Hawker P.1154

[kitnut617]

The pointed tip had eight flat surfaces to it and connected to the missile body in an octagon which was then blended to the round body.

[Thorvic]

Actually in Project Cancelled i think there was a mention that before cancellation Hawker were looking at a Navalised version of the 1154(RAF).

Certainly by the 70's it the 1154(RAF) had gone into service as the Harrier then we would certainly have seen a Sea Harrier based upon it of some description.

G

[Martin H]

just had a squiz thru Amazon and the bank balance got up and left the room!!!  

boy do i know that feeling all to well LOL

[dy031101]

Threads got merged, and mikeew's thread has majority, so I'm re-posting my questions to minimize the possibility of them being buried within the prespective weapons discussion.

And Zen and Thorvic, thanks for your thoughts.



In light of Maverick's recent works on P.1154(RN) profiles, I read BSP entry on P.1154 again and am now under the impression that the Kestrel wouldn't have been developed into service machines if P.1154 was not cancelled......

By the time the AI radar for the RN was projected to be available though, RN's conventional carriers would be gone or going...... now RN originally wanted their version of P.1154 to use catapult and arrestor gear for their carriers just like the Sea Vixen before it (in the end P.1154 was competing against F-4)...... then Ark Royal got worn out, her replacement axed.

So what would really have happened if the RN version of P.1154 got the go-ahead i.e. was the final configuration for P.1154(RN) still a CATOBAR machine?  If the initial service version of P.1154(RN) was CATOBAR and the attack carriers were still replaced by the through deck cruiser, what would the future have held for the alt. Harrier?

My current impression is that P.1154(RN) would have been CATOBAR first, replaced when Invincible class came on-line by a version that retained the forward fuselage (with the two-seater arrangement and the bigger AI radar) but have the fuselage and powerplant of RAF's STOVL version.  But I could have gotten it totally wrong- maybe Mav's navy P.1154 profile represents STOVL machines after all(at which point there is no problem whatsoever)- and I'd like to be sure.

Thanks in advance for inputs.




(In my humble opinions, however, it would still have been perfectly fine even if his profile ends up representing CATOBAR machines- Ark Royal in 1969, Clemencau, Melbourne and Viraat might have been refitted for alt. Harrier ops instead, and Principe de Asturias could have been based on catapult-equipped version of Sea Control Ship......?)

[Zen]

Err well now!

RAF machines would use a variant of the Ferranti AI.23 AIRPASS  radar as used on Lightning, Buccaneer, and was also in another form for the TSR.2 so I seem to reccal.

Whereas the Apsinal CW set was expected to be available after 1972.

SO the RAF versions could enter service in a reasonable timeframe, most of the avionics bar the radar actualy got used on the P1127 development we know as the Harrier and I think some parts used on the Jaguar. The latter more properly performing the role intended for the P1154.

So IMO, and considering how things where going the RN has three options:-
1. wait until the Aspinal set is available before getting their P1154 order.
2. buying a US radar/missile combination fitted to the P1154
3. opting for the AI.23/Red Top as an interim solution

Of these 1. is unacceptable due to the pressing need to replace the SeaVixen.
2 could work but runs risks on integration of US technology into the P1154 airframe
3. the interim solution would become permanent

Of them 3. is most likely the choice that would've been made and the outcome of it.

2. is the most sensible, as I seem to reccal its this periode when the US developes several sets able appropriate for SARH guidance. Late model F104's for Italy and French MN F8's had just such radars.

Of course the P1154 in almost every form threatens the CVA-01 sized carrier, even in CTOL form. In sticking the course with the Hawker machine, the RN would find itself under great pressure to ditch the large new carrier long before 1967.

[uk 75]

HS 1154 for the Royal Navy in its 1963 two seater form was very much a device by the Admiralty to ensure that the politicians had to relent and give it the F4 Phantom which was the only fighter it wanted.  As a result the design was pretty much overloaded and impractical. Having said which I like it and am a fan.

The HS 1154RN 1963 variant required a catapult launch and was designed to be on the CVA 01 with the Buccaneer as its strike colleague.  The RN were looking ahead to an F111B type aircraft for the 70s (again as they were keen on cross decking with USN carriers they preferred a US design or at worst a British equivalent).

There was no chance whatsoever of the RN agreeing to a simplified VSTOl aircraft until the Government took away its East of Suez role and the large carriers. This in turn could only happen from about the mid-60s (after the resolution of the Indonesian confrontation and the demise of Sukharno).

All of which takes you up to 1968 and the real world events which produced the "Invincible" class and the RN's own Harriers (not secured until the 70s).

In fact the RN did much better than the politicians wanted. It retained a carrier with Buccaneer and Phantom aircraft until 1979 (any longer and either Ark or Eagle would have been a floating scrapheap). It got three ASW cruisers optimised to carry Sea Harriers and has been able to up arm these until the end of the Cold War.  I doubt whether any of the other options floated here and on the RN discussion board at Warships of the World woudl have survived real world politics so well.

UK 75

[dy031101]

HS 1154 for the Royal Navy in its 1963 two seater form was very much a device by the Admiralty to ensure that the politicians had to relent and give it the F4 Phantom which was the only fighter it wanted.  As a result the design was pretty much overloaded and impractical.

Would the RN version have been more practical if it shared everything aft of the tandem cockpit with the RAF version?

(Was wondering how possible it'd have been that RAF and RN got P.1154 and F-4K respectively, the latter being forced to adopt a two-seater P.1154 interceptor based on the RAF version later on for the "through deck cruisers".)

[Zen]

DAW (I think thats Director Air Warfare) did studies of a small CV for CTOL ops that could be converted for what we might call CTOVL or CaTOVL. Catapult Take off and Vertical Landing. Though it must be said this is in 1954.
Seems it was rather precipitous and so DAW's next effort on such ships was the first parallel deck type for CTOL aircraft, trading continious ops for a 580ft deck and a deck park.

DNC then produces a rather nice design to counter DAW's studies showing a more normal CV of Colossus size can operate machines like the Scimitar.

Considering the timescales its quite likely such ships would loose the catapult when switching to the P1154RN in favour of the ski-ramp.

[dy031101]

DNC then produces a rather nice design to counter DAW's studies showing a more normal CV of Colossus size can operate machines like the Scimitar.

Size of a Colossus class?  Do you have an artist impression of it?

[GTX]

I thought I would add these to this discussion - some rough details of the internal arrangement of the P.1154 variants:

RN:



RAF:



Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

My Maintrack RN P.1154 has a pair of main wheels which retract into pods that are on the trailing edge of the wing, which are located somewhere about the same area the outriggers retract on a GR.5/7/9.  I didn't know there was a RN version which had the single main leg retracting into the fuselage like a Harrier.

Robert

[Zen]

When I get a scanner working I might be able to show you, but yes. A 695ft inthe waterline, 700ft long CVL, 122ft wide, two inboard lifts of rather large proportions, a 500ft long angled deck at about 4 degrees.

Presumably its powered like the earlier modernised Colossus type considered with a pair of YEAD I machinary for 60,000shp.

[Howard of Effingham]

hmm, if the FAA and RAF had bought a P1154 variant each, would a sale to the USMC of the same be a possibility?

and would the P1154 have fitted on most of the USN carriers of the 1970's, in the same manner that AV-8A's flew
off of USS franklin d. roosevelt in bout 1976 or so?

[Gondor]

hmm, if the FAA and RAF had bought a P1154 variant each, would a sale to the USMC of the same be a possibility?

and would the P1154 have fitted on most of the USN carriers of the 1970's, in the same manner that AV-8A's flew
off of USS franklin d. roosevelt in bout 1976 or so?

Basically if it could fit on/into a RN carrier then it would fit into the larger USN carriers

Gondor

[Howard of Effingham]

thanks gondor.

my freightdog P1154 gets a USMC finish now.