Various aviation projects from South Africa

Very slightly different picture of the same thing Graugrun posted, as can be seen from the guy's hand who is lying down.
Unfortunately, an even worse picture wrt clarity.

I'm wondering whether this is the ACW or something else...
Is that a canard near the chin of fellow kneeling, or not?
 

Attachments

  • unidentifi0001.JPG
    unidentifi0001.JPG
    16.6 KB · Views: 1,097
It looks like a canard to me, however the more I look at the aircraft the more it looks like a little more than just a Cheetah with the ACW (and wingtip rails). The wing shape seems to be a lot wider and a slightly different shape than what I remember the ACW to be (not that I'm an expert on ACW by any means).

Remember that Carver was initially a single engine aircraft (like that pictured) - and it would make sense that what they developed wing-wise as part of the Carver program, they could then extrapolate this development into Cheetah program as the ACW, which due to the high cost they wanted for the ACW was never accepted (on the Cheetah Program).

I mean was there ever a definitive program to specifically develop the ACW for the Cheetah program - and why...? I doubt it, it was not covered in the Cheetah program and was offered later as a bolt-on solution - I would put my money on that it was rather just a spin-off of the Carver program...

So could the above possibly be one of the wind tunnel model options of the all elusive Carver....

I need to dig some additional ACW info up and post it (for some more reference).
 
I think you are correct there Graugrun.

I seem to recall another engineer on the SAAF forums who was part of the ACW project.
I'm operating from memory here, but I do seem to recall that although he didn't come out and say it, the gist of what he was saying was that the ACW for the Cheetah was a spinoff from Carver.

They looked at leading edge slats and different fixed profiles for Carvers wing, of which a modified drooped extended leading edge was found to be readily translatable into a Cheetah or Mirage III upgrade.

Certainly, from what I know of the timescales, the ACW seems to be well after the various Carver designs had started to be windtunnel-tested.

The wing chord does look different to me too, quite apart from the wing tip extensions and reduced sweep. Difficult to be sure though...

Also, apparently from various sources over the years, some of the various Carver wind tunnel models or configuartions could be seen openly at the CSIR wind tunnel facilities for quite a while to guests, but obviously not so readily photographed.

Over on keyforums a few years back, a fellow who worked at Denel said that although he had not worked on the project himself, he had seen some of the engineering drawings, and would check at work to see whether "it was time for more info to be released".
Unfortunately, an infrequent poster already, he stopped posting after that.

I'd really like to know more about this aircraft.
 
Just to add, I seem to recall that canards were looked at, but discarded, as the chief designer thought they were a fad, and didn't place much stock in them.

Again, operating from memory here, so I might be wrong.
 
IIRC - I was told that Fabish/Fabrish was a great proponent of canards....
 
Graugrun said:
IIRC - I was told that Fabish/Fabrish was a great proponent of canards....

I'd heard the opposite about David Fabish, hence their absence on the Mirage 2000.
This was as told to me by the engineer over on the Saaf forum.

As said before though, I could be wrong, as indeed could the engineer, if he was operating from memory.

Just shows though that one cannot be quite so sure unless one could ask him directly...

Either way, from what I can gather, both canard and non-canard configurations were looked at.

This is from "Cheetahs: Guardians of the Nation", and shows part of the Carver design team in frnt of what appears to be a jig with some patterns and a fuselage frame.
 

Attachments

  • CARVER-Gaurdiansofournation-image.jpg
    CARVER-Gaurdiansofournation-image.jpg
    79.3 KB · Views: 490
I've then properly got it wrong on David Fabish - so the chances are less then of it being one of the Carver wind tunnel models - however that wing shape just looks a little too different... To me the grey painted model in the top pic looks like the wind tunnel model, just with wing tip railings (and canards) on...

Regards Carver in general, as per TEL - if it's still not on view/open intel today, then someone else is using it, or using a lot of it's tech.
 
Graugrun said:
I've then properly got it wrong on David Fabish - so the chances are less then of it being one of the Carver wind tunnel models - however that wing shape just looks a little too different... To me the grey painted model in the top pic looks like the wind tunnel model, just with wing tip railings on...

Regards Carver in general, as per TEL - if it's still not on view/open intel today, then someone else is using it, or using a lot of it's tech.

You might be right re the canards, and I might be wrong. I'm relying on memory.
It's just that I recall the fellow mentioning that Fabish wasn't a great fan of canards, as up to that stage I'd thought or assumed the end result of Carver might feature them.

That pic might be a Cheetah with ACW, but it could equally be one of the Carver configurations. From my understanding they tested quite a few, including canards. As said, the wing chord/shape looks different to me too, so it's not just you. But again, difficult to be sure from such poor quality images...

It's funny. There are quite a few Cheetah windtunnel models on the net, yet none of the Carver, even though posters on other forums confirm that they were to be seen at the CSIR for a while.

From what I can gather, David Fabish was one of the designers of the Mirage 2000. There was some speculation about where he went to after the Carver was cancelled...
 
The more I look at the silver wind tunnel model, the lessor it looks like a Cheetah, especially compared to this Cheetah model. The tail, body shape etc, are quite different.
 

Attachments

  • SCAN0013 Cheetah.jpg
    SCAN0013 Cheetah.jpg
    969.1 KB · Views: 305
sa_bushwar said:
The more I look at the silver wind tunnel model, the lessor it looks like a Cheetah, especially compared to this Cheetah model. The tail, body shape etc, are quite different.

That's what Graugrun and I are also thinking.
That possibly what we are seeing is either a Cheetah with ACW, or very possibly one of the Carver versions perhaps...
Here are his and my slightly different pics together. His is on the last page and is better than the one I posted.
 

Attachments

  • ACW-01.jpg
    ACW-01.jpg
    71.3 KB · Views: 785
  • 000006.JPG
    000006.JPG
    25.2 KB · Views: 740
kaiserbill said:
sa_bushwar said:
The more I look at the silver wind tunnel model, the lessor it looks like a Cheetah, especially compared to this Cheetah model. The tail, body shape etc, are quite different.

That's what Graugrun and I are also thinking.
That possibly what we are seeing is either a Cheetah with ACW, or very possibly one of the Carver versions perhaps...
Here are his and my slightly different pics together. His is on the last page and is better than the one I posted.

Just noticed in the top RH corner of my photo of the silver wind tunnel model; that there is another wind tunnel model in the background. Looks like another Mirage F1. Pity I only had a 36 exposure chemical film camera then!
 

Attachments

  • 3 mistery windtunnel model.jpg
    3 mistery windtunnel model.jpg
    52.2 KB · Views: 780
The SMR-95, a slightly re-designed Russian RD-33 engine with which they hoped to replace the Atar 09K50 and Atar 09C engines on our Mirage F-1's and Cheetah's. Interestingly enough they hoped to also provide us with the A-11 (NATO) AAM and even the RVV-AE/R-77 (NATO - AA-12 Adder) AMRAAM type missiles - could have worked at the time.

What I am not so sure about is the Helmet mounted sight/aiming system (our own designed helmet sights/helmet mounted mini HUDs were far more advanced than what the Russians had developed), and a Russian HUD (I think we had decent enough HUD's at the time).

The attached Rosoboronexport brochure should cover most the specs and answer a few questions on this project. I also have another brochure from Marvol/Marvotech on this project that I still need to post.

Note - although the brochure would have you believe there was very little input from South Africa, there was in fact a lot of critical design, development and testing work done by Aerosud - in fact it was pretty much a joint 50-50 project to integrate the engines into the Cheetah and F-1.
 

Attachments

  • SMR-95-18.jpg
    SMR-95-18.jpg
    489.5 KB · Views: 294
  • SMR-95-17.jpg
    SMR-95-17.jpg
    494.5 KB · Views: 262
  • SMR-95-16.jpg
    SMR-95-16.jpg
    500 KB · Views: 247
  • SMR-95-15.jpg
    SMR-95-15.jpg
    529.9 KB · Views: 236
  • SMR-95-14.jpg
    SMR-95-14.jpg
    404.8 KB · Views: 230
  • SMR-95-13.jpg
    SMR-95-13.jpg
    453.9 KB · Views: 239
  • SMR-95-12.jpg
    SMR-95-12.jpg
    463.4 KB · Views: 174
  • SMR-95-11.jpg
    SMR-95-11.jpg
    177.2 KB · Views: 669
  • SMR-95-10.jpg
    SMR-95-10.jpg
    323.5 KB · Views: 720
One more of the F1CZ with the R-73E:
 

Attachments

  • Dassault Mirage F-1CZ with R-37E AAMs_01.JPG
    Dassault Mirage F-1CZ with R-37E AAMs_01.JPG
    36.8 KB · Views: 215
More on the Super Mirage F1AZ, including some aviation cheesecake.
 

Attachments

  • 20100102_bbb6fc8819b3bdec73c8xsb1mSDDtpmP.JPG
    20100102_bbb6fc8819b3bdec73c8xsb1mSDDtpmP.JPG
    91.5 KB · Views: 356
  • 20100102_1949309ec64298b00c5axl8YywT8K88b.JPG
    20100102_1949309ec64298b00c5axl8YywT8K88b.JPG
    87.8 KB · Views: 335
  • Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_06.JPG
    Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_06.JPG
    312.1 KB · Views: 211
  • Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_05.jpg
    Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_05.jpg
    99.1 KB · Views: 180
  • Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_04.jpg
    Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_04.jpg
    85.2 KB · Views: 191
  • Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_03.jpg
    Dassault Super Mirage F-1AZ_03.jpg
    95.6 KB · Views: 196
Some pics I took at DEXSA...
 

Attachments

  • DSC00041.JPG
    DSC00041.JPG
    105.9 KB · Views: 165
  • DSC00042.JPG
    DSC00042.JPG
    138.9 KB · Views: 159
  • DSC00043.JPG
    DSC00043.JPG
    110 KB · Views: 138
  • DSC00044.JPG
    DSC00044.JPG
    94.2 KB · Views: 136
  • DSC00045.JPG
    DSC00045.JPG
    98.8 KB · Views: 182
One question: Was the F1CZ re-engined with the SMR95 as the brochure implies, or the re-engining was limited to the AZ shown in most of the photos?
 
One tends to forget how much development work goes into aircraft development such as the Rooivalk - the picture below compares the pre-production prototype with the model in service with 16 Sqn in Bloemfontein.
 

Attachments

  • Rooivalk toe-en-nou.jpg
    Rooivalk toe-en-nou.jpg
    89.9 KB · Views: 306
Here is a classic example of why the art department doesn't get to design the next fighter. From an ARMSCOR advert from 1991: the South African forward swept wing, butterfly tail, four intake (!), single engine fighter! I will offer the apologies now to Northrop and Edgar Schmued for the disservice done to their F-5.
 

Attachments

  • armsor_fighter.png
    armsor_fighter.png
    901.2 KB · Views: 341
  • armscor_advert.png
    armscor_advert.png
    897.2 KB · Views: 320
Page 5 Reply 71 SA Bushwar posted an intriguing newspaper report about an RPV incident at the time. The newspaper article speculated it could have been a UAV called Eyrie, which I had not heard of before.
I've taken the liberty of posting that article from SA Bushwar again, which is the first attachment.


The next two is another report from AAFJ in 1987 that describes this Eyrie, or a development thereof, further.
Designed by Dr Maitland Reed of National Dynamics, it had an interesting joined-wing configuration.
 

Attachments

  • 1 (12) Eyrie.jpg
    1 (12) Eyrie.jpg
    697 KB · Views: 202
  • Eyrie01.jpg
    Eyrie01.jpg
    185.7 KB · Views: 194
  • Eyrie02.jpg
    Eyrie02.jpg
    228.3 KB · Views: 180
Abraham Gubler said:
Here is a classic example of why the art department doesn't get to design the next fighter. From an ARMSCOR advert from 1991: the South African forward swept wing, butterfly tail, four intake (!), single engine fighter! I will offer the apologies now to Northrop and Edgar Schmued for the disservice done to their F-5.

Perhaps the inner "inlets" are actually for boundary layer removal?
 
This was posted on facebook.


It shows the Atar Plus test team next to a Mirage F1AZ, as can be seen by the label on the air intake just aft of the roundel.


I wasn't aware that there was an Atar Plus flight test programme.


Note the old camouflage colour of the F1AZ, which had a new, different colour camouflage scheme in the years before being retired in 1997.
Thus, I'm wondering whether the camouflage colours can therefore be used as an indicator of a rough date for when the pic was taken?
 

Attachments

  • AtarPlusTestTeam.jpg
    AtarPlusTestTeam.jpg
    51.9 KB · Views: 1,467
While the 20mm gunship mount (picture below) on a SAAF Allouette III helicopter was used extensively during the Bush War in the ground fire support role, can anyone confirm if the 4 x 7.62mm version was deployed operationally?
 

Attachments

  • PIC00282.jpg
    PIC00282.jpg
    135.1 KB · Views: 1,341
  • 068.jpg
    068.jpg
    91.8 KB · Views: 1,271
  • 9 (21).jpg
    9 (21).jpg
    502.2 KB · Views: 1,228
sa_bushwar said:
While the 20mm gunship mount (picture below) on a SAAF Allouette III helicopter was used extensively during the Bush War in the ground fire support role, can anyone confirm if the 4 x 7.62mm version was deployed operationally?

A similar mount for Browning guns (ex-Provost trainers) was used in Rhodesia.
 

Attachments

  • 4x0.303-mg_7544942502_9e0f859df6.jpg
    4x0.303-mg_7544942502_9e0f859df6.jpg
    63.8 KB · Views: 1,058
The quad mount on the K Car was supplied by South Africa. It is detailed in Petter-Bowyer's "Winds of Destruction". From memory it was the "Cat's Eye" (Katts Ogg in Afrikaans) designed and built by CSIR (SA). The mount was remotely controlled linked to a point and shoot operated by the gunner. Similar to the original gunner's sight on the AH-1G Cobra. The Browning .303 was standard air to ground MG for the Rhodesians so used rather than the MAG-58 which was used by the Army.
 
In the absence of a dedicated Rooivalk threat, here is a collage of the development of the Rooivalk attack helicopter. See if you can spot the changes over time.
 

Attachments

  • Rooivalk coulage.png
    Rooivalk coulage.png
    1 MB · Views: 261
Abraham Gubler said:
The quad mount on the K Car was supplied by South Africa. It is detailed in Petter-Bowyer's "Winds of Destruction". From memory it was the "Cat's Eye" (Katts Ogg in Afrikaans) designed and built by CSIR (SA). The mount was remotely controlled linked to a point and shoot operated by the gunner. Similar to the original gunner's sight on the AH-1G Cobra. The Browning .303 was standard air to ground MG for the Rhodesians so used rather than the MAG-58 which was used by the Army.
I have seen photos of Rhodesian helicopters mounting the FN MAG. But I seem to recall that the Browning was preferred because, being an aircraft gun, it had roughly twice the rate of fire. The Browning was in short supply, however.
 
kaiserbill said:
sa_bushwar said:
The more I look at the silver wind tunnel model, the lessor it looks like a Cheetah, especially compared to this Cheetah model. The tail, body shape etc, are quite different.

That's what Graugrun and I are also thinking.
That possibly what we are seeing is either a Cheetah with ACW, or very possibly one of the Carver versions perhaps...
Here are his and my slightly different pics together. His is on the last page and is better than the one I posted.

From: http://www.saairforce.co.za/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=6555&start=15; this should add some clarification.
 

Attachments

  • unidentifi0003.jpg
    unidentifi0003.jpg
    71.4 KB · Views: 203
  • 000003.jpg
    000003.jpg
    27.5 KB · Views: 175
  • 000004.jpg
    000004.jpg
    51.4 KB · Views: 164
  • 000006.jpg
    000006.jpg
    25.2 KB · Views: 146
On Page 4 of this thread, the Denel SARA regional turboprop, announced in Sept 2014, was shown.


Some excerpts below, from a very comprehensive article at the link below.


Sara is not a technology vanity project. It is planned and intended as a profit-making programme to fill an identified niche in the global aviation sector. “We believe there’s a need in the market for more point-to-point travel, especially in Africa, in the 10- to 40-seat segment,” says Dockrat. Air traffic across the continent is growing rapidly. There is a need to directly link smaller centres to larger ones, both within and between countries. “Everything currently available out there is old technology.” “The current African regional transport fleet is largely composed of ex-Soviet, ex-Russian, ex-Ukrainian aircraft,” notes Barker. “New aircraft are needed.”

snip........

The Sara project team was also influenced by overseas studies into 19-seat regional aircraft (close enough to the original 20-seat concept). In the US, certification of such aircraft, unless they are used for scheduled flights, falls under Federal Aviation Administration regulations known as FAR 23 (for Federal Aviation Regulation No 23). US certification is very widely accepted outside America and so it is a highly convenient option. And FAR 23 is the cheapest certification option for a 19-seater. So, at first, Denel inclined towards seeking FAR 23 certification for the Sara. However, on reflection, it was realised that, to allow the aircraft to undertake scheduled services (studies showed scheduled flights would make up 66% of the market), it would have to be certified under FAR 25, which would make the Sara more expensive because it required the aeroplane to have more backup systems. On the other hand, FAR 25 covers aircraft with a passenger capacity of up to 25 seats. That allowed Denel to enlarge Sara.

..................


Currently, three versions of the Sara are planned. A airliner version would carry 24 passengers. A combi version would be able to carry 12 passengers and one LD2 cargo pallet. A freight version would be able to transport three LD2 pallets. It would have a maximum takeoff weight of 8 400 kg, a ferry range of 1 500 nautical miles (nm) but a typical operating range of 500 nm and be pressurised, so it could fly high and above the weather. Powered by two turboprops, it would have a designed cruising speed of more than 300 knots (kts – 556 km/h) and an economical cruising speed of 280 kts (519 km/h). Takeoff distance, under hot and high conditions, would be less than 900 m. It would have a length of 15.3 m, a height of 5.7 m and a wingspan of 20.9 m. The cabin would be 6.02 m long, 1.91 m high and 2.93 m wide. In the passenger version, the seating would be 2 + 2 with a central aisle and a block of four seats together at the rear. There would also be a toilet and a seat for a flight attendant. It would be flown by a pilot and copilot.

...............................


Denel is currently building a full-size mock-up of the aircraft (although it will only have stub wings, as full wings will not be required). This will also serve as a kind of test rig to check the ease of ingress and egress on the part of passengers, seat layouts, other internal cabin arrangements, basic cockpit arrangements and so on. As a result, the mock-up has to be solidly constructed, using wood, metal joiners, glass fibre and heavy-duty polystyrene.

..............................

Facilities available at the CSIR include several wind tunnels, covering a speed range from Mach 0.2 to Mach 4.3 (The Mach number is the speed of sound in the atmosphere, which, expressed in kilometres per hour, varies with height.) For Sara, it would obviously be the lower speed wind tunnels that would be needed.
http://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/denels-bold-new-regional-aircraft-project-2014-11-07


The data/dimensions and configuration given in the article is obviously still in the prelim stages, as alluded to in the full article in the link.
What is interesting at this stage is that the they are looking at quite a wide fuselage, with a cabin width of almost 3 meters.

 

Attachments

  • denelSara0005.jpg
    denelSara0005.jpg
    329 KB · Views: 184
  • DenelSara0003.jpg
    DenelSara0003.jpg
    103.3 KB · Views: 159
  • 0000370456_resized_0000368723denelsouthafricanregionalaircraftsaraprototype21014duane1022.jpg
    0000370456_resized_0000368723denelsouthafricanregionalaircraftsaraprototype21014duane1022.jpg
    86.4 KB · Views: 105
  • 0000370455_resized_0000368722saraheadon0001copy1022.jpg
    0000370455_resized_0000368722saraheadon0001copy1022.jpg
    61.2 KB · Views: 105
  • 0000370454_resized_0000368721saralanding0000copy1022.jpg
    0000370454_resized_0000368721saralanding0000copy1022.jpg
    71.2 KB · Views: 125
  • 0000370448_resized_flagship.jpg
    0000370448_resized_flagship.jpg
    182.3 KB · Views: 139
This is the third report I have seen regards a potential Rooivalk 2 being developed - since it is from IHS Janes this time, I have sat up and taken proper notice. I suppose there is the possibility of it being done, if one other international party puts up at least half of the funding, or more... (the article says there are two that are interested).

I had previously read that it would most likely be a bit smaller than the original Rooivalk - which is quite a large helicopter.

I can sort of guess at the two possible international parties - but rather does anyone else have any thoughts or educated guesses as to who they could be...?

http://www.janes.com/article/51180/rooivalk-2-under-consideration
 

Attachments

  • 1634464_-_main.jpg
    1634464_-_main.jpg
    60.4 KB · Views: 170
From www: Very unusual camouflage scheme on this SAAF Impala - shiny brown and tan as opposed to the normal matt dark green and brown
 

Attachments

  • 11072523_690699124386290_3010156231799219284_n Bruin Impala.jpg
    11072523_690699124386290_3010156231799219284_n Bruin Impala.jpg
    90.4 KB · Views: 241
sa_bushwar said:
From www: Very unusual camouflage scheme on this SAAF Impala - shiny brown and tan as opposed to the normal matt dark green and brown


Has two tones of brown in there. Seems to remind me of the Macchi prototype 326K? Maybe this was a promotional scheme before ARMSCOR decided to order the Impala Mk 2?
 
Abraham Gubler said:
sa_bushwar said:
From www: Very unusual camouflage scheme on this SAAF Impala - shiny brown and tan as opposed to the normal matt dark green and brown


Has two tones of brown in there. Seems to remind me of the Macchi prototype 326K? Maybe this was a promotional scheme before ARMSCOR decided to order the Impala Mk 2?

Coastline looks more Italian than South African....
 
sa_bushwar said:
Abraham Gubler said:
sa_bushwar said:
From www: Very unusual camouflage scheme on this SAAF Impala - shiny brown and tan as opposed to the normal matt dark green and brown


Has two tones of brown in there. Seems to remind me of the Macchi prototype 326K? Maybe this was a promotional scheme before ARMSCOR decided to order the Impala Mk 2?

Coastline looks more Italian than South African....


That is definitely Saldanha Bay, along the west coast of South Africa.
I know it very well.

The Impala would be from the large nearby Langebaanweg Air Force base.
In the distance on the peninsula above the Impala is the town of Saldanha Bay.
To the left, out of picture, the bay extends for about 20km, becoming Langebaan Lagoon.
Below the Impala, the jetty, is the end of the Shishen to Saldanha railway, which runs iron ore in some of the longest, heaviest trains in the world.
It held the record for many years with a 660 wagon train almost 8km long transporting almost 70 000t of ore.


Nearby were massive earth ramparts holding much of South Africas strategic oil reserves in underground tanks. Again, some of the largest infrastructure of it's type, holding 45 million barrels of oil. This was loaded off by oiltanker and run to the storage tanks via pipe.


Apart from a small nearby naval base, just outside the pic on the top left is another, isolated headland which forms the opposite side of the mouth of the bay. Here one would find the Recce special forces base.


It's an old picture, as more infrastructure is now in place, such as a larger new jetty/quay.


Interesting and nice (if dry) part of the world that held many strategic facilities for South Africa, but is now known more for the burgeoning town of Langebaan on the banks of the lagoon, and for tourism.
 
Saw this at the PE SAAF museum in July 2007, but it is not there anymore. Not sure if it military. Anybody has more info?
 

Attachments

  • DSC02302.jpg
    DSC02302.jpg
    83.1 KB · Views: 191
  • DSC02303.jpg
    DSC02303.jpg
    116.1 KB · Views: 194

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom