SNCASO (Sud-Ouest Aviation) Projects

[dan_inbox]

A missile only was the normal armament of mixed-production point defense interceptors then.
The Dever (Décollage Vertical, ie VTO) is basically an evolution of the Trident, which also had a single missile.

In France there is a rumor that it was the Israelis who insisted that their Mirage III got cannons, because they couldn't afford such expensive ammunition as the Matra missiles.


BTW, astute observers may notice why the the Dever concept was not successful : there is no system for landing...

 

[Pioneer]

In France there is a rumor that it was the Israelis who insisted that their Mirage III got cannons, because they couldn't afford such expensive ammunition as the Matra missiles.

Very interesting thanks dan_inbox

Regards
Pioneer

 

[Stargazer]

BTW, astute observers may notice why the the Dever concept was not successful : there is no system for landing...

Not just that. I guess you couldn't just launch those babies from any regular tarmac, or you'd have to replace your airstrips every time!!

Very Dan Dare, there (pardon the pun!).

You are thorougly pardoned (at least by me). I'm a sucker for good puns... and even lame ones!

 

[Grey Havoc]

;D

 

[hesham]

From Le Fana 142,

here is the early drawings to SNCASO SO.4000.

 

[toura]

I don't remember where I've found this !!!

 

[hesham]

Nice find my dear Toura.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

the SNCASO SO.60,the rival to SNCASE Caravelle jet airliner,
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1952/1952%20-%201351.html

Now it seemed to be that,the SNCASO SO.60 was allocated twice,one of them
was developed from SO.50.

 

[hesham]

very strange,

in Ailes 10/1948,an article about SNCASO SO.6004,and I don't know if they meant the
SNACSO SO.6000-04 or what ?.

 

[dan_inbox]

I suspect this text relates to the two famous photos attached below.
Panhard showed off their Dynavia car along a proto of the SNCASO SO-6000 Triton for a publicity stunt.
Where does the 6.004 come from? Maybe it's the 4th proto of the Triton?
Maybe the usual, erm, variable level of care and understanding from a journo?

 

[hesham]

My dear Dan,

we must don't forget that,there was an interceptor Project version of Triton.

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 6/1949,

here is a 3-view to SNACSO SO.6020 early draft,and also from "Les Avions De Combat Francais
1944-1960" volume II.

 

[hesham]

Also from Ailes 7/1949.

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 9/1950,

a strange Info about SNCASO SO-6008,I am confuse ?.

 

[Deltafan]

This "SO-6008 bis" is probably a study on an aerodynamic profile for an improvement for a plane (maybe the SO-6000) or a project (maybe the SO-6005).

 

[Deltafan]

very strange,

in Ailes 10/1948,an article about SNCASO SO.6004,and I don't know if they meant the
SNACSO SO.6000-04 or what ?.

Yes, it's the 6000-04 (first flight 19.03.1948), as the article (from 10.1948) says that it shows a photo of a plane on an airfield.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Deltafan,

but we must don't forget the Interceptor which developed from SO.6000,and we don't
know what the designation number was taken for it.

 

[Deltafan]

Yes, this "6008 bis" is maybe this project of an Interceptor. But without other information we can only speculate (The second 6005 project [the first was a training version of the 6000] was a "straight wing" version of the "Espadon" [SO-6020] with "swept wing", and had not to do with the "Triton" [6000]).

But if you have a photo with the article about the "6004", this photo shows the 6000-04. There was no known 6004 on an airfield in France (or elsewhere) at this time (and never before or after).

 

[hesham]

From AFM magazine,

here is the SNCASO SO.1340 & SO.1350 drawings.

From Ailes 31/10/1953,

the first time to hear about SNCASO SO.1330 Convertiplane Project ?;

After experimentation, this device proved to be excellent to the point that the future "convertible"
SO-1330 will have, in addition to its two turboprop engines used for horizontal flight (we think of the
T.B.-1000 with nostalgia), a rotor driven in the same way as that of "Djinn".

 

[hesham]

From 23/3/1958.

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 9-3-1957,

the SNACSO SO.70A Project.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
SNCASO SO4070 Minerve supersonic bomber.
Engine : SNECMA Super ATAR(8500kgp)×1, Nord designe ramjet×2
Length : 23.6m, Span : 11.83m, Height : 6.65m, Wing area : 58.5 square meter
Empty weight : 13.78ton, Gross weight : 33ton
Vmax : Mach3, Range of action : 2500km×2, Ceiling : 23000m

"Designed in 1957 to reach speeds of the order of m = 3 to 3.5, this aircraft would have been radically different from the 4060.
Despite the adoption of a delta wing, it would not have been more advantageous and comparable to the dassault mirage.
Its delta wing, extremely thin would indeed have been mounted high on a very long pointed fuselage of only 1.69m in diameter.
A single SNECMA SUPER ATAR jet engine, with an air inlet with a movable body, would have been mounted above it and two detachable, releasable ramjets would have been hung on the wing, for high speed flight.
The monotrack lander would have included a central bogie and a front dolly retracting into the fuselage.
To take into account the kinetic heating, structure either in stainless steel or in titanium was already proposed.
This project was very ambitious.
It seems certain that the announced performance could have been achieved.
It is however surprising that(,despite the study of the remarkable Michaux Sud-Avion system,)to avoid the difficulties inherent in the installation and use of aiming radars, a radio guidance system of questionable precision was only planned.
It would in any case have made it possible to reduce the crew to one man, practically reduced to the role of conveyor of the machine During the return flight!
With a load of 1000kg (the bomb from the 1956 program) the SO4070 could have attacked an objective located at 200km, by flying at M = 3 at an altitude between 22 and 23000m.
On a reconnaissance mission the radius of action would have been slightly increased.
The possibility of the development of such a second generation supersonic bomber was one of the arguments put forward by Sud-Aviation to try to save at least the second prototype of S0 4060 during the dark coupes of 1957: this aircraft could have served flying test bench for the Super ATAR
We never heard of it after the spring of 1958."
(from Jean Cuny "Les Avions De Combat Francais 1944-1960" volume II,Docavia)

And
https://fr.audiofanzine.com/le-pub-...-belmoufles-chouettes-coucous-land,p.405.html
I can't find main engine air intake shock cone in plan view drawing.
How can the pilot of this airplane secure forward visibility for takeoff and landing?

 

[blackkite]

Hi! SNCASO SO4080 supersonic bomber 3D model.
https://www.shapeways.com/product/VPY2U7YEH/1-144-sncaso-so-4080
(from Jean Cuny "Les Avions De Combat Francais 1944-1960" volume II,Docavia)
Engine : Nord ramjet×2, Length : 15m, Span : 6.15m, Wing area : 16 square meter, Empty weight : 5.27ton, Gross weight : 9.75ton

In 1956, in response to a technical survival program, a planned bomber of unmanned origin, capable of reaching, at m = 3 and at an altitude of 20000m, a target located at 3000km away, was studied at Courbevoie.
For take-off and acceleration, booster motors should have been used, capable of providing an additional 15 or 20t of thrust.

Three side view drawing.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/attachments/so-4080-jpg.82225/

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
On 26 September 1949, M1 performed first free-flight, launched from a SNCASE Languedoc.
On 13 April 1949, M.2 conducted its first flight
Both the M.1 and M.2 provided valuable data for swept wing, escape system, etc, for SO 4000.
Testing of the M.2 was successful, one occasion having exceeded 1,000 km/h (621 mph) while flown in a dive becoming the first French aircraft to achieve this.
On 5 March 1950, the SO.4000 was rolled out.
Ｔhe S.O.4000 performed its maiden flight on 15 March 1951.
During landing, its undercarriage failed, resulting in damage.
The S.O.4000 was overweight and underpowered.
The S.O.4000 was operated by a crew of two.
Being intended for use as a bomber, the production aircraft was capable of carrying a bombload of up to 5,000 kg (11,000 lb);
S.O.4000 General characteristics
Length: 19.75 m (64 ft 10 in), Wingspan: 17.86 m (58 ft 7 in)
Wing area: 75.00 m2 (807.3 sq ft) ,
Empty weight: 16,583 kg (36,559 lb), Gross weight: 22,005 kg (48,513 lb), Powerplant: 2 × Rolls-Royce Nene 4,980 lbf thrust each
Source : SPF,etc

 

[blackkite]

Sorry I made a mistake. This is a correct compariosn.
I can't understand the meaning of Cuny-san's scale in SO M-1, M-2 and SO 4000 three side view drawings.
https://avia.superforum.fr/t2122p625-ce-jour-la

 

[dan_inbox]

With a load of 1000kg (...) the SO4070 could have attacked an objective located at 200km, by flying at M = 3 at an altitude between 22 and 23000m.

That should be 2,000km.

 

[Archibald]

The SO-4000 is exemplary of what was wrong in 1948 (and was corrected in 1952 with the SO-4050 Vautour). Same for Arsenal VG-90 vs Mystère IV.

Basically... those aircraft looks impressive and very advanced. Unfortunately - that's not enough to make a viable aircraft. Ambition shall not prevail over mastering technology.
Jet aviation in the 50's was very unforgiving.
Let's take swept wings as an example.
Point 1 Nazi research was a lure and a red herring because done in awful conditions (1945 Germany) and with insane ambition (nazis...)
Point 2
- Case 1 - you fall to the lure of nazi tech and over-ambitions. SO-4000 and VG-90 are cases in point. MD-450 Ouragan is not.
- Case 2 - you don't fall to the nazi / over-ambition lure.
Varied examples
- The United States had the luxury of nearly infinite means. They didn't fell to the lure. Even then, within the next decade hundreds of pilots were killed, if not thousands (B-47, F-100, were very unforgiving. So many others.)
- Great Britain was a mixed bag. For a simple reason: they had managed to stay in the bandwagon with the USA yet the country was ruined like France.
Swift vs Hunter is a startling example of "stellar success" vs "miserable failure".
- France SNCAs had no choice, because Tillon, politics, etc.
Basically it took them until 1955-56 to build workable prototypes fighter aircraft (Trident, Durandal, Griffon - and Vautour of course).
- Bloch / Dassault had the choice (since 1936 private armement industry had very bad press - yet in 1948 France it was rather a chance)
MD-450 if compared to Espadon or VG-90 was really ugly, low performance... yet it worked. And carried the day. 1952 was turning point, really. It was very much 1948 revenge, because that year was really miserable.
Same for Cormoran vs Noratlas, for transport aircraft. SO-4000 and SO-4050 for light bombers.

Note that Dassault had their very own Swift-like black sheep - the Mystère II. Basically they botched the Ouragan to Mystère IV transition. They were pretty lucky the Ouragan carried the momentum and the Mystère IV worked well enough.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! SO 6020 wind tunnel test model.
https://www.bada.org/object/sud-ouest-espadon-wind-tunnel-model
Explanation of this model says that this is the SO 6025??
(SO 6025 : The third prototype fitted with a SEPR 25 auxiliary liquid-fuel rocket beneath the fuselage, behind the jet engine air intake.)
Source of drawings : LES AVIONS DE COMBAT FRANCAIS, DOVAVIA 28.

 

[blackkite]

Hi 6021.

"SO 6021 was therefore fitted to receive at the wing ends light reactors of the generation intended for interceptors of the 1953 program. In spindle engines similar to those of SO9000 “Trident”, it therefore received Turbomeca “Marbore Ⅱ”, without then with post-combustion. It had been planned to mount “Marbore Ⅲ”, then “Viper” produced under license by Dassault (decision n ° 16847 DTI of December 1954) but, in July 1955, priority was given to “Gabizo”, which seemed the most promising light interceptor reactors. In 1956, the end of this program came when the SO6021 had only flown with an asymmetrical installation (a "Gabizo" on the one hand, a "Marbore" on the other). It was then that the plane appeared to have been permanently abandoned."

Source : LES AVIONS DE COMBAT FRANCAIS, DOVAVIA 28.

 

[dan_inbox]

Explanation of this model says that this is SO 6025??

It is not a 6025. The 6025 had an additional rocket behind the air scoop.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! My understanding is as follows.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! What is this? Vertical tail stabilizer shape is little different. 6021?
Espadon is very hard to identify. 6020-01,6020-02(modified 6020?), 6021, 6025, 6026........
6020-01 and 6025 is easy to identify.

6020-01 : Ventral jet engine air inkate.
6020-02 : Fuselage side jet engine air intake.
6021 : Additional wing tip jet engine?
6025 : Ventral jet engine air intake+Rocket engine installed behine the jet engine air intake.
6026 : Fuselage side jet engine air intake+fuselage tail installed rocket engine.

 

[blackkite]

What is this? 6020-02?
http://univers-de-la-maquette.blogs.../2012/08/le-sud-ouest-so-6025-espadon_27.html

 

[dan_inbox]

As it says on the site, it is the 1st prototype 6020.01, after refit with 2 reheated Marboré engines.
For a history of the Espadon prototypes and their various evolutions, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sud-Ouest_Espadon#Variants

It does get confusing with those machines changing designation as they tried to address the deficiencies of each version.

Frenchies say "faire prendre des vessies pour des lanternes", Brits say "put lipstick on a pig", or hoodwink. An old practice of marketing: smoke up the customer and tell him that this is a new product, not last year's failure warmed over.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Frenchies say "faire prendre des vessies pour des lanternes", Brits say "put lipstick on a pig", or hoodwink. An old practice of marketing: smoke up the customer and tell him that this is a new product, not last year's failure warmed over.

The more things change...

 

[blackkite]

I can't understand the shape of this air intake.
http://modelstories.free.fr/analyses/avions/MS2005_9P/FM_Espadon/index.html
https://aviationsmilitaires.net/v3/kb/picture/1593/sud-ouest-so6020-espadon-so6021-vu-de-lavant

 

[dan_inbox]

They are simple NACA intakes. Maybe the render at militryfactory will help:

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/imgs/sncaso-so6020-espadon-fighter-interceptor-prototype-france.jpg

 

[blackkite]

Thanks a lot.
Hi!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nTQxtR8kog&t=16s

 

[blackkite]

Hi! 6021.

 

[hesham]

From ; Les Avions de Combat Francais,

the SNCASO SO.6150.