BAE Sea Harrier F.3 (another revised designation)

[G777]

Cool, I like it!

[kitnut617]

Cool, I like it!

Cheers mate !!

I'll get on with this in earnest later in the month, got our final visitors coming from the UK this weekend for two weeks. It's been really hectic this year, our nephew and his wife came in April for two weeks, followed by his younger brother a week after they went home for two weeks.  Then the younger brother (he's currently stationed at Suffield in the south of Alberta) came again for three weeks with his girlfriend in June followed by the first nephew and his wife again for two weeks in July.  Younger brother came again for a week last week and now on Sunday, their Mom (SWMBO's sister) and Dad arrive.  I'm just about 'visited' out ---  

[tinlail]

Of course this would only work if there was some advance warning of an attack on the fleet, I would imagine there would have to be some pickets way out in front, a submarine or an AWAC, so the F.13 wouldn't be the total answer to defending a fleet.

You need the AWACS version of the Osprey.

[Ian the Kiwi Herder]

Always enjoy your projects, Robert.... looking forward to seeing this one progress.

Ian

[kitnut617]

Thanks Ian, I'll be able to concentrate on this after this weekend, the last of our visitors for this year who are from the UK are leaving on Sunday (wife's sister and hubby) so things should get back to near normal  

Anyway, some bits arrived from Heritage Aviation today, 100% LERX for the F.3 (after some discussion with a member of the ATF forum, I think as this is a Sea Harrier it's designation should really be an F.3 so I've re-named it) and some nozzles, these are to replace the ones I'm using on my STOVL Canberra (which will be finished off sometime soon too).  Plus from Ed, some more MRCA Martels (many thanks Ed and already assembled [bonus  ] )

[Taiidantomcat]

Going all out! 

[Devilfish]

 Comparing the two Airfix Club kit Harriers (GR.7 & FA.2)

it doesn't explain the differences the two kits have in the wheel bay lengths ??

The reason is that they are completely different aircraft. (SHAR2 being based on the original GR1/GR3/FRS1 airframe)

The latest radars use AESA (active electronically scanned array), meaning no moving parts at all.  They use lots of tiny transmitters to form the search beam.  This would be a better bet for your system. 
The radar would only be needed to initially search for the targets as, if your missile is like Phoenix, it will be fully active.
The data-link system wouldn't need a seperate pod (if that's the way you are still going?) as it would be fully integrated to the aircrafts systems. 

Other than those minor points, I love this idea

[kitnut617]

The reason is that they are completely different aircraft. (SHAR2 being based on the original GR1/GR3/FRS1 airframe)

Um, yes - I realise that they are from the two different versions, but looking at the models I see that the two edges of the bays that are closest to each other(the back edge of the front bay and the front edge of the rear bay) they're in the same place.  What's different is the length going from these edges and I hadn't thought there was any difference in the u/c legs, at least from what I've read.

The latest radars use AESA (active electronically scanned array), meaning no moving parts at all.  They use lots of tiny transmitters to form the search beam.  This would be a better bet for your system. 

Isn't that also known as a 'phased-array' system 

[Hobbes]

Yes.

[kitnut617]

I've experimented with a jet engined Martel here, it could be either a ramjet or a turbojet

[Hobbes]

Nice idea! I'd make the intake a bit bigger, though. See the Sea Eagle below.

[kitnut617]

I'd wondered if it was big enough, I'll have to have a look through my styrene stock to see if I got a bigger channel section to use.

[Hobbes]

Drinking straws are nice source material for this.

[Taiidantomcat]

Cutting the nose off an Aim-7 Sparrow half will work well for a scoop too

[kitnut617]

OK, jet engined Martel, take 2