Hawker Hunter

[rickshaw]

Kind of.  The P.1128 Huntsman biz-jet would have had twin engines.  It used the Hunters wing mated to a new fuselage.  I don't know of a twin engined Hunter fighter project.
Falcon did a build of the P.1128 here: http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php/topic,13717.0.html



EDIT, fixed image.

Interesting.  Your drawing shows the Hunter's wing-root intakes while the model built by Falcon shows rear fuselage side intanks.  I think your drawing would make an interest fighter version with the P.1090 (that's the one with the radar nose, isn't it?) forward fuselage.  I might give it a go.

[Weaver]

Interesting.  Your drawing shows the Hunter's wing-root intakes while the model built by Falcon shows rear fuselage side intanks.  I think your drawing would make an interest fighter version with the P.1090 (that's the one with the radar nose, isn't it?) forward fuselage.  I might give it a go.

I thought those were intake duct-shaped fuel tanks filling the original duct space, with blank fairings on the leading edge.

[Mossie]

You're right Weave, they are tanks designed to fit the space left by the Hunters intakes.  Looking more closely at the diagram, they feed to the centre, rather than the engines.

I think a two engined Hunter with the intakes from the P.1090 would look good.  A pair of developed Vipers maybe?

[Weaver]

Well the Orpheus had more development potential than the Viper and the B.Or.12 version had afterburning for a max. thrust of around 8000lbs, so why not go with those, in the Huntsman back end linked to the P.1090 intakes, OR bring the Huntsman intakes forward until they're over the wing leading edge, a bit like a F-106 or Tu-128?

[norseman]

There was also the RR RB.180 small turbofan project designed for light transports and exec jets which was rated at around 6,250lb. Still can't place my finger on the Orpheus turbo fan variant but I think that was in the circa 6,000lb area as well.

[Mossie]

I've just googled the RB.180 & found another possibility from the Flight archive, the RB.153 turbojet. The article is speculative, but it guesses the engine would have been about 25in diameter, 65in in length & anything from around 5,000lb to 8,000lb thrust.  It was intended to power the VJ-101D & a version of the VTOL Gina. It's described as a scaled down Spey.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1962/1962%20-%201019.html

There's a reasonably good drawing of the engine in a G.95/6 on Secret Projects:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,851.15.html

[norseman]

That's very interesting, I had only ever thought of the RB.153 in the context of VTOL aircraft projects before rather than the straight through model, certainly nice and compact.

[Weaver]

Well the Orpheus had more development potential than the Viper and the B.Or.12 version had afterburning for a max. thrust of around 8000lbs, so why not go with those, in the Huntsman back end linked to the P.1090 intakes, OR bring the Huntsman intakes forward until they're over the wing leading edge, a bit like a F-106 or Tu-128?

Thinking about it some more, I see a problem with this idea. The Hunter has it's engine pretty far forward, with a long jetpipe behind it. The Huntsman has it's engines right at the back, presumably to balance the increased weight of the much larger forward fuselage. Therefore, if you put an Hunter front end on a Huntsman back end, the CofG would be way too far back for the wing position.

However, if you kept the Huntsman's forward fuselage length, but replaced the 7-seat cockpit with a T.7 cockpit plus a load of nav/attack avionics, plus some more fuel, you'd have an interesting strike aircraft........

[Mossie]

Another thing going against the Orpheus is it's width, at 32¹/₂" it's only 5 inches less than the Avon.  The reason I suggested the Viper, is that it's only 25in, although it just doesn't have the power.  The RB.153 seems the perfect answer although it would have needed development, by the time it came along the authorities would probably no longer be looking at the Hunter, unless improvements like the P.1083 or even further came around.

[DarrenP]

A Navalised Hunter would have been interesting though have heard the Super Etendard described as such!

[rickshaw]

Well the Orpheus had more development potential than the Viper and the B.Or.12 version had afterburning for a max. thrust of around 8000lbs, so why not go with those, in the Huntsman back end linked to the P.1090 intakes, OR bring the Huntsman intakes forward until they're over the wing leading edge, a bit like a F-106 or Tu-128?

Thinking about it some more, I see a problem with this idea. The Hunter has it's engine pretty far forward, with a long jetpipe behind it. The Huntsman has it's engines right at the back, presumably to balance the increased weight of the much larger forward fuselage. Therefore, if you put an Hunter front end on a Huntsman back end, the CofG would be way too far back for the wing position.

However, if you kept the Huntsman's forward fuselage length, but replaced the 7-seat cockpit with a T.7 cockpit plus a load of nav/attack avionics, plus some more fuel, you'd have an interesting strike aircraft........

Alternatively, two seats (tandem?), guns, fuel and missiles, all up front, equals a long range fighter.

I wonder, was there ever consideration of the Hunter as a naval fighter?  I think this twin engined one would have been pretty good as an A4 competitor.

[DarrenP]

could the wings have folded and still kept a decent war load?

[pyro-manic]

The main gear takes up the inner half of the wing, so there wouldn't be much room for a wingfold unless you're willing to have pylons outboard of the fold. The Sea Vixen had this, so it's plausible..

[Weaver]

You'd also have to bear in mind that the Hunter's wing ribs are at 90 deg to the spars rather than parrallel to the fuselage, and that there's an inboard leading edge fuel tank whose front corner is further outboard than the main gear attachement. Essentially, it would require a completely new wing structure. Looking at a cutaway, the best place for a fold would seem to be at inner end of the dogtooth

[rickshaw]

Would you need a fold?  The wingspan of the Hunter is 33 ft 8 in (10.26 m), the A4's is 26 ft 6 in (8.38 m).  I think you could get away with just the tips, from the inboard edge of the aileron folding.  You're right the ribs run perpendicular to the spar but you could have an angled fold which follows the ribs.