Miles M.52

[Noah Zark.]

I don't know whether this is in the right forum. If not, perhaps the Mods would be kind enough to re-direct it.
I am not a professional, only a long-in-the-tooth enthusiast! I have just watched (again!) a documentary about the events leading up to the breaking of the Sound Barrier, and the thought occured, knowing what is known now about aerodynamics, engines, etc., would the Miles M.52 have done the job had it not been cancelled?
Any opinions appreciated.
Thanks. N.Z.

[bigal1941]

Since the Bell X1A, which supposedly was the first aircraft to break the sound barrier deliberately, was to all and intents and purpose, a copy of the Miles M52, albeit rocket powered rather than by jet propulsion, I would say most definatly yes. The story is told in "Project Cancelled" by Derek Wood ISBN number 0 7106 0441 6. Hope this helps, Alan

[LowObservable]

Hate to be the wet blanket, but probably not, with the jet engine technology of the day. The US made it with air launch and rocket power, but the UK lacked a carrier aircraft or a place to do it, and was making no plans to build a manned rocket-powered version of the M.52.

That said - and in spite of many illustrious historians - I remain very impressed by the fact that key features of the M.52 - bullet-shaped body, all-moving tail and thin wing - were echoed by the XS-1 and were not adopted by Bell until after NACA knew about the M.52.

[John Farley]

I think the M52 could have coped with the stability and control issues re going supersonic (because of the features you mentioned)

As to the thrust issue why not do it down hill?

[BOAC]

I believe it was also one of the first to plan to use reheat (a/b for 'them':))? I recall the pilot was to sit in the intake..............:eek: a bit like that there French thing the ?'Coleoptre'? (sp?)

[Dan Winterland]

Quote: The US made it with air launch and rocket power,

Apart from the fact that Scott Crossfield took the prototype F86 supersonic about a week earlier. And it also appears from some accounts that Luftwaffe Me262 pilots may have acheived it a few years before that.

[Brian Abraham]

Was not the illustrious Winkle Brown the marked man to do the deed? I'm sure he would have got it through the "barrier" even if he had to get out and push.

[sycamore]

BOAC- think you mean the Leduc 0.22,rogeer Ramjet power.
I don`t think it was beyond the bounds that at the time the Lanc could have carried the M52 on top,a la Shorts/Mayo,Heinkel etc.there were also plenty of Lancs fitted with a variety of jet and turboprop engines to provide sufficient `steam`.

[BOAC]

I'd forgotten that one! I have now checked my abysmal French and the Coleoptere (with missing accents!) was equally frightening!

http://www.airbornegrafix.com/HistoricAircraft/VTOL/Coleoptere.htm

[Dave Unwin]

I think that although the airframe was probably good for Mach 1, I very much doubt that it could have taken off, climbed to altitude, made a supersonic run in afterburner and returned to land on the fuel it could have carried. Even an air-launch would be marginal. Having looked at drawings of the aircraft, I just don't think the tanks had the capacity.

[Noah Zark.]

Thanks for the input, folks. All appreciated.
As I said in my original post, I am not a professional, but I was intrigued by the bullet shaping of the machine, the very thin wings, and all-moving tailplane being used, and wondered if these things would have enabled it to break the "sound barrier".
Of course, as mentioned, other things probably would not have helped, i.e. lack of fuel, how to get it "up there" in the first place.
But all interesting. Thanks again.
N.Z.

[aviate1138]

Surely with all the ingenuity that Miles Aircraft displayed over the years the possibility of needing fuel and how to launch the M-52 must have been sorted out. After all they were the originators of the key to supersonic flight - the all flying tailplane. I cannot imagine the Miles Brothers scratching their heads and saying "Oh dear we forgot about fuel and getting to altitude!" :rolleyes:

Interesting that, like the TSR2, a Labour Government had the airframes and jigs totally destroyed.

[cwatters]

Some interesting references on wikipedia...

Sound barrier - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sound_barrier)

[Double Zero]

I thought the point of the M.52 was supersonic level flight – and didn’t we have B-29 Washingtons suitable for air-launch then, if we’d got round to it ?!

Getting the engine going let alone intake issues etc might have been a different matter of course.

I’ve always thought Mr Yeager ( who was debatably the first anyway ) did it by brute power & guts, + the all moving tail…

As I recall there was a test ‘prone-pilot’ Meteor, the summary of which was “ there are 2 things a pilot can do in that position, neither of which involve flying ! ”

The scale models of the thing did rather well on the supersonic speed stakes, I believe.

I’ve always thought whoever ‘designed’ Thunderbird One had a good look at the M.52, though TB1 was supposedly good for 24,000 MPH and VTOL to boot, so I suspect may have used a different powerplant.

Before anyone queries, I’ve touched the real thing – TB1 - but unfortunately didn’t get a flight, security and all that.

Aviate1138, I think you’ll find all political parties are as bad as each other- the P1216 project, which made the F-35 look like a Sopwith Camel, including ‘trained carbon fibre’ forward swept wing versions was vetoed by none other then Margaret Thatcher when she was shown the mock-up at Kingston; what did she care, the Harrier had already saved her political arse !

DZ

[warrior28]

Does anyone know what happened to the scale mock up that used to hang
from the roof in the terminal building at Shoreham.

[henry crun]

Double Zero: the prone position Meteor was developed to investigate the possibility of reducing the effects of G, and had nothing to do with the M52 which had been cancelled many years before.

[Fareastdriver]

You wouldn't have needed a B29 to get it up to altitude. M52 maxed out at 7720lbs, well inside a routine Lancaster's Tallboy weight of 10,000lbs. It could have been mounted in the belly as in the Betty/Baku combination or on top as the Heinkel111/FW190. Even with it on top a Lanc could have blundered its way up to 25,000ft. There would have probably been enough IAS to airstart the engine though getting it back on the ground at 170+knots would involve Manston, Elvington or Woodvale as they had the long wartime emergency runways.
The prone Meteor still exists at the RAF Museum at Cosford.

http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee224/fareastdriver/IMGP2912.jpg

[Flugplatz]

I think Thunderbird 1 'only' flew at 15,000 mph and was sub-orbital. I don't think Chuck Yeager has claimed to have flown it - yet.

Flug

[bigal1941]

Wasn't the "all moving tail" invented by Miles Aircraft, and is now considered necessary for supersonic flight. Regards Alan

[Double Zero]

I stand corrected on the prone Meteor, should have looked up Don Middleton's 'Test Flying - the History of British aircraft testing, 1903 - 84' which remains unsurpassed for me, I remember the Meteor job was indeed concerned with 'G', though presumably Eric 'Winkle' Brown would have been in that position, among several other unenviable ones!

There is a programme repeated quite often on 'Sky' T.V. where he ruefully recounts how Miles gave the U.S. all their info' including the all-moving tail, then the Americans clamped up tight and no gen' came back the other way.

Then again we were daft enough to give jet engine designs to the Russians...

The original X-1 had a conventional elevator equipped tail, but someone with some foresight had included the option of an all-flying job; after early problems, it seemed worth trying the latter...

As for Thunderbird 1, I've just checked, and it's quoted as approaching Heathrow at 'only' 7,500 MPH though may have been slowing down ( not knots, though radio procedure in the series was surprisingly good, no ' over & out ' nonsense we still get in modern productions !

Maybe the seperate lift motor ( don't know what Mr.Farley would think of that ! ) was driven by a shaft from the main engine - there's no counting some people's ideas...

Whoever did those designs certainly had some aircraft knowledge - the Fireflash SST seems to show a hint of Barnes Wallace, while my dad took the 'P' out of TB2 with it's forward swept wings for years until I gleefully pointed to the X-29.

Back to the M.52, I know 'Winkle' is game for anything, ( I'd love to see some of the T.P's I worked with if asked to land a Sea Vampire wheels up on a floating rubber mat ! ) but I wonder if it was a good thing it was cancelled, or we'd have been minus one Test Pilot !

[G-AWZK]

Here is an entry about the Miles M52 from H2G2:

Britain's First Supersonic Aeroplane (http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A882272)

[aviate1138]

Double Zero said....
"I’ve always thought whoever ‘designed’ Thunderbird One had a good look at the M.52, though TB1 was supposedly good for 24,000 MPH and VTOL to boot, so I suspect may have used a different powerplant."

Aviate1138 adds.....
The designer of Thunderbird One was Derrick Meddings, who designed most of Gerry Anderson's TV Show's craft. I was T1's pilot. And T2/T3/T4 etc. They were hung on thin tungsten wires and the 'pilot' dangled over the high speed camera and 'flew' the craft to the best of one's ability. Studio temperature was usually around 120 degrees F. No air conditioning. I served in the RAF but never as a pilot. Later flew Gliders then GA then PFA reg types. Built my own CFM Shadow, CFM Star Streak 912 and SkyArrow 650T.

The merchandising spinoff from those series made the Century 21 boss Anderson and Lew Grade[ITV] a lot of money. Derrick never got a penny.

Sorry about the thread creep but 00, you started it! :)

Back to the M 52 - a lot of ' If only they had flown' aeroplanes might well have changed the face of aviation...... could make a good TV Documentary series.

[Double Zero]

Aviate1138, an honour to hear from you ! I hope Derek Meddings gets some recognition some day - is he still with us ?

Apologies to the rest of you for the thread creep...

DZ

[aviate1138]

Derrick died 1995, sadly. He had years of good movie magic left in him but the old 'C' got him.

I remember using sacks of Blue Asbestos! as set dressing. The air was full of the stuff every time an explosion happened! Somehow no one got asbestiosis afaik. :rolleyes:

Thread creep - Off.

[Double Zero]

'Back to the M 52 - a lot of ' If only they had flown' aeroplanes might well have changed the face of aviation...... could make a good TV Documentary series...'

Aviate1138, as mentioned previously, 'Sky' often air a programme about the M 52, and indeed other episodes on 'Aircraft That Never Flew' inc. British post-war projects ( jet / rocket hybrids for instance ), plus interesting ideas some of which did fly inc. German projects - saw one recently mentioning the last-ditch 'Natter' VTO tail-sitter fighter - among other things - and the Canadian Avro Arrow etc.

They also did one on the U.S. attempts at a nuclear powered bomber - does " Well, with our atomic engines we could stay up for 6 months, but we've only got 2 hours radiation shielding ! " Sound familiar ?! http://www.pprune.org/forums/images/infopop/icons/icon6.gif

[Fareastdriver]

The B36 nuclear reactor carrier had so much radiation protection around the cockpit that despite six turning and four burning it was like flying a glider.
It seemed a pretty useless experiment as it wasn't nuclear powered. It just proved that you could get one airborne.

[chevvron]

At the risk of thread creep, wasn't there a proposal to instal a reactor in one of the Princess flying boats? Late '50s so still cocooned at Calshot.

[Jetex Jim]

http://www.ffscale.co.uk/rapgal/miles.jpg

Made the traditional stick and tissue way, and it flies.
http://www.ffscale.co.uk/rapgal/miles3.jpg

[alf5071h]

Re Princess: A cross section sketch of a nuclear installation is shown in ‘The complete encyclopedia of flight 1945-2006’

M.52 is also covered in the same book, covering much of the info above.
However, Barrie Hygate’s book “British Experimental Jet Aircraft” (1941-86) has much more detail reflecting some thorough research.
Here it is suggested that the projected failure to meet the design spec of M1.5 was a significant reason for cancellation. Wind tunnel tests indicated that supersonic flight could only be achieved in a dive, and then only 1.07 due to thrust limits.
Another concern was pilot escape. Hatch jettison, for manual bail-out was tested in a blower tunnel with limited success. The alternative of separating the complete nose capsule was complex and untried.

I also detect an underlying debate on swept wing vs straight wing supersonics. The latter, being superior at very high speed, appears again in missile development, whereas swept wings were promoted for subsequent post-war transonic research and development aircraft.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Just as an aside, how was a nuclear reactor going to drive an aeroplane? Steam? I can't think of another way, but would be ridiculously heavy. Anyone know?

[Jetex Jim]

Wiki has this to say on the subject.

Direct Air Cycle program
The General Electric program, which was based at Evendale, Ohio (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evendale%2C_Ohio), was pursued because of its advantages in simplicity, reliability, suitability and quick start ability. Conventional jet engine compressor and turbine sections were used, with the compressed air run through the reactor itself to heat it before being exhausted through the turbine. This program produced the successful X-39 engine, two modified GE J47s (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_J47) with heat supplied by the Heat Transfer Reactor Experiment-1 (HTRE-1). The HTRE-1 was replaced by the HTRE-2 and eventually the HTRE-3 unit powering the two J47s. The HTRE-3 used "a flight-type shield system" and would probably have gone on to power the X-6 had that program been pursued.

Indirect Air Cycle program

The Indirect Air Cycle program was assigned to Pratt & Whitney, at a facility near Middletown, Connecticut (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middletown%2C_Connecticut). This concept would have produced far less radioactive pollution. One or two loops of liquid metal would carry the heat from the reactor to the engine. This program involved a great deal of research and development of many light-weight systems suitable for use in aircraft, such as heat exchangers, liquid-metal turbo pumps and radiators. The Indirect Cycle program never came anywhere near producing flight-ready hardware.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Aich!

Now I see why this never happened - direct compressed air thru the reactor or liquid metal turbopumps.

No no no no no no!

Imagine all that liquid sodium being chucked into the oggin and inside a damaged reactor in an accident!