The Arrow - Canadian Interceptor

Channel Hopper

Suffering fools, so you don't have to.
Staff member
My Satellite Setup
A little less analogue, and a lot more crap.
My Location
UK
Not really a retro tech device, as it was sufficiently advanced for its time.

A couple of hours can be pleasantly wasted on searching through Google on the what ifs of this amazing plane, but heres one for starters (with additional links)

 
Last edited:
Let's not forget the TSR2:

http://members.aol.com/nicholash1/tsr2.htm .

www.aemann.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/aircraft/virtraf/tsr2.html .

Plagued by problems - like most such projects - then cancelled just on the point of being successful!

Final cancellation was due - I think - to the Sidney Hooker's Olympus engines being "not quite up to it", although they were later on, and much of the technology was re-used in Concorde.

NB, there's a famous book called "project cancelled", a history of British aerospace projects that "almost" made it, then were junked just before completion!
 
spiney said:
Looks odd, due to "cannards", a supersonic technique not used now.


The Eurofighter Typhoon has canards, is it really obselete already ?:eek:
 
er, um, oops, mumble, dither ......

Can I change that to "canards were temporarily unfashionable"?
 
Almost forgot the original designer
 
Canards, what i really meant was ..... (I'm always saying that!).

Yes, they were on the Wright Bros flyer, before they "officially" even existed, but after that, bi-plane (and tri-plane!) and mono-plane design "settled down" to a standard configuration of main front wings, and tailplane section behind.

They "came back in" during 1950s, as a solution to supersonic stalling problems, where the airflow pattern suddenly changes while passing through Mach 1. Especially favoured by French designers on Mirage aircraft. The alternative Anglo-American solution was the delta wing, giving a gradual airflow transition across the large leading edge and surface.

As I understand it, there was a row during Concord(e)'s design. The French originally wanted canards, the Brits didn't and eventually got their way, I can't remember how this was resolved.

There's much info on Internet, some above from Channel Hopper, also for example see:

www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Theories_of_Flight/supersonic_flow/TH22.htm .

Another solution was vari-sweep wings, not a good idea:

www.pilotfriend.com/century-of-flight/Aviation%20history/evolution%20of%20technology/Variable-Sweep%20Wings.htm .

(added). I can't find any Internet refs to "Concord canards", but here's a "most excellent Concord(e) page", so party on .....

www.jameshovercraft.co.uk/concorde/ .
 
spiney said:
As I understand it, there was a row during Concord(e)'s design. The French originally wanted canards, the Brits didn't and eventually got their way, I can't remember how this was resolved.

I can't find any Internet refs to "Concord canards",.......


You would need to search for the Tupolev TU-144 to find them. Russia had put them on the plane, but the rest of the design was rather similar , unfortunately the cost of maintaining the planes, the lack of viable cost effective flight routs for the plane and a couple of worrying incidents, put paid to the competition.

Google (or WebFerret) TU-144. If memory serves me correctly it was a bit faster than Concorde as well.
 
Yes I think Concordski sorry the Tupolev TU-144 had the canards, I feel sure I have seen them on one of those beauties.
 
Truly a lovely sight

Best picture I could find - courtesy Airliners.net
 
Yes, indeed, canards certainly were used on the "Concordski", a poor design - unfortunately, out of a desire to "compete" - not well thought of in the west, half the range of Concord, and it famously crashed in a spectacular way!

I'll look for the "concord canards" stuff, if I can find the original book .....

(added) PS, some interesting stuff:

www.answers.com/topic/tupolev-tu-144 !
 
Apparently they are once again all the rage.

 
Back
Top