What might have been - V.1000

[Tom Everitt AFG]

Hi all,

There is a nice animated sequence and a few drawings of the cancelled Vickers V.1000 here:

http://www.aeroplanemonthly.com/news/Vi ... 00480.html

Just follow the link beneth the drawing to get to the animation.

Tom.

[Tarasdad]

What a lovely aircraft! Such a shame that it never flew.

[Garry Russell]

Nice to image what would have been :think:

Had it gone into service we would never have had the VC 10 as the requirement that type was built for would not have existed at that time.

True of most cancelled projects.....They would have beem instead of not as well as types we have come to love

The V.1000 would probably have seen the Comet 4 off as well :think:

Garry

[SkippyBing]

The V.1000 would probably have seen the Comet 4 off as well

On the other hand it may have seen off the 707 and led to a stronger UK aerospace industry...

[Garry Russell]

I doubt the 707 but the DC 8 and CV880 may not have happened in the reduced market.

The 707 though would not have dominated to such an extent.

Being more jet minded if it had gone into service may have meant the Trident being built the proper size.

Interesting :think:

[Hot_Charlie]

Can't help thinking that in terms of looks, we lucked in with the VC10 over the V1000. However, I'm sure a successful V1000 in the late 50s and early 60s would have been an enormous fillip for the British aircraft industry post Comet 1.

[Garry Russell]

The VC 7 almost fits in as a transistion of looks between the Comet and the VC 10.

Still very different from the American idea

Garry

[SkippyBing]

From memory the advantage the 707 has with it's engines hung on the front of the wings is that it reduces aero-elastic bending which otherwise has to be countered with a stiffer, hence heavier, structure. Not sure of the merits of the other options, although I think the 'in wing roots' style of the Comet has drag advantages although I imagine it's tricky getting a high by-pass engine in there!

[Garry Russell]

One problem of wing root engines is the need to redesign that area with any engine devlopment

At least with the pods you can have more flexibilty.

Offering more than one type of engione would be near on impossible with the wing root method due to re engineering and even the rear pods are not so adaptable as the hung wing system.

Garry

[Kevin Farnell]

Podded engines also give much better access for maintenance. Shorter turn around times = more revenue.

Have to say that the V1000 looks good. Could it have gone on to give a Nimrod equivalent?

Kevin