Lockheed PRC-105

boxkite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
12 July 2006
Messages
918
Reaction score
614
The Lockheed PRC-105 civil aircraft project was mentioned in JAWA 1986-1987 (page 439). Was there an illustration (artist's impression or three-view drawing) of this project in one of the following Jane's (or another publication)?
 
boxkite said:
The Lockheed PRC-105 civil aircraft project was mentioned in JAWA 1986-1987 (page 439). Was there an illustration (artist's impression or three-view drawing) of this project in one of the following Jane's (or another publication)?

I can only assume the PRC designation might have stood for People's Republic of China.
 
hesham said:
My dear boxkite,

a small info,please see;
http://asia.stanford.edu/events/spring06/ee402t/bio/klee.html

Hesham,

Yes, this website seems to give a confirmation for TinWing's guess. The '105' could be the number of seats/passengers ... ?
 
My impression of the PRC-105 is that it would have been a stretched P-3 Orion with five-abreast seating to replace the Il-18 in the Chinese market.
 
Sentinel Chicken said:
My impression of the PRC-105 is that it would have been a stretched P-3 Orion with five-abreast seating to replace the Il-18 in the Chinese market.

https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1986/1986%20-%201258.PDF
 
Since Circle 5 seems to be slacking off, I went ahead and took photos of a display model of this proposal along with some family portraits with a P-3C model. Obvious on the model are the fuselage stretch, wing root inserts, larger tailplane and cosmetic changes to the nosecone and vertical fin. I don't think the nose and fin changes are a net improvement and the squared-off tail, in particular, gives the airplane an Antonovish look (no offense intended). It also looks like the cockpit eyebrow windows are different, but this might just be due to the different decals used.
Also notable is that:
- the payload bay contours seem to have been retained - this may have provided a little extra underfloor volume at minimal/no cost in drag or may just be due to a lack of ambition on the modeler's part. I'd think that this area would have to be redesigned in the airliner to eliminate the structural weight penalty associated with the payload bay, so guess that the modeler is to blame.
- the wingtip sensor fairings are also retained. I'd guess that these would have disappeared also.
Interestingly, or perhaps not, the original box for the model was hand-marked both "Chinese Electra" and "Passenger P-3".
I don't think that this project had much of a chance. The government of an ambitious developing country would seem unlikely to sign on to a failed (commercially) airliner design from 25 years ago, whatever it's technical merits.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_8314.JPG
    IMG_8314.JPG
    121.4 KB · Views: 389
  • IMG_8316.JPG
    IMG_8316.JPG
    82.5 KB · Views: 372
  • IMG_8315.JPG
    IMG_8315.JPG
    103.7 KB · Views: 367
  • IMG_8312.JPG
    IMG_8312.JPG
    113.4 KB · Views: 361
  • IMG_8310.JPG
    IMG_8310.JPG
    72.9 KB · Views: 349
  • IMG_8313.JPG
    IMG_8313.JPG
    137.2 KB · Views: 77
taildragger said:
Since Circle-5 seems to be slacking off [...]

Yes, well some of us don't happen to have a Lockheed PRC-105 model conveniently on hand to illustrate a point. The reason I'm slacking off is that I switched my interests from aerospace concept models to PEZ dispensers. ::)

Nice model, BTW!
 
Due to my scanner nt working, I will have to type, verbatim, the entry on Page 5 of Air International July 1986 which said:
"Lockheed California has proposed a 105-seat transport derivative of the P-3 Orion as a joint project for production in China and tailored to Chinese domestic air transport needs. Designated PRC-105, the project is based on the use of advanced technology engines such as the Allison 427 or General Electric GE27. If launched, the PRC-105 would bring the design of the Electra full circle, for the Orion is itself a development of the original Lockheed turboprop airliner."
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom