Hawkers Private Venture: The Hawker P1121 Hurricane II - I fancy a bit of S&M...

[Steel Penguin]

you could always use the top holes for overwing rails, ... make a feature of an error!

[PR19_Kit]

Can't you just tell that Duncan's been on a spraying binge? 

Four posts in succession that have all reached the same stage on the same night? There's going to be mucho decalling in the Overkill Palace tonight I know!   

[Steel Penguin]

Okay duncan... okay.... ( looks round to make certain hes not between me and the door)  maybe a nice cup of tea? eh.  (steps back carefuly)  
It does look lovely though, and no dought when finished will look effortless.

[Weaver]

Nice one Duncan - lots of pain, but it's looking really good now.

Roy Braybrook opined that Camm's one big mistake was in making the 1121 too big and heavy, a Draken sized aircraft, in his opinion, stood more chance of being adopted.

I've often though that a straight-forward Mirage-style development of the Fairey Delta II would have produced a decent aircraft.

Having said that, IMHO I still think this is the one we should have had, it was just the sort of aircraft we really needed, a decent all round Hunter replacement that the country could actually afford to develop and deploy in useful numbers, and had a reasonable chance of gaining a meaningful number of export sales.

Then again, the comparable F-105 didn't get any export sales. Either it was too expensive to buy, too nuclear to sell, or the Phantom stole it's lunch.

As wonderful a machine the TSR-2 might have been, it was simply beyond the economic means of the UK to develop on its own, I like the TSR-2 as much as anyone on this forum, but I do rather think that the single biggest mistake in the whole sorry saga, was starting the project in the first place. A mixed force of Lightnings for air defence, Buccaneers for strike/recon and a swing force of 1121's to switch between strike and air defence would have been just the ticket (of course, hindsight is a wonderful thing, I here the baying crowd cry....) You may now proceed to pillory me....

I'll join you in that pillory: I think TSR.2 was a mistake too. What really, really annoys me is the RAF's snotty attitude to the Buccaneer, just because it was naval and subsonic. Had they taken it seriously earlier, they could have had an RAF- tailored version much earlier than the still-good ones they ended up with.

[Gondor]

Blue Dolphins sound like the idea weapons for the aircraft.

Gondor

[deathjester]

That is most beautiful!  Very nice

[Mr.Creak]

I'm in love.
The P.1121 has been in my top five favourite aircraft ever since I came across Derek Wood's Project Cancelled.
You, sir, have done an awesome job.

[NARSES2]

Yet another nice build Duncan. Can't say I'm a fan of the 1121, for some reason it always looks way to big to be a fighter to me 

Always suprises me how these really large aircraft carry such a seemingly small weapons load ?

[Mr.Creak]

Always suprises me how these really large aircraft carry such a seemingly small weapons load ?

I remember (from somewhere: Air International again?) that Roy Braybrook noted the P.1121 had the warload/ radius of the F-105, i.e. around 8 tonnes (? from memory) of lifting capability.
It was after all a dual-role aircraft. If it had ever been built I see MERs and TERs aplenty: a British Phantom possibly...

[NARSES2]

The next one will be Indian in the strike role, possibly circa the war of '71,
Duncan

Thanks for the explanations Dunc. Indian loaded up in the strike role would look good, especially with MER's etc as Mr Creak says.

I remember (from somewhere: Air International again?) that Roy Braybrook noted the P.1121 had the warload/ radius of the F-105, i.e. around 8 tonnes (? from memory) of lifting capability.
It was after all a dual-role aircraft. If it had ever been built I see MERs and TERs aplenty: a British Phantom possibly...

Must admit I had forgot that and I can see it loaded up in the way F.105's were. It's just in every drawing of British designs from the period I've seen there are simply a couple of missiles or maybe a tac nuke. I suppose it's because of the emphasis on defence against the Soviet Union and their masssed tank armies ? Once Vietnam comes along then you start seeing aircraft loaded up with conventional weapons and all the drawings of British projects pre-date that change I suppose.

Be interesting to see any survivors in Gulf War I, mybe two seat Wild Weasels ?

Again thanks for the info lads

Chris

[Mossie]

Well, it sounds like you got your S&M out of this kit, but a good result in the end mate!   Liking the 4 Sqn markings, good to see your not afraid to go with a low number squadron!

I think the thing with seeing GA diagrams of British aircraft carrying light warloads boils down to a number of things.  Firstly, it's mostly representative, to determine if there's interference with the airframe & other weapons.  Also, I think there was a doctrine that change until the Falklands war to keep warloads down & performance up.  Certainly in the fifties & sixties the emphasis was in getting a fighter to the target as quick as possible.  In the Falklands it was realised that you really needed more AtoA weapons on board & this started to happen after then, the RN doubled the missile carriage on the Shar & the RAF introduced missiles for self defence on their attack aircraft.

[Pablo1965]

Really your kit and his scheme are a very awesome combination and a brilliant idea.
I like this plane.

[Stargazer]

Wonderful model!!

[GTX]

Be interesting to see any survivors in Gulf War I, mybe two seat Wild Weasels ?

Ooo...yes please!

Regards,

Greg

[GTX]

Oops, forgotto congratulate you on a nice model.