Vickers (Supermarine) Type 583 / 583V / 584 / 589 VG strike fighter family

[zen]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Did the variable geometry play any role in allowing the type to be able to be
operated from Hermes or could a fixed geometry design have also done so?

Certainly a fixed wing machine can be built to operate from something like Hermes. After all Buccaneers did, and its reasonably clear Crusader ought to.
On the Type 583 I think it is possible, but the margins are less than with a VG wing. Approach speed should be higher with a fixed wing, and Take off loads would be less. That said it assumes a reletively normal wing with normal levels of blow.
Now do we actualy have confirmation this is a Huges missile? It might fit the timeline if this is being offered in '64 with GAR.9, if my memory is working. Though the size does rather vindicate BACs view that the Type 583 and earlier Type 582 will have issues fitting these large missiles.

 

[danielgrimes]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Given fixed geometry designs had swing wing variants - Lightning, Phantom - presumably a fixed geometry variant of the 583 could have been developed?

See http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2949.0.html

The Type 577 was a downsized version of the TSR2 (Type 571), and the Type 576 was a supersonic Scimitar...so yes!

 

[circle-5]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Vickers factory model of proposed Type 583 reconnaissance variant with canoe-type camera fairing. (Courtesy Sir George Cox Collection)

 

[zen]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Fascenating, great find!
Curiously looks like the nose carries recce sensors too.

 

[uk 75]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Remarkable model from a great collection. I continue to find the aircraft itself confusing and inadequately documented. None of the published three views and dimensions seem to fit this and the model shown earlier. The models were produced for the famous BAC Secret Exhibition of 1964.
Had TSR 2 been cancelled earlier in the cycle this would seem to have offered an excellent basis for a collaborative 60s programme?

 

[JFC Fuller]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Agreed,

A fascinating model, assuming that the black square on the nose is meant to be another camera port then it is probably for an oblique camera, the belly pack looks like it is arranged (as far as such a small model can show) for vertical cameras only. Certainly this model looks different to the 583, 589, 590 family that we have seen in the BSP series. It looks like its part TSR-2 and interestingly it does not seem to have the later 583 wing-plan that Damien Burke describes.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Re: Vickers(Supermarine) 583 VG fighter

Round inlets with half-cone centerbodies were on the earliest 583 designs.

My suspicion is these are early 583 designs.

 

[danielgrimes]

Round inlets with half-cone centerbodies were on the earliest 583 designs.

My suspicion is these are early 583 designs.

Mine too - final drawings of the Type 583 had Tornado type intakes (as did the Type 581), so interesting that BAC were doing the 'executive desk toys' at this point. Also interesting that the Type 583s were designed to OR.356 for the Royal Navy - I assume that the recon role was locating the Russian fleet and bomb damage assessment. Assuming my assumption is correct, are those type of recon features consisten with this role?

 

[zen]

Seems reasonable to suspect the wingplan evolved from something like the Lightning, as far as I can see.
All in all it is a very curious matter this aircraft. Wish we had a brochure for it from the 'Secret Exhibition' in '64. That might answer a few questions.

 

[uk 75]

circle-5 I think there is a possibility that Sir George might be getting a third 583, if so it would be great to see pictures here. This has been a great thread for completing what is a still rather thinly covered subject. The 1984 edition of "Project Cancelled" shows 4 models and I think there is a another picture of the same exhibition in a magazine article which shows more, but I have not been able to track it down.
As the exhibition was in 1964 the models were designed to illustrate the capabilities BAC could offer based on its 583 rather than being an operational design. However, the capabilities offered stand comparison with Tornados IDS and ADV that materialised a decade or so later.
It would be interesting to know if anyone at the BAC Warton Historical Society knows more. Knowing the UK the project is probably still classified!

 

[circle-5]

I will be sure to post whatever becomes available for release. It's a slow process.

 

[danielgrimes]

Hmmmm....

That looks like a variant of Type 583, its too small to be TSR.2 with a VG wing. That being based on the size of the cockpit relative to the fusilage.

I've been mulling over and I think it's a Type 589. The 583 has rounded wingtips the 589 had squarer wingtips. The 589 was slightly larger (58ft vs 53ft) and Tony Butler quotes in BSP the 583 being armed with 4 red tops (no references for this though), different to the model above. The only reason I see for it not to be a 589 is that the drawings I have seen of the 589 have a more blended fuselage and wing as per the TSR2.

 

[uk 75]

I think that the Vickers/BAC swing wing family of projects is one of the most fascinating what-ifs. It is overshadowed by the mighty TSR 2 and even by the P1154 because of course these were real Government projects. "Project Cancelled" remains with British Secrets Projects the only comprehensive source but both do not cover the "family" in the depth of say a Chris Gibson profile.
Yet the Vickers/BAC designs could have given Britain a family of aircraft with Tornado like capabilities much earlier. Moreover as designs they compare favourably with Marcel Dassault's various Mirage variants which did get French funding. Like the Mirage IIIV and the Mirage G the various 581-589 designs were not operational aircraft but they were essential to get on the road to Tornado. Besides they are just to so 60s...

 

[uk 75]

Leafing through the new Tony Buttler work on UK Bombers Secret projects, I still found myself confused by the evolution of Vickers and BAC tactical swing wing aircraft.

I think I have the chronology as follows (using pics raided from other threads on this site)

Type 581 to OR346 in 1961 which uses Foxbat/Vigilante style intakes

Type 583 of 1962 which moves over to TSR2 style intakes but appears in both NASA style wing gloves and Swallow style

Finally we evolve into Type 589 with TSR 2 style intakes with NASA wing gloves in 1963.

Confusingly the Type 583 model was shown at a Secret BAC Exhibition in 1964 when the design was already superseded by 589.

Can anyone help further, as none of the publishes sources do.

 

[hesham]

That needs good search.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It's common practice to display old configurations that have been superceded at shows as a way of showing capability without revealing your current design to potential competitors. The point of the 1964 exhibition was to demonstrate that BAC had been working on VG for some time so it's quite expected they would use models of earlier configs.

 

[zen]

So.....to my understanding....one of the factors for different inlets has to be the difference between weight and cost and performance.

The old 'Mouse ears' half conic translating shock-cone type are technically lighter in weight, but fabrication is expensive.
While the square 'ramp-type' inlets are easier to fabricate.

 

[TsrJoe]

not sure how visible the link may be, here's a Facebook album of Type 583 material which may be of interest ? ... https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=oa.595866093915883&type=3

cheers, Joe

 

[uk 75]

Joe
Thanks for the link. The What If Forum
contributed some good models as well.
I remain hooked on these 60s projects.
Shame the published sources do not share
my enthusiasm

 

[starviking]

Joe
Thanks for the link. The What If Forum
contributed some good models as well.
I remain hooked on these 60s projects.
Shame the published sources do not share
my enthusiasm

I probably speak for many forum members when I say that I also share your enthusiasm.

Maybe we'll see a ProjectTech book on the topic in the future...

 

[Foo Fighter]

I tired the facething page but navigation fails.

 

[CJGibson]

Maybe we'll see a ProjectTech book on the topic in the future...


Somebody needs to pitch it and we'll think about it. Can't publish blank pages (although some do).

Your mission is to... proceed up the Nung River in a Navy patrol boat. Pick up Colonel Kurtz's path at Nu Mung Ba, follow it, and…write about the Vickers VG studies

Chris

 

[starviking]

Maybe we'll see a ProjectTech book on the topic in the future...


Somebody needs to pitch it and we'll think about it. Can't publish blank pages (although some do).

Your mission is to... proceed up the Nung River in a Navy patrol boat. Pick up Colonel Kurtz's path at Nu Mung Ba, follow it, and…write about the Vickers VG studies

Chris

Sadly on the wrong side of the planet for it. I will start honing my teleperception skills forthwith.

 

[uk 75]

Chris I am a facebook member but only in a limited way. The link is useful but you have to be a facebook member to use.

I am afraid that my limited skills do not run to research (not least I have no scientific or service knowledge base). I am surprised though that this period
does not interest more historians/technical writers. The plane designs are just so cool.

I covet the What If models (I have had some Philippine copies made by the old Collectors Aircraft Models, but these are not relevant to serious research).
The George Cox collection features heavily in the new Buttler books (it is unique in the UK).

 

[CJGibson]

What Facebook link? Not me guv!

Chris

 

[uk 75]

Sorry paw and brain out of sync, meant Joe

 

[Vahe Demirjian]

Flying Review from 1964 Paris Airshow says BAC put on a display of VG models including VG Lightnings, perhaps that is the exhibition you mean? Unfortunately they include no pics, and my copy of Project Cancelled is the 1975 edition without this picture.

Photo in question appears on page 181 of the 1984 edition of "Project Cancelled."

The caption reads:

"The BAC secret mini-exhibition at Warton in April 1964 showed a variety of VG projects and conversions."

The 4 models at the bottom of the photo look like versions of the AFVG with different weapon loads, but there is a drawing of the top view of a variable geometry "TSR2 Development."

My best bet is the VG models at the bottom of the photo are of the BAC P.45 swing-wing strike plane design, because the mini-exhibition was held after BAC began investigating VG designs of the P.45 starting in February 1963. Info on the P.45 can be found in both editions of the volume British Secret Projects: Jet Bombers Since 1949. It's possible that the BAC English Electric division was investigating the possibility of adapting VG wings on the TSR.2, and used the design of the P.45 as the basis for the AFVG after the TSR.2 was cancelled. There's info about the VG Lightning in Tony Buttler's book British Secret Projects: Jet Fighters Since 1950.

 

[Hood]

My best bet is the VG models at the bottom of the photo are of the BAC P.45 swing-wing strike plane design, because the mini-exhibition was held after BAC began investigating VG designs of the P.45 starting in February 1963. Info on the P.45 can be found in both editions of the volume British Secret Projects: Jet Bombers Since 1949. It's possible that the BAC English Electric division was investigating the possibility of adapting VG wings on the TSR.2, and used the design of the P.45 as the basis for the AFVG after the TSR.2 was cancelled. There's info about the VG Lightning in Tony Buttler's book British Secret Projects: Jet Fighters Since 1950.

No, you have obviously haven't seen the picture otherwise it would be clear that the models in question are not P.45 designs. They are the unidentified VG project BAC were working on around the time of the Type 589 but with circular shock-cone intakes rather than ramp intakes. These have been illustrated by Tony Buttler in both editions of the Bombers post 1950 book.

 

[TsrJoe]

BAC. (Vickers) Type 583 studies

https://m.facebook.com/groups/424714227697738?view=permalink&id=595866087249217

 

[GTX]

BAC. (Vickers) Type 583 studies

https://m.facebook.com/groups/424714227697738?view=permalink&id=595866087249217

No workee...

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Works OK for me but you need to be a member of Joe's Facebook group it seems.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Merged topics. The pics from Joe's link are mostly in this topic.

 

[JFC Fuller]

No definitive answer on the identity of the missile but some marginally informed speculation based on a document at Kew:

Following a "Future Naval Fighter Systems" study, the RAE conducted a theoretical study into next generation air launched guided weapons for the fleet defence role in about 1960/61 with the objective being to equip an aircraft to enter service around 1970. This was conducted in collaboration with DeHavilland, who had a study contract, and it analysed a whole range of configurations and trades between length/diameter, speed/range etc. Basic assumptions were around the weight of the warhead and guidance equipment. My suspicion is that the DeHavilland "Families" described in BSPIV were the product of this study contract.

One of the main requirements used to bound the study was that the missile would equip the Vickers "Swallow", which I am taking to mean the Type 581 in its then current guise as the dates and study processes appear to match with the original OR.346 related VG feasibility study conducted by Vickers and ending in March 1960. A 36 inch AI radar antenna, as included in the Type 581 studies, is also mentioned as an "X-band, coherent pulse radar with a parametric amplifier, operating with a transmitter power of 500 Watts", this also seems to have been entirely theoretical. The missiles were to be carried internally, the stated reasons being issues with alignment and aerodynamic degradation of the aircraft, the former would explain why the wing mounted missiles on this model are on the wing glove - no need for pivoting hard points. The weapons bay on the Swallow is described as having the following dimensions: 19ft long, 3ft wide and a maximum of 3ft deep though the rear 5ft of length was said to be "more restricted". The structural payload limit was 6,000lb but 4,000lb was the maximum that would allow a four hour CAP.

In short, it is possible that the missiles on this model are a configuration looked at in this study. That said, the RN was very interested in the GAR-9 so it is a possible candidate for these missiles too. However, given the role of the Swallow in this study this seems less likely to me.

The basic thinking behind this study, in terms of required missile/weapons system performance and the number of missiles needed per aircraft (4), seems to have made its way into the later AST.1193 effort.

 

[uk 75]

Reading the article on TSR2 successors in this month's Aeroplane magazine and noticing a caption saying Falcon or future UK missile I think like the missile in that drawing the missile under the 589 is a Falcon lookalike.

 

[zen]

Reading the article on TSR2 successors in this month's Aeroplane magazine and noticing a caption saying Falcon or future UK missile I think like the missile in that drawing the missile under the 589 is a Falcon lookalike.View attachment 620086View attachment 620087

But not actual Falcons. More like inspired by it and scaled up....or....is this an early GAR.9 design?

 

[zen]

Another thought, actually a reinforcement of an earlier supposition.....
Those nose cones look very blunt for a supersonic missile.....
But if they where frangible covers for a ramjet inlet, that would make a lot more sense.

In fact if they are 18 inches diameter.....wasn't that a particular diameter Bristol ran in tests for future missile propulsion?

AS I look at the missile wings......I wonder if that's a means to get more area without increasing span too much?

 

[JFC Fuller]

Having looked at the images of the DeHavilland family missiles in BSPIV I am now even more convinced that they were the product of the study contract that DeHavilland had to support the RAE missile study I referenced earlier. The mix of hemispherical and ogival noses, the varying lengths and diameters, the different weight categories and wing configurations all match with the work described in the aforementioned RAE report. This implies that at concept phase the solution to OR.346 was a coherent weapons system based around a VG aircraft with appropriate weapons and radar. This appears to have fallen apart with the decision to pursue the P.1154 which seems to have resulted in a period of relative inaction and extreme debate on potential missile armament, with scepticism as to whether the P.1154 could house the equipment necessary to support a missile designed to AST.1193.

What is apparent from the RAE study is a desire to engage some very demanding targets, mach 3 at 80,000 ft is mentioned. The study specifically states that ramjets weren't considered because they couldn't "compare favourably over the propulsion ranges likely to be achievable". Curiously, there was a strong interest in storable liquid propellents to allow for better control of the burning rate than was possible with solid motors.

It would be interesting to know if it was only DeHavilland that was put under contract to support these early studies. BSPIV mentions that Vickers (specifically John Forbat) created some missile concepts for their VG designs, I wonder whether this was funded internally by Vickers or if they had their own contract?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Drawing posted by Paul Chapman on British Aircraft of Prototype / Experimental and Proposed Designs Only. Facebook page appears to be Model 589.

I spent time in the transonic wind tunnel when I was a Brooklands apprentice in the late 1960s. I doubt if Model 26 was tested there somehow although I may have found this among the scrap. I presume it is an earlier AFVG model. Sadly the wing pivot point is not shown since that was critical. Thinks...maybe these tests were linked to Barnes Wallis?

Looks like one of the Vickers/BAC VG projects, 583, (584 was single engined but similar) 585, 589. Away from my references so can't check but I think it's likely to be either Type 583 or 589 as it looks to be a two seater.
It's one of the later variations as it's got the Tornado style ramp intakes, whereas earlier ones had TSR2 style circular intakes with shock cones. There's a model of the Type 589 with the circular intakes.

Norman Church I would agree, it looks identical to the Type 589, checking in Tony Buttler's British Secret Project (vol 3) it looks to be the design dated 28/1/1963.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Model 583 later version with ramp intakes.

source: www.the-blueprints.com (possibly from BSP: Jet Fighters)

 

[hesham]

Also;

https://kplanes.tumblr.com%2Fpost%2F130839749965

View: https://kplanes.tumblr.com/post/130839749965/k-planes-episode-85-sharing-is-caring