonio]

Apple Saffari shows an alert about malicious code when trying to enter your web :-[

 

[zanenobbs]

Hi, I just tried on Apple Safari and Internet Explorer without any notifications. The site appears clean.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Looks ok to me on Linux... fwiw.

 

[robunos]

Firefox 3.5 blocks me out......


cheers,
Robin.