SNCASO (Sud-Ouest) SO.9000 « Trident »

[hesham]

Hi,

is that artist drawing related to SNCASO SO.9000 ?.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1959/1959%20-%201716.html

 

[Matej]

-

 

[Stargazer]

Tail unit configuration is much different from the final Trident. Probably an artist's concept from aviation press back then.

 

[Skyraider3D]

Does anyone have accurate and detailed 3-views of the SO.9000 / SO.9050 / SO.9050 SE aircraft by any chance? I haven't come across anything too impressive online.

 

[Jemiba]

From FlugRevue 01/2002:

The picture posted by Hesham, I've seen in several adverts not directly related to the
Trident, so I would think, it was just an illustration of a "modern aircraft".

 

[Skyraider3D]

Thanks Jemiba, nice profile art though not quite what I'm after. It lacks a bit in detail and accuracy in areas.

 

[Jemiba]

Well, you're quite right. And in the end, there's always the old say "Never believe
in 3-views, you didn't manipulate yourself".
Maybe the best help, I can give is this one from "Les Prototypes De L'Aviation
Francais" by Jean-Claude Fayer.

 

[Skyraider3D]

Those are very nice photos indeed, thanks! If it's not too much trouble, would you be able to scan them at a higher resolution please?

 

[Justo Miranda]

more...

 

[Justo Miranda]

more...

 

[Skyraider3D]

Thanks a lot Justo! The cutaways are very interesting! B)

 

[airrocket]

Appears to be a three chamber Reaction Motors rocket similar to the X-1 four chamber unit. Unable to discern what type of air breather nest inside the wing pods.

 

[Jemiba]

The SO.9000 had a SEPR 481 rocket engine and two Turbomeca Marboré II jet engines,
the 9050 a SEPR 631 and two Dassault MD.60 Viper

 

[Skyraider3D]

Thanks again for the scans, Jens!

The SO.9000 had a SEPR 481 rocket engine and two Turbomeca Marboré II jet engines

After an incident on 26-10-'54 where the rocket motors failed and the Marboré engines proved barely sufficient to lift the SO.9000 off the ground, the SO.9000 was re-equipped with Dassault MD30ASV4 Vipers of 745kgs thrust. (source: X-Planes Profile 4: http://www.luft46.com/hpmpub/hpmpub.html)

 

[hesham]

From TU 149,the patents which led to develop SNACSO SO.9000.

 

[JC Carbonel]

Of course it is "related" to the SO 9000 / 9050 but stylized to become a generic rocket fighter ....

JCC

 

[hesham]

Of course it is "related" to the SO 9000 / 9050 but stylized to become a generic rocket fighter ....

JCC

Yes my dear Carbonel,

and maybe we can consider they were early attempts to rocket fighter with various shapes.

 

[JC Carbonel]

Your illustration comes from an advert. Advertising artists do not always copy reality ... hence my feeling what is there is just a "generic" design. Especially as the company for which the advert was created, SEPR, was a rocket engine manufacturer, not an airframe manufacturer ....

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Carbonel,

and here is the pages for it.

 

[JC Carbonel]

See document TU149_p12 above or my own Trident book page 14 where Philippe Ricco supplied the original (not redrawn) sketches by Servanty. That's what you are looking for. And don't forget what you are looking at are sketches dating from the late 40's (pre-Trident) while the SEPR advert which originates the whole thread is from 1959 when the Trident was dead. Mixing the two is IMHO an anachronism.
JCC

 

[riggerrob]

Why did so many 1940s and 1950s vintage jet prototypes have engines mounted on wing tips?
They produce ridiculous amounts of yaw after one engine quits.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
http://www.nags-gallery.com/cgi-bin/bbs39/bbs39.cgi?mode=past&year=2012&mon=12
https://picclick.fr/Sud-Ouest-SNCASO-SO9000-Trident-Manual-rare-archive-1950s-372683046733.html

 

[blackkite]

Rocket engine.
Trident 1 : three rocket nozzles
Trident 2 : two rocket nozzles
http://www.spl.ch/old/news/SEPR/AIAA-43160-765.pdf

 

[lostcosmonauts]

Artist’s impression in a small ~1950 book I picked up yesterday

 

[lostcosmonauts]

Another pics from a vintage book picked up today

 

[kocovgoce]

my 3d model in blender

 

[Deleted member 4286]

From AW 1957 View attachment 722401

 

[fightingirish]

I never have seen the aft of this aircraft.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1770516944501772692

View: https://twitter.com/AviationMarlene/status/1770516944501772692?t=pT5IebGwzDQ7V6GNArdnGQ&s=19

 

[F.L.]

Has anyone seen any plans or drawing for the Trident IIC project ?
It seems to have been designed with the area rule.
And also of the Trident III ?

 

[Deleted member 4286]

AW June 27 1957; Paris air Show

 

[Deleted member 4286]

Performances of the Trident II (from wikipedia)

 

[Archibald]

Interesting, in the Griffon thread I noted Mach 1.95 in February 1958. Mach 1.97 of course is even closer and still ahead of the Griffon II (August 1958) and Mirage IIIA-01 (October 24, 1958) Mach 2 flights.

That's just amazing. A three-way race to Mach 2 with three different propulsion systems: jets+rockets, jets+ramjet, and pure jet.

I think however that Wikipedia conclusion is B.S. Whatever happened the Mirage III was more practical (and cheaper and closer from IOC) than both Griffon II and Trident II.
Turboramjet to Mach 2.19 doesn't bring anything compared to Atar 9C to Mach 2.2. As for Trident: rockets were not practical, even if the plane was dynamite (lame pun assumed). On top of that, Mirage IIIC got a rocket too, except far more practical: the SEPR 841/ 844 removeable pack.
Almost importantly, France could not pay for all the types, at least to operational status. Even less with the coming Force de Frappe colossal expense, which was a GO the day De Gaulle cemented his return to power: in the summer of 1958.

Note that the Americans also got a massive glut of Mach 2 fighters the same year, particularly the US Navy.

 

[Deleted member 4286]

Interesting, in the Griffon thread I noted Mach 1.95 in February 1958. Mach 1.97 of course is even closer and still ahead of the Griffon II (August 1958) and Mirage IIIA-01 (October 24, 1958) Mach 2 flights.

That's just amazing. A three-way race to Mach 2 with three different propulsion systems: jets+rockets, jets+ramjet, and pure jet.

I think however that Wikipedia conclusion is bullshit. Whatever happened the Mirage III was more practical (and cheaper and closer from IOC) than both Griffon II and Trident II.
Turboramjet to Mach 2.19 doesn't bring anything compared to Atar 9C to Mach 2.2. As for Trident: rockets were not practical, even if the plane was dynamite (lame pun assumed). On top of that, Mirage IIIC got a rocket too, except far more practical: the SEPR 841/ 844 removeable pack.
Almost importantly, France could not pay for all the types, at least to operational status. Even less with the coming Force de Frappe colossal expense, which was a GO the day De Gaulle cemented his return to power: in the summer of 1958.

Note that the Americans also got a massive glut of Mach 2 fighters the same year, particularly the US Navy.

The conclusions just make a point on the fact that a choice had already been made; they don't compare Trident and Mirage; and they showed that SNCASO didn't want to upset Air Force and French authorities for evident reasons.

 

[Deleted member 4286]

The conclusions just make a point on the fact that a choice had already been made; they don't compare Trident and Mirage; and they showed that SNCASO didn't want to upset Air Force and French authorities for evident reasons.

And at that time the Mirage was not a pure jet but a jet plus rocket plane.

 

[kocovgoce]

I knew so9000 was meant to be а plane that will have to take off from imported runways forward at a speed of 1700 km per hour at short distances like a guided missile to intercept a bomber.The SO9000 does not need an area rule, they had quite thin wings, something like the f-104, and these thin wings reduce the air resistance of the wings

 

[hesham]

From Pegase 1999/4. [Admin - removed pages except first page - this is a current publication]
Available online here - https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb34382520k/date

 

[hesham]

From Pegase 1999/1 [Admin - removed pages except first page - this is a current publication]
Available online here: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb34382520k/date

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I'm not comfortable posting entire long form articles from relatively modern journals for no obvious reason. 'Pégase' is the quarterly magazine of the Society of Friends of the Musée de l'Air and it is possible to buy back issues from them at a reasonable price. They are also available online.

Was there something specifically interesting about the Trident in either of these? If so, you should be mentioning it in your post with some excepts.

 

[hesham]

From, flygrevyn_1957-7.