FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1965
1965 - 0850.PDF
466 FLIGHT International, 25 March I9i$ MARITIME COMET... There is a vast choice of tactical control arrangements, many of which might drastically reduce the crew requirement of the maritime Comet, but it seems likely that, although advantage will logically be taken of better plotting systems and more streamlined display arrangements, the number of men required will not be materi- ally reduced. Neither is the mission time reduced sufficiently to warrant deletion of the traditional galley and rest quarters. Provision of comfortable and effective visual-search positions, probably aft of the wing as shown in the drawing, equally remains a virtual certainty. The human eye still makes an excellent detector. Inclusion of four crew stations on the flight deck allows for aircraft commander and co-pilot, engineer or air electronics officer and navigator/signaller, who might or might not have some function in the tactical centre further aft. For transport flying, a crew of four on the flight deck seems logical. The rather small Comet access doors will probably be enlarged to facilitate passage of rather more bulky people, but also to ease installation and removal of equipment. Freight capacity, in so far as it may be required, will probably continue to be provided by Shackleton-type panniers in the weapon bay. A typical offensive weapon load for the Shackleton is two homing torpedoes, nine depth charges, 12 sonobuoys and 12 float markers. The Flight drawing indicates how torpedoes and depth charges can fit in the forward weapon bay and sonobuoys and markers under the rear cabin floor, to be released through individual doors, much in the same way as from the Breguet Atlantic. If the hinged weapon-bay doors shown interfere with engine-intake airflow, they could be arranged to slide up the sides of the fuselage, again in the same way as in the Atlantic. Weapon release would take place at low i.a.s., so that turbulence around the bay need not prove a problem. Increased engine thrust would raise greater asymmetric thrust following engine failure, but this could be absorbed by a bullet giving end-plate effect to the fin; and this provides an obvious aerial housing. C.g. and other factors are not likely to require any other change in tail configura- tion. Flight deck windows would reasonably be improved to facilitate visual search and general ease of handling, but existing escape hatches are adequate for both ASW and trooping missions. Survival dinghies are likely to find stowage outboard of the engines, aft of the undercarriage bay. The rescue equipment normally carried on routine peace-time patrols would be carried in the weapon bay. The flare dischargers used in Shackletons for night illumination would probably not be mounted in the pressure cabin and would be displaced either aft or into the wings or pinion tanks. Shackleton patrol speed is 120kt at 1,500ft and transit speed 250kt at slightly higher altitude. The Comet will probably patrol at close to 200kt, but has the impor- tant ability to make transit flights at 30,000ft and about 450 m.p.h. Much higher speed capability at low level provides excellent re-attack capability and protection from surface defences. High transit speed may halve the unproductive transit time, with the result that fewer Comets would be required to maintain a given strength on station. Overall flying time and maintenance is reduced, required endurance is far less and fleet costs can be greatly reduced. Fewer than 40 Comets could replace 60 Shackletons. With a 19,6301b payload, the Comet 4C has a range, with reserves, of 2,590 miles at 542 m.p.h. This is equivalent to a total endurance of perhaps 6hr, but the ASW requirement reasonably must require an on-station time of some 8hr at 700 or 800 miles from base. This calls for a rather higher fuel capacity than the 8,908 Imp gal of the Comet 4C, even allowing for the better s.f.c. of the Spey. This extra fuel can be accommodated in enlarged pinion tanks and by using the increased depth of the fuselage beneath the existing centre-section bag tanks. Wing tanks are integral. Patrol- ling on two engines might prove more efficient if icing and electrical generating factors were amenable. Above, photographed at Nice Airport: one of three Nord 2502s—Noratlas transports with wing-tip mounted Turbomeca Marbore turbojets—operated by I'Mronavale on ASW research duties from St Mandrier. Non-standard features include an underside radome, large observation windows and two rear-fuselage chutes Left: now based at all operational USAF airfields in Europe is a six-man plane-guard detachment equipped with a Kaman HH-43B fire-fighting helicopter. Seen here is the Toul-Rosieres AFB machine, hoisting its 1,0001b "Red Ball" fire extinguisher. The operational crew comprises two pilots, two asbestos-clad fire-fighters and a medic. The crew chief completes a detachment
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
