Hawker Siddeley Sea-Hawk S.1

Devilfish · March 14, 2013, 01:28:37 AM

In the late 60's with the imminent retirement of the big carriers, the Navy chiefs fought tooth and nail to retain some sort of Fleet Air Arm. Events in the early 70's, with the fuel crisis and the wars in the middle east, led the government to make the decision to replace just one of the carriers with a retired, surplus USN carrier, that were in the process of being phased out for more modern nuclear variants. A deal was struck whereby the USS Kittyhawk would be bought, shipped to Scotland and refitted. British Radars and defensive systems were fitted, as well as an overhaul to the living quarters.
As part of the deal, many aircraft types were replaced with american equivalents.
The F-14 was bought for fleet defence, leaving the F-4 to carry out strike roles.

However, a need was envisaged for a small, fast, point defence anti-shipping aircraft. Initially the A-4 was considered, but Hawker Siddelley claimed they could develop their new Hawk into a suitable aircraft.
The new aircraft, designated the Seahawk, has strengthened undercarriage and an extending nose leg to increase AOA on launch. The wings and tail are "blown" to increase lift. Precious power could not be diverted from the engine for this, so an system developed in which the APU is left running during take off and landing to provide blown air.
An in-flight refueling probe is fitted to extend range when required.
The flight profile is as follows....
After launch, the aircraft flies towards the target ship at around 200ft. when the tail mounted RWR warns of the ship searching for them, the AR Martel is fired and the plane descends to 50ft.
The Martel will have one of 2 effects. It will destroy the enemy radar, or it will force them to shut it off.....either gives the aircraft the chance to get closer.
At around 16 miles, the TV Martel is fired and the aircraft turns around. As it retreats to safety, the weapons operator in the rear seat guides the TV Martel via the centreline Data-link pod.

Dizzyfugu · March 14, 2013, 01:43:40 AM

Very nice work, I like it very much, esp. the external refuelling probe arrangement. This looks like a converted standard Hawk, not a T-45, correct?

Always a challenge to fit relatively large missiles under smaller aircraft...

1:72 Fiat G.91N; RNoAF, 333 squadron, Ørland air base, 1988 (Whif/Italeri kit conversion) by dizzyfugu, on Flickr

Devilfish · March 14, 2013, 01:58:57 AM

Yes, started as a T1, with a 100 tail (RWR), modified airbrakes etc.

I had a lot of trouble getting the Martels to clear the ground. Initially I fitted the launch rails but they contacted the ground, so I removed them (the French don't seem to use them). Lets just hope the pilot doesn't make too heavy a deck recovery, lol

PR19_Kit · March 14, 2013, 02:15:17 AM

Yeah, like that a lot, both the model and the idea too.

NARSES2 · March 14, 2013, 08:44:56 AM

That looks really good

deathjester · March 14, 2013, 11:09:12 AM

Hmm, looks vaguely familiar...

Looks great - nice one! Really like the anti ship tactics!!

sandiego89 · March 14, 2013, 03:49:40 PM

Very well done! I like it. Ditto on the scabbed on plumbing for the inflight refueling piping.

Weaver · March 14, 2013, 04:19:16 PM

Yes: funny how a refuelling probe really "makes" the look of some planes isn't it? Gives it a "purposeful" look somehow....

That's very good Devilfish - nice one. The Martels must be possible because were touted as a Sea Eagle platform and the Sea Eagle was based on the Martel airframe. Using the APU for blowing is ingenious. Not sure it'd really be neccessary though: Hawks are pretty small and the T-45 seems to do okay without it.

Devilfish · March 15, 2013, 12:17:29 AM

Quote from: Weaver on March 14, 2013, 04:19:16 PM
Yes: funny how a refuelling probe really "makes" the look of some planes isn't it? Gives it a "purposeful" look somehow....

Originally it was to have one Martel on the centreline, then one drop tank and the data acquisition pod on the pylons. But I feel this is a more useful load, so a probe was required.

Quote from: Weaver on March 14, 2013, 04:19:16 PM
That's very good Devilfish - nice one. The Martels must be possible because were touted as a Sea Eagle platform and the Sea Eagle was based on the Martel airframe. Using the APU for blowing is ingenious. Not sure it'd really be neccessary though: Hawks are pretty small and the T-45 seems to do okay without it.

The Martel is slightly lighter than Sea Eagle too, which is how I got away with carrying two. In reality, the Sea Eagle is too heavy for the Hawk. The pictures that are out there are of a mock up missile.
The T-45 is a trainer remember, and doesn't have to launch from a carrier with a weapons load. This one is carrying at least an extra 3000lb of weight, so I feel that blown wings are a prudent safety precaution.

Weaver · March 15, 2013, 04:30:07 AM

Quote from: Devilfish on March 15, 2013, 12:17:29 AM
The Martel is slightly lighter than Sea Eagle too, which is how I got away with carrying two. In reality, the Sea Eagle is too heavy for the Hawk. The pictures that are out there are of a mock up missile.

The Sea Eagle weighs 1279lb and the Hawk's centreline and inboard wing pylons are rated at 1500lb, within a total payload of 6800lb, so I don't see that, to be honest. One round plus two tanks plus two Sidewinders seems entirely possible.

Quote
The T-45 is a trainer remember, and doesn't have to launch from a carrier with a weapons load. This one is carrying at least an extra 3000lb of weight, so I feel that blown wings are a prudent safety precaution.

Fair comment.

Captain Canada · March 15, 2013, 04:48:41 AM

Very nice. Looks so right in those colours. I like the beefier nose of the Goshawk, but the A-4 style also suits her. I've been thinking alot about Hawks recently ( been reading Paul Courtnage's ebook ) and am looking at building a few !

Devilfish · March 15, 2013, 04:56:28 AM

Quote from: Weaver on March 15, 2013, 04:30:07 AM
Quote from: Devilfish on March 15, 2013, 12:17:29 AM
The Martel is slightly lighter than Sea Eagle too, which is how I got away with carrying two. In reality, the Sea Eagle is too heavy for the Hawk. The pictures that are out there are of a mock up missile.

The Sea Eagle weighs 1279lb and the Hawk's centreline and inboard wing pylons are rated at 1500lb, within a total payload of 6800lb, so I don't see that, to be honest. One round plus two tanks plus two Sidewinders seems entirely possible.

What mark of Hawk? I have some books from the 80's giving the inner and centreline pylons rated at (iirc) around 1100 to 1200lb each. This is a late 70's whif remember, so all facts and figures have to be regarding that era.

Weaver · March 18, 2013, 12:06:09 PM

Quote from: Devilfish on March 15, 2013, 04:56:28 AM
Quote from: Weaver on March 15, 2013, 04:30:07 AM
Quote from: Devilfish on March 15, 2013, 12:17:29 AM
The Martel is slightly lighter than Sea Eagle too, which is how I got away with carrying two. In reality, the Sea Eagle is too heavy for the Hawk. The pictures that are out there are of a mock up missile.

The Sea Eagle weighs 1279lb and the Hawk's centreline and inboard wing pylons are rated at 1500lb, within a total payload of 6800lb, so I don't see that, to be honest. One round plus two tanks plus two Sidewinders seems entirely possible.

What mark of Hawk? I have some books from the 80's giving the inner and centreline pylons rated at (iirc) around 1100 to 1200lb each. This is a late 70's whif remember, so all facts and figures have to be regarding that era.

Looking into it a bit more, I think I may have misunderstood a comment about the pylons being rated at 1500lb: I can't find a definative statement about the later Hawks and early (RAF) ones are listed as 1120lb. However:

1. I don't believe for a moment that they'd have offered the Sea Eagle if the aircraft couldn't actually carry it: what would be the point? Any customer interest wouldn't get past first base.

2. Any Hawk upgraded for carrier use is going to have to have it's structure substantially uprated anyhow, so if Sea Eagle was desired, an uprated hardpoint would have been easy to include.

Devilfish · March 19, 2013, 12:20:22 AM

Quote from: Weaver on March 18, 2013, 12:06:09 PM
Looking into it a bit more, I think I may have misunderstood a comment about the pylons being rated at 1500lb: I can't find a definative statement about the later Hawks and early (RAF) ones are listed as 1120lb. However:

1. I don't believe for a moment that they'd have offered the Sea Eagle if the aircraft couldn't actually carry it: what would be the point? Any customer interest wouldn't get past first base.

2. Any Hawk upgraded for carrier use is going to have to have it's structure substantially uprated anyhow, so if Sea Eagle was desired, an uprated hardpoint would have been easy to include.

I agree with you totally. I did read on another forum that altho the Hawk did physically carry the Sea Eagle, it could fly at a fast enough speed to launch it (bearing in mind it has a turbojet not a rocket motor) I don't know how true that is tho....

Yes, a carrier Hawk would be substantially uprated, so carriage of the Martels (lighter than Sea Eagle) shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Weaver · March 19, 2013, 05:45:19 AM

Well Sea Eagle can be launched from Sea Kings with the aid of a pair of strap-on rockets, so if the Hawk's flying speed was a problem, they could just use the rocket-boosted version. Have to say that I find it a bit hard to believe that the Hawk couldn't carry it fast enough to air-start it's engine: I'd think that the Hawk's stalling speed would be fast enough to manage that! A more likely problem is that the missile would fall a long way from a slow platform before getting up to flying speed due to the lower acceleration of a turbojet compared to a rocket, but you can counter that (at some tactical disadvange, granted) by launching it at a greater height.