Avro C102 Jetliner

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...

Looking at my picture of the airliner I can see a standard piston
engine design airframe with four small Derwent centrifugal engines. I
would posit that the thick airfoils would limit its speed to say .75
max (if that) and probably about 300 IAS just like the Convair 240 it
resembles. The four low-pressure centrifugals guzzle fuel hungrily.
With the Comet all ready to go the bird was a non-starter despite the
PR advantage of offering 'jet service'. The Canadian Gov did their
airlines a service - or they would have been in a fix just like
Eastern was when Eddie Rickenbacker eschewed true jets for the
turboprop Electra and very shortly AA and National ate his lunch.


The Jetliner was designed to a TCA requirement of 400 mph cruise, the
prototype achieved cruise speeds of 450 mph. That's almost 200 mph over
Convair 240 cruise speeds.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message link.net...
SNIP:
The Jetliner was designed to a TCA requirement of 400 mph cruise, the
prototype achieved cruise speeds of 450 mph. That's almost 200 mph over
Convair 240 cruise speeds.

Nevertheless the wings and horizontal stabilizer are visibly thicker
in proportion to chord than on present-day jet transports. The 602
might 'cruise' at 400 mph (almost 350 knots) but certainly not at
lower altitudes because it would soon run out of fuel, consumption
being about 2 1/2 times greater down low. At altitude (30000) that 400
mph would give about .6Mach with an indicated airspeed around 150
plus. BTW when did the Canadians hang the Eland on the 440? I got a
ride in a T29(440)(ex-AF2) with Allison 501s and it could cruise (!)
at Vne. Very nice airplane - Washington ANG had it back then.
Walt BJ

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...

Nevertheless the wings and horizontal stabilizer are visibly thicker
in proportion to chord than on present-day jet transports.


So what?



The 602 might 'cruise' at 400 mph (almost 350 knots) but certainly
not at lower altitudes because it would soon run out of fuel, consumption
being about 2 1/2 times greater down low.


It demonstrated cruise speeds of 450 mph, about 390 knots. Cruise altitude
was in the 30,000' region, where fuel consumption was lower and the air was
smoother.



At altitude (30000) that 400 mph would give about .6 Mach with an
indicated airspeed around 150 plus.


I gotta assume that's a typo. The IAS would be about 250 under those
conditions.

But at altitude (30000) 450 mph TAS would give about .66 Mach with an
indicated airspeed around 280 mph. Significantly faster than a Convair 240.



BTW when did the Canadians hang the Eland on the 440?


Did the Canadians hang Elands on actual Convair 440s? Canadair bought the
design and the jigs from Convair and built an Eland-engined aircraft as the
Canadair 540. I believe the first one flew in 1960. Of course, the deal
probably included a fair amount of Convair parts and assemblies, perhaps the
first one actually was a reengined Convair. Allegheny operated a small
fleet of Eland-engined 340s briefly in the early 60s, they were designated
Convair 540s. When Eland production ceased they were converted back to the
R-2800.



I got a ride in a T29 (440) (ex-AF2) with Allison 501s and it could
cruise (!) at Vne. Very nice airplane - Washington ANG had it back then.


I believe T-29s were all Convair 240s. I also believe the USAF acquired a
few Convair 440s that had been converted to Allison-engined 580s and
designated them VC-131D, but can't confirm.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:



Did the Canadians hang Elands on actual Convair 440s? Canadair bought the
design and the jigs from Convair and built an Eland-engined aircraft as the
Canadair 540. I believe the first one flew in 1960. Of course, the deal
probably included a fair amount of Convair parts and assemblies, perhaps the
first one actually was a reengined Convair. Allegheny operated a small
fleet of Eland-engined 340s briefly in the early 60s, they were designated
Convair 540s. When Eland production ceased they were converted back to the
R-2800.

As well, the RCAF operated about 6 or 7 Napier Eland 540's. Known
as the 'Cosmopolitan'. They were a very quiet comfortable
aircraft (if you didn't know about the reliability of the Eland).

If you did then it was 'white knuckle time' (that engine was a
horror to keep trimmed and keep operating) I have quite a bit of
time on them as Flight Engineer. (1963 till 69 - probably lost 8
or 10 engines inflight in only 2 or 3 years) They re-engined them
with the Allison 501-D36-A7A sometime in the mid-sixties (my
logbooks are in the bedroom and my wife's sleeping). Beautiful
aircraft then!...Hot rod for sure.

We (foolishly) took one to 45,000 feet once (to beat another crew
who had one to 40,000 the day before. (Took full power for the
last 1,000 feet)



I got a ride in a T29 (440) (ex-AF2) with Allison 501s and it could
cruise (!) at Vne. Very nice airplane - Washington ANG had it back then.



Yes and you were never 'committed to land' ever, just pork on
METO power and pull up and away you go (even in the middle of the
flare!) Hot aircraft. We used to take off at METO (Climb power)
until the manufacturer heard about it...he slapped our wrists
because it violated the warranty (or somesuch foolishness)


I believe T-29s were all Convair 240s. I also believe the USAF acquired a
few Convair 440s that had been converted to Allison-engined 580s and
designated them VC-131D, but can't confirm.


Ours were 540 when engined with the Napier Eland and 580 with the
Allison.

We called them CC-109 Cosmopolitans. I have something like 2500
hours logged on them.
--

-Gord.

In article . net,
"Steven P. McNicoll" writes:
I believe T-29s were all Convair 240s. I also believe the USAF acquired a
few Convair 440s that had been converted to Allison-engined 580s and
designated them VC-131D, but can't confirm.

There were a whole slew of Convair 240/340/440s in U.S. Service.
Here's the breakdown I've got:
46 Model 240-17 as T-29A (14 Nav Stations, unpressurized)
105 Model 240-27 as T-29B (10 Nav Stations, 4 Radar Nav,
pressurized)
119 Model 240-27 as T-29C
93 Model 240-52 as T-29D (K-System Bombardier trainer)
26 Model 240-53 as C-131A Medivac transports
36 Model 340-70 as C-131B Most were used as test platforms
2 Model 340-36 as YC-131C turboprop testbeds. Flown by the
1707th ATW at Kelly AFB, along with
a pair or turboprop C-97s, a pair
of turboprop C-121s, and a
turboprop C-124.
16 Model 340-67 as VC-131D Staff Transports
1 Model 340-68 as VC-131D (Ordered by Lufthansa)
16 Model 340-79 as C-131D
15 Model 440-72 as C-131E ECM trainers.

3 C-131Ds adn 1 C-131E were converted by Pacific Airmotive to
C-131Hs, which were basicaly Model 580s, with T56 turboprops.
They went to the USN in 1979.
Oh, yeah, I almost forget! One C-131B was converted to C-131H
standards, then further modified as the Total In-FLight
Simulator, flown by Calspan. Basically you could dial in a
set of stability definitions, and control laws, and ruin a
Test Pilot's day in a controlled manner.

--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster