ARC Search Pics

Jim Floyd:RAeS Lecture

Jim Floyd:
RAeS Lecture pg 10


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


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.



(selectable links)





















































































Go Up



FIGURE 25 (top left). Before touch-down.
FIGURE 26 (top right). At touch-down.
FIGURE 27 (above). Arrow veering off runway following release of brake parachute.
FIGURE 28 (right). Aerial view of aircraft ground run and final attitude.

  Figure 25 shows the aircraft just before touch-down, indicating the port leg. in a twisted condition; Fig. 26 shows the aircraft just on touch-down with the leg being dragged sideways and the tyres just beginning to smoke. Fig. 27 shows the aircraft just as it ran off the runway into the soft earth, snapping off the undercarriage; and Fig. 28 shows the path taken on landing.
  Aircraft Nos. 2 and 3 have now taken over the bulk of the current flight test programme and, in proving the flight envelope, have flown at speeds considerably in excess of those achieved on the first aircraft.


  It is interesting to note that in Canada the flight evaluation set-up is a little different to that in the United Kingdom, where the government establishments at Farnborough and Boscombe Down are available for, extensive development flying, and similarly, at Wright Field, Eglin Field, and others in the United States.
  In Canada, the prime contractor takes on the job of all the initial development flying and evaluation, with R.C.A.F. crews assigned to work alongside. The final performance evaluation is made at the R.C.A.F. Central Experimental and Proving Establishment at Rockeliffe.
  Later armament evaluation will be carried out at the R.C.A.F. Air Armament Evaluation Detachment at Cold Lake, Alberta, and all-weather evaluation at the Climatic Detachment, located near Edmonton, Alberta. The Cold Lake airfield site covers 10 square miles, and the 4,000 square miles range is large enough for unrestricted missile and rocket firing. Electronic optical theodolites are used for tracking and photographing aircraft and missiles. High speed cameras, spotting scopes and telemetry systems are also used in tracking missiles. This facility is probably one of the largest overland ranges in the world.
  With regard to our own flight testing, we have had the added problems of operating from a busy commercial airport adjacent to the plant and have to tie our flight testing in with scheduled commercial flights. However, with as many as 30 flights a day on the CF-100, we have had little problem with this, due to the excellent co-operation of the Department of Transport controllers.
  Before operating the Arrow from Malton, the question of noise was raised, since the installed thrust of. the Arrow is well over twice that of the, CF-100. A considerable number of noise frequency and pressure levels were analysed before flight. However, so far, it has been obvious that the actual noise levels encountered during all conditions of taxi, take-off, landing, engine run-up, and so on, present no greater problem on the Arrow than they did on the CF-100 and, in fact, are considered to be less than at least one of the commercial aircraft operating from the same facility.

Defence Environment

  The overall defence system for the North American Continent is now generally well known. The D.E.W., or Distant Early Warning Line is the first line of defence and runs from Baffin Island to Alaska, over the far North of Canada. The second line is the Mid-Canada Line, provided by Canada, and the third line is the Pine Tree Line, which was jointly financed by the United States and Canada.
  These three lines are supplemented at the ends by inshore and offshore pickets (Fig. 29). In addition, there exists an airborne network of early warning aircraft fitted with powerful radar. Practically the whole of this warning network lies in Canadian territory.
  A Semi-Automatic Ground Environment System (S.A.G.E.) developed in the Lincoln Laboratories in Boston, is now being set up to provide a complete surveillance and weapons control system. All information in a particular area can be presented on a master scope and the S.A.G.E. system is capable of transmitting the data to the interceptor electronically to provide an auto- matic intercept (Fig. 30).

Since North American Air Defence (N.O.R.A.D.) now controls the complete Air Defence system of the North American Continent in an emergency, the Arrow weapon system will be operating within this environment (Fig. 31).

Weapon System Concept

  The ultimate responsibility for the Arrow "Weapon System" including the aircraft, the ground support equipment, and the base facilities, rests with the Royal Canadian Air Force and the Department of National Defence, who created the operational requirement and will eventually operate the weapon system.


.   FIGURE 31. Arrow environment

  In the interest of better control and co-ordination of the development and production of the Weapon Systen a group was formed within the R.C.A.F. under the direction of an Assistant for Arrow Weapon System (A/AWS), reporting to the Chief of Aeronautical Engineering, R.C.A.F., who has been delegated " Technical Authority " for the programme. The group is larger made up of R.C.A.F. engineering officers drawn from the various specialist engineering directorates.
  A portion of the management responsibility of the A/AWS is sub-contracted to the aircraft supplier, Avro, who, as " Co-ordinating Contractor." undertakes much of the detail co-ordination of the whole programme, subject to monitoring by A/AWS.
  The Arrow programme is a colossal undertaking for Canada, and up to the present time it has required the co-operation and integration of all the responsible agencies within our country, and I would like to emphasise the " national " nature of the project. There are some 650 individual companies engaged in the programme, mostly on sub-contract work for Avro.
  Significant contributions to the programme have been made by the Canadian Defence Research Board and the National Aeronautical Establishment in Ottawa where most of the low and medium speed wind tunnel work was carried out. We have also received valuable assistance from the N.A.C.A. in the United States, and the R.A.E. in the United Kingdom in the use of their facilities where these have not been available in Canada.


  On re-reading my manuscript I was conscious of the fact that while it contained most of the important facets of the Arrow programme that could be covered inside the security limits, it did not even begin to convey the human side of the endeavour.
  There were many periods of frustration and in the early stages of the programme the project was ON and OFF about every three months, while Government and the Service wrestled with the problems involved in managing and financing such a large project.
  When the programme finally got under way, and the engines scheduled for the project fell by the wayside one by one, we had to re-design our fuselage three or four times, and while the aircraft had been designed from the outset with the flexibility to make re-engining as simple as possible, it appeared to us that every engine manufacturer had gone out of his way to make things different! Some engines had three-point mounts, some f'our, and pressure ratios differed, which meant an almost complete re-design of the air conditioning system, since this is dependent on the engine for its prime inputs.
  The R.C.A.F. naturally wanted the best and latest integrated electronic system and weapon in the aircraft, and finally chose these, after a considerable portion of the aircraft had been designed around an earlier system.
This is, of course, normal to some extent in our business. However, since this is the major military project in Canada and involves almost all the aircraft and associated industries, the whole Arrow programme is in the " shop window " so to speak, and every set- back becomes almost a national calamity!
  This can be quite embarrassing from an engineering point of view, especially super imposed upon the added pressures of attempting to meet what was probably the most advanced contemporary interceptor requirement.
  However, we have survived so far, and from the results of our flying up to the present, there is every reason to believe that Canada's biggest military venture will emerge from a state of national discussion to become a sourceof national pride and security, if such there can be in our peculiar but exciting time. To those of us in Canada who have been actively engaged in this project, this will be sufficient.


  The opinions which I have expressed in this lecture do not necessarily coincide with those of the R.C.A.F., the Canadian Government, or Avro.
  I wish to thank my colleagues in the Engineering Division at Avro for their kind assistance in the preparation of some of the material for the lecture and, particularly, Mr. R. F. Marshall who struggled with the art work and diagrams, to finish them in almost zero time, and my secretary, Mrs. Salter, for her patience in sorting out a readable manuscript from a collection of almost illegible scribbled notes and garbled records.


DR. MOULT: The lecture had been a most interesting one in the best traditions of the Commonwealth Lectures. The Avro Arrow was an impressive aircraft; it was a complex piece of machinery, like most aircraft nowadays, and it had been a success because of thoroughness, attention to detail and excellant planning from the beginning. Great credit was due to Mr. Floyd, to his Company and to Canada for their achievement.

It was not the custom to have a discussion after the Commonwealth Lecture, and he would ask Mr. N. E. Rowe, C.B.E., B.Sc., F.C.G.I., M.I.Mech.E., F.R.Ae.S., Technical Director of Blackburn and General Aircraft Ltd., and a Past President of the Society, to propose the vote of thanks.

MR. ROWE: They had heard an account of a great enterprise, courageous in its conception, in its execution and distinguished by the resolute pursuit of an extraordinary variety of problems, all done in parallel with a very difficult programme of production " from the board." He congratulated the lecturer, not only on his lecture, but on being the leader of such an enterprise.
There was no doubt that Canada had an extreme awareness of the importance of aeronautics for peace; that had been made evident by the lecturer., they knew it also from the tremendous Canadian activity in the civil field and from the contributions from Canada to this particular series of lectures.
In 1948 Mr. James T. Bain had lectured on " Aircraft and the Airlines-A Canadian View "., in November 1949 they had had
" Inter-City Transport Development on the Commonwealth Routes" by Mr. H. Aitken; in 1955 " The growth of Aeronautical Research in Canada, During the Post-War Decade" by Dr. J.J. Green; now there was Mr. Floyd's lecture, and to complete the picture they had had in this same series a most stimulating lecture by Mr. B.S. Shenstone " Why Airlines are Hard to Please."
Obviously Canada was interested in the widest range of aeronautics and had the clearest idea of it's importance for war and for peace; if one were prepared for war then one could ensure peace, so Canada was supporting the whole field of aeronautics in a most complete way.
The nature of a modern, complex aircraft involved a tremendous weight of effort and he was not surprised to hear that 650 firms in Canada had been engaged on the Arrow project and that it was the major item in the whole Canadian aircraft industry. Such an effort required co-ordination of a high order and a vast system of pre-flight testing to ensure success. The wisdom displayed in this aspect of the work and the engineering that went into the project was proved by the successful first flight which they had seen on the film which had been most impressive.
The last time he had spoken at a Commonwealth Lecture, had been when he was President and introduced Dr. Green, who also gave a classic lecture. On that occasion he had commented that the lecture was originally devised to form a focus for the aeronautical problems of the Commonwealth and thought that the series had achieved this. To judge from his remarks, that opinion was shared by Mr. Floyd who would like the focus to be brought to practical reality by a meeting of Commonwealth Aeronautical Engineers, something which probably all engineers in the audience would be only delighted to see.
Mr. Floyd's lecture was a stimulus to all in the Commonwealth, showing vision in concept with resolution and skill in attack on most difficult problems; not only had they tackled and solved the most difficult problems in aircraft design but also, those of the most advanced jet engine practice.
Such lectures as these strengthened the position of aeronautics throughout the Commonwealth and added greatly to the prestige of the Society; in this sense especially they offered their warmest thanks to Mr. Floyd.

Following the Lecture a Dinner was given at 4 Hamilton Place at which the following were present-

Dr. A. M. Ballantyne, T.D., B.Sc., PH.D., Hon.F.C.A.I., A.F.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S., Secretary, Royal Aeronautical Society. Air Commodore F. R. Banks, C.B.. O.B.E., Hon.F.I.A.S..M.I.Mech.E., F.R.Ae.S., Director Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd.; Member of Council and Vice-President. ' A. D. Baxter, M.Eng., M.I.Mech.E., F.R.Ae.S., Chief Executive, Rockets and Nuclear Energy, de Havilland Engine Co. Ltd.; Member of Council. Marshal of the Royal Air Force, Sir Dermot Boyle, G.C.B., K.C.V.O., K.B.E., A.F.C., Chief of the Air Staff. Major G.P. Bulman, C.B.E.. B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S., Honorary Treasurer; Member of Council and Past President. A. F. Burke. O.B.E., President, Society of British Aircraft Constructors Ltd. W. G. F.
Burns, A.F.R.Ae.S., Civil Aviation Adviser to the High Commissioner for Australia.
Sir Sydney Camm, C.B.E.. F.R.Ae.S., Chief Designer and Director, Hawker Aircraft; Member of Council and Past President. J. R. Cownic, B.Sc.(Eng.), Grad.R.Ae.S., Chairman of the Graduates' and Students' Section and Member of Council. Sir George Cribbett. K.B.E., C.M.G., Deputy Chairman, British Overseas Airways Corporation; 1950 British Commonwealth Lecturer.
M. A. S. Dalal, M.A.(Cantab.). LL.B., Regional Manager, Air-India International Corporation. Handel Dayies, M.Sc., A.F.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S.. Deputy Director General, Future Systems, Ministry of Supply; Member of Council. W. Dirkse-van-Schalkywk, Acting High Commissioner for the Union of South Africa. Lord Douglas of Kirtleside, G.C.B., M.C., D.F.C., Chairman, British European Airways. Sir George Dowty, Hon.F.C.A.I., F.I.A.S., M.I.Mech.E., F.R.Ae.S., Chairman and Managing Director, Dowty Group; Past President.
Sir George Edwards, C.B.E., B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S., Managing-Director, Vickers-Armstrongs (Aircraft) Ltd.; Member of Council; Immediate Past President.
Sir William Farren, C.B., M.B.E., M.A., F.R.S.. M.I.Mech.E., Hon.F.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S., Technical Director. A. V. Roe and Co. Ltd.; Member of Council; Past President. J. C. Floyd, F.C.A.I., M.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S., Vice-President, Engineering, Avro Aircraft Ltd.; 14th British Commonwealth Lecturer.
Dr. G. W. H. Gardner. C.B.. C.B.E.. F.R.Ae.S.. Director, Royal Aircraft Establishment: Member of Council. H. H. Gardner, B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S., Director and Chief Engineer (Military Aircraft), Vickers-Armstroungs (Aircraft) Member of Council.
R. E. Mardingharn, C.M.G., O.B.E., F.R.Ae.S., Secretary andChief Executive, Air Registration Board; 1952 British Commonwealth Lecturer. E. T. Jones, C.B., O.B.E., M.Eng., F.R.Ae.S.. Deputy Controller of Overseas Affairs, Ministry of Supply: Member of Council and Past President. M. B. Morgan, C.B., M.A., F.R.Ae.S., Deputy Director. Royal Aircraft Establishment. Member of Council. Dr. E. S. Moult, C.B.E., B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S , Director and Chief Engineer, de Havilland Engine Co. Ltd.; Member of Council and Vice-President. Sir Cyril Musgrave, K.C.B., Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Supply.
John Nash, A.F.R.Ae.S.. Astra Aircraft Corporation; Member of Council of Southern Africa Division of the Society.
J. H. Parkin, C.B.E.. Hon.F.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S., Consultant to Division of Mechanical Engineering. National Research Council of Canada. Colonel R. L. Preston, C.B.E., A.F.R.Ae.S., Secretary-General, The Royal Aero Club, Captain J. L. Pritchard, C.B.E., Hon.F.R.Ae.S., Secretary, Royal Aeronautical Society 1925-51.
Squadron Leader R. C. G. T. Rogers. D.C.Ae., A.F.R.Ae.S., R.A.F., Directorate of R.A.F. Fighter Aircraft, Research and Development, Ministry of Supply; Member of Council. J. A. Ross, A.R.Ae.S.. Trans-Canada lines. N. E. Rowe, C.B.E.. B.Sc., F.C.G.I., F.I.A.S., F.R.Ae.S., Technical Director, Blackburn and General Aircraft Ltd.; Member of Council and Past President. Major-General G. N. Russell, C.B.E., C.B.. President, The Institute of Transport.
W. Tye, O.B.E., B.Sc., F.R.Ae.S., Chief Technical Officer, Air Registration Board; Member of Council.
Sir Hubert Walker, C.B.E.. 1953 British Commonwealth Lecturer. L.A. Wingfield, M.C., D.F.C., A.R.Ae.S., Solicitor to the Royal Aeronautical Society.

Scott McArthur.




© C© Copyright AvroArrow.Org, 2009. Materials may be freely copied and distributed subject to the inclusion of the copyright notice, and credit must be given to AvroArrow.Org. The site is intended for historical and informational purposes. This site contains links to other Internet sites. These links are not endorsements of any products or services in such sites, and no information in such sites has been endorsed or approved by this site.



ARC Logo Strip