This
republication has been made possible thanks to
the assistance of The
Royal Aeronautical Society and
Dr. James C. Floyd. This is quite a
lengthy lecture and was presented in
December 1958. At that time the Arrow
was in phase one flight tests.
We hope you enjoy this piece of aviation history. Scott McArthur. Webmaster, Arrow Recovery
Canada.
The Fourteenth British
Commonwealth Lecture
The Canadian Approach to All-Weather
Interceptor Development
by
J. C. FLOYD, A.M.C.T., P.Eng., F.C.A.l.,
M.I.A.S., F.R.Ac.S.
(Vice-President, Engineering, Avro Aircraft Limited, Canada)
The
Fourteenth British Commonwealth Lecture," The
Canadian Approach to All-Weather Interceptor Development," by
Mr.J. C. FLOYD, A.M.C.T., P.Eng., F.C.A.l., M.I.A.S.,
F.R.Ac.S. was given in the 9th October 1958 at the
Royal Institution, Albemarle Street, London, W.1.
The Chair was taken by Dr. E. S. Moult, C.B.E., Ph.D., B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S.,
Vice-president of the Society, deputising for the President, Sir Arnold
Hall, M.A., F.R.S., F.R.Ae.S., who was ill.
Dr. Moult first read a telegram from the President and then introduced
the Lecturer, a distinguished Canadian engineer, for this Fourteenth
Commonwealth Lecture. Mr. Floyd joined A. V. Roe and Co. Ltd., at Manchester,
as an apprentice in 1929, progressing through the design and production
offices to become Chief Projects Engineer in 1944. Immediately after
the War he joined A. V. Roe Canada Ltd., at first as Chief Technical
Officer, becoming Chief Design Engineer in 1949, Works Manager 1951,
and Chief Engineer in 1952. He is now Vice-President, Engineering, Avro
Aircraft Ltd. Mr. Floyd became a naturalized Canadian in 1950 and in
the same year was the first non-American to receive the Wright Brothers
Medal, which was awarded for his contributions to aeronautics, including
his design of the Avro Jetliner. More recently, he had been known for
his work on the Avro CF-100 interceptor and for the Avro Arrow, which
made its first flight in March 1958.
During
the time that the tests were being made on the notch
and leading edge extension for pitch-up we were following
very closely the work being done on the F.102 with
regard to a reduction in induced drag by drooping
the wing leading edge, and also the work that was
going on at Avro Manchester on the Vulcan. They were
drooping the leading edge to increase the buffet
boundary by preventing leading edge breakaway at
high angles of attack.
This also influenced us in choosing the 10 per cent increase in leading
edge outboard, to cure pitch-up, since we realised that, if after investigation
we found that it would be advantageous to droop the leading edge, the extension
would increase the amount of effective droop.
Droop was installed on the wind tunnel model, 8deg inboard and approximately
4deg outboard. This increased the buffet boundary considerably. For instance,
at M=0.925, which is the normal subsonic cruise Mach number, the CL at which
we estimate the onset of buffet is increased from 0.26 with the extension alone,
to 0.41 with the extension plus droop. The buffet, or flow separation, was indicated
by pressure plots on the ailerons in the Cornell Laboratory tunnel tests. The
supersonic drag did not appear to be increased appreciably.
We were also cognisant at this time of the work on Vortex Generators
which Avro Manchester were doing for alleviating the shock-induced rear separation,
but from the evidence we had from N.A.C.A., and also from the Manchester reports,
it was felt that for a t/c ratio of under 5 per cent this would not be a problem,
and Vortex Generators would not be required for this
reason on the CF-105.
ANHEDRAL
Another
peculiarity of the CF-105 wing is the 4deg anhedral.
This was established entirely to reduce the length
of the undercarriage, and has no appreciable aerodynamic
effect or significance.
HIGH
WING
A
high wing arrangement was adopted because of the
greater flexibility with this layout. For example,
it allowed a relatively simple engine installation
and any changes in engines and armament can be made
without affecting the basic wing structure, which
is not always the case with an integrated wing-fuselage
structure.
It also allowed us to carry the wing structure straight through without
a break at the fuselage and simplified the wing to fin attachment, since there
was no necessity to carry the fin structure down through the engines. The fin
is 4 per cent t/c.
AREA
RULE
A
great deal of theoretical work was done on the application
of Area Rule to the CF-105 and during the early design
stages certain changes were incorporated in the aircraft
to take advantage of the results of our area rule
work.
Eleven plastic models were made at 1/30th scale and cuts were taken
on these to represent various Mach numbers. The cuts were then checked on a planimeter,
the results fed into a digital computer, and plots were made around the aircraft
at 0deg., 45deg., 90deg., 135deg. and 180deg.. Most of the results were obtained
around a Mach number of 1.5 and, as a result of this extensive investigation,
we sharpened the radar nose, thinned down the intake lips, reduced the cross-section
area of the fuselage below the canopy, and added an extension fairing at the
rear, to smooth out the bumps in the area rule curve (Fig. 6).
ENGINE
AND INTAKES
The
CF-105 is undoubtedly the most " re-engined" of
any aircraft at this stage of development since,
one by one the engines slated for the project fell
by the wayside. However, I will not attempt to go
into the history of the " thousand and one " installations
but will deal mainly with the final (?) installation
on the production Mark 2. The first five aircraft
are fitted with Pratt and Whitney J.75 engines, and
the sixth aircraft is the first Mark 2 with Orenda
Iroquois engines.
The Iroquois power unit is an axial flow gas turbine of twin spool
configuration. The compressor is designed for a high air mass flow, and a pressure
ratio of 8 to 1 at sea level static. Compressor delivery air bleed is used for
driving the air turbine centrifugal fuel pumps, and is also available for aircraft
services.
The engine incorporates an afterburner which is built as an integral
part of the basic engine. The afterburner operation is fully automatic, the engine
having a modulated final nozzle to produce the desired thrust to temperature
relationship at the selected power lever setting.
Figure 7 shows the engine cooling system at speeds greaterthanM=0-5.
The intake gills immediately adjacent to the compressor inlet open
up at M= 0. 5 and allow air to by-pass around the engine for cooling purposes,
and to alleviate spillage at high Mach number. By this means, it is possible
to achieve near optimum performance with this fixed geometry intake, in the subsonic.
transonic, and supersonic speed ranges. At very high Mach numbers, if the air
which could not be swallowed by the engines were allowed to spill from the intake
lips, there would be a high drag penalty, bad pressure recovery characteristics
within the intake itself, and possible de-stabilising effects from the components
of spillage.
The technique of by-passing air over the engine between the engine
and compartment sidewalls not only takes care of the spillage and cools the engine
but, by acting as a beat exchanger, collects heat from the afterburner casing
and passes it into the ejector exit annulus, providing a small percentage of
additional thrust.
For
fire protection, the critical compartments containing
the fuel system, and so on, are enclosed by titanium
shrouds and stainless steel insulated blankets.
The gills are automatic, and when the aircraft has reached a forward
speed high enough to create a static pressure higher than ambient within FIGURE
7. Engine cooling. Flight case M=0.50 and upwards
the
intake duct, the by-pass gills open due to ram intake
pressure, and allow the air to by-pass over the engine.
With the twin-engine configuration on the Arrow, there has been no
requirement for either bifurcated intakes or nozzles, and the flow is relatively
clean.
CONVERTED TO HTML,
AND HYPERLINKS ADDED, MARCH 28, 2001.
Scott McArthur.