Hawker P.1121

Last updated

P.1121
Hawker P.1121.JPG
Hawker P.1121 model on display at the Midland Air Museum.
RoleFighter aircraft
Manufacturer Hawker Siddeley
StatusCancelled

The Hawker P.1121 was a British supersonic fighter aircraft designed, but never fully completed, by Hawker Siddeley during the mid-1950s. It was designed by a team headed by Sir Sydney Camm.

Contents

The P.1121 was initially funded as a private venture by Hawker Siddeley, with the aim of producing an aircraft that conformed with the requirements of Operational Requirement 339 (OR.339) by the UK Air Ministry.

In 1958, all work was stopped, [1] shortly following the publication of the infamous 1957 Defence White Paper by Minister of Defence Duncan Sandys, which had called for manned fighter aircraft to be phased out and replaced with guided missiles.

Development

In March 1954, Hawker decided to embark on the development of a new fighter aircraft in response to the release of Operational Requirement 323 (OR.323) by the Air Ministry. [2] This initial design, designated as the P.1103, was a twin-seat swept wing aircraft powered by the de Havilland Gyron turbojet engine and armed with two sizeable Red Dean air-to-air missiles. The proposed design was reworked the following year when, in February 1955, the Ministry issued OR.329, which, amongst other requirements, called for a large 40-inch (100 cm) sweep-scanning radar unit, AI.18, to be installed. [2] In October 1955, Hawker decided to tender its revised P.1103 proposal for the requirement, notably offering the Red Hebe missile as an alternative to Red Dean. [2]

In 1956, Air Marshal Thomas Pike, the Deputy Chief of the Air Force, approached Sidney Camm, the lead designer of the P.1103, to air his suggestion that the proposed aircraft might be reasonably adopted to perform as a combined long-range interceptor and ground attack platform, which could include the potential utilisation of nuclear weapons. [3] Camm, who found the suggestion to be favourable with his thinking, promptly directed his team to design a twin-seat strike derivative of the P.1103, which was soon given the designation P.1116; a similar single-seat proposal was also prepared, designated P.1121. [4]

In terms of specifications, capacities and performance, the proposed P.1121 was similar to the American McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II, which was at that point also under development, both aircraft possessing comparable performance and load carrying capacity. [4] According to Hawker's own summary within the presented proposal, the P.1121 was promoted as being ready for production as early as 1960, and was to have been capable of speeds of up to Mach 2.5. Promoted elements of the design included its high speed, large internal fuel capacity, provision for a wide range of munitions and equipment, and being strengthened for a full range of ground attack profiles. [4] Hawker promoted in detail the long-term development potential of the P.1121 to the RAF. [5]

In addition to the Mach 2.5 design, Hawker also carried out initial design work upon an even faster version of the P.1121. [5] This model, which was projected to be capable of Mach 3, was to be outfitted with a steel wing along with an uprated engine in order to achieve this increase. Multiple radical proposals, such a version which would have utilised a combination of both rocket and jet propulsion, had also mooted for the type. [5] In May 1957, Camm produced a rough draft of a twin-engined version of the aircraft, designated as the P.1125, which was to have been powered by a pair of Rolls-Royce RB.133 engines. [5] While the prototype would be furnished with a Gyron P.S.26-6 model capable of 17,400 lbf (77 kN) thrust (23,800 lbf (106 kN) with reheat), production aircraft had been envisioned to make use of the more powerful P.S.26-3 engine, capable of 20,000 lbf (89 kN) thrust (27,000 lbf (120 kN) with reheat). [4] The Gyron engine would have provided the P.1121 with a relatively quick time-to-altitude and interception performance in comparison to contemporary fighters. [4]

By September 1957, at which point the infamous 1957 Defence White Paper was published, work had progressed to an advanced stage on the P.1121 project. [5] While OR.329 was cancelled, it was recognised that the design could be reworked to meet OR.339, which was by then the only-remaining long term manned aircraft requirement left to contend for. During October 1957, shortly after the receipt of OR.339 that month, it was determined that an enlarged version of the P.1125 proposal was the most likely candidate to meet the requirements, thus, in January 1958, it was submitted as the P.1129, powered by a pair of Rolls-Royce RB.141 engines. [5]

On 25 June 1959, the Defence Research Policy Committee approved funds for OR.339, at which point Hawker Siddeley's management directed that a re-submission be made. [5] Accordingly, Camm produced a modified P.1129 proposal, which drew on improvements featured on a competing design by Avro. By Summer 1958, the major assemblies for the P.1121 had been completed along with extensive wind tunnel testing, most of the system trials had also been completed. [6] However, the Hawker Siddeley board decided to slow development on the project, being unwilling to self-finance its final completion along with its maiden flight, pending upon the outcome of OR.339. Thus, the nearly complete aircraft remained in Hawker's Kingston facility effectively due to lack of funding. [7]

In January 1959, it was announced that a competing submission by Vickers and English Electric had been awarded the contract for OR.339, which effectively signalled the demise of P.1121. [7] The company's board saw no value in pursuing development against government favour. While efforts were made during 1960 to revive the P.1121 programme, by this point development of the Gyron engine that was to power it had already been terminated as well. [8] The aircraft had failed to be selected due to the Air Staff having been unable to understand the concept of the multi-purpose functionality of the aircraft, which would become commonplace on later aircraft. [9] While seeking a new project to take the place of the P.1121, Camm soon began work upon another new and radical aircraft design, designated as the Hawker Siddeley P.1127. The P.1127 would become the Hawker Siddeley Harrier, the first effective vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) combat aircraft. [9]

Design

The Hawker P.1121 was envisioned as being one of the first British-built supersonic fighter aircraft, being projected to be capable of speeds of up to Mach 2.5. [4] It was to have been used not only as a radar-equipped interceptor aircraft but also ground attack missions, which was envisaged to potentially include tactical nuclear weapons. [4] If pursued, the P.1121 would have replaced existing RAF transonic aircraft, such as the Hawker Hunter. While initial models were envisioned to be single-seat aircraft, Hawker emphasized that twin-seat versions, to seat a navigator/radar operator, were plausible. [5]

The P.1121 was to be powered by a single de Havilland Gyron turbojet engine; Camm chose the Gyron engine to power the type as at the time it had been determined to be the only suitable powerplant that was available. [4] Alternative powerplants were evaluated for potential use, including the Rolls-Royce Olympus turbojet engine and the Rolls-Royce Conway turbofan engine, the latter being the first available turbofan engine in the world. According to Wood, the Olympus engine provided the best compromise on paper, capable of an equal strike range to the Conway while delivering similar speed and altitude performance to the Gyron engine. [10] Airflow would have been provided to the relatively large engine via a large fully variable 'shark-mouth' style intake positioned beneath the aircraft's fuselage. [11]

Conventional construction was employed throughout the majority of the P.1121; using a thick lightweight alloy skin placed on top of tightly spaced frames and stringers, while steel was used for some highly stressed components. [11] The fuselage was split into three major sections; the front fuselage contained the radome, cockpit, radio, and equipment bay, the centre section housed the engine, air intake, belly-mounted air brake, nosewheel, 2-inch (51 mm) rocket launching fixtures, and a total of five nylon bag fuel tanks. The rear fuselage section was occupied by the reheat pipe, final nozzle, the main undercarriage a pair of rear air brakes, and two further bag-type fuel tanks. [11] The P.1121 was furnished with a four-spar wing, covered by a 0.3-inch (7.6 mm) thick alloy skin, which was similarly shaped to the wing of the preceding Hawker Hunter. [11] The spars were attached to steel booms at the inboard end, which were in turn fixed onto the four main frames of the centre fuselage section. The structural box of the wing also contained an integral fuel tank, containing up to 420 imperial gallons (1,900 L) of fuel in addition to the 1,055 imperial gallons (4,800 L) held within the fuselage fuel tanks. [11] Up to four additional underwing external fuel tanks could also be fitted if required. [11]

The flying controls of the P.1121 were designed as a fully integrated system which enabled power to be entirely duplicated across the control surfaces. [11] The weapon system was to be initially based on the Ferranti AI.23 radar unit, however Hawker had envisaged adopting a GEC-built J-band radar, to be capable of a 35 nautical miles (65 km) search range, and further radar improvements were projected beyond this, as well as the use of new semi-active radar-guided air-to-air missiles developed by Fairey. [12] A fully integrated power control system with autopilot functionality and Doppler navigation was to assist in performing low-altitude bombing runs using both conventional and nuclear armaments. [5] Various upgrades and modifications for the base P.1121 design were proposed. [5] Sideways-looking radar, the equipment for which to be installed upon underwing pylons, was promoted as an available option for the type; a forward-looking radar could also replace the standard AI radar unit for improved strike performance. The P.1121 could have also be used in the Electronic countermeasures (ECM) role, being fitted with underwing pods to do so. [5] A centrally mounted fuel/bomb cell was also conceived of, which would have provided a total fuel capacity of 3,000 imperial gallons (14,000 L). Upon customer request, it could have been outfitted with 30mm ADEN cannons as well. [5]

See also

Related development

Aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">BAC TSR-2</span> British reconnaissance strike aircraft prototype

The British Aircraft Corporation TSR-2 is a cancelled Cold War strike and reconnaissance aircraft developed by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC), for the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The TSR-2 was designed around both conventional and nuclear weapons delivery: it was to penetrate well-defended frontline areas at low altitudes and very high speeds, and then attack high-value targets in rear areas. Another intended combat role was to provide high-altitude, high-speed stand-off, side-looking radar and photographic imagery and signals intelligence, aerial reconnaissance. Only one airframe flew and test flights and weight-rise during design indicated that the aircraft would be unable to meet its original stringent design specifications. The design specifications were reduced as the result of flight testing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Afterburner</span> Adds additional thrust to an engine at the cost of increased fuel consumption

An afterburner is an additional combustion component used on some jet engines, mostly those on military supersonic aircraft. Its purpose is to increase thrust, usually for supersonic flight, takeoff, and combat. The afterburning process injects additional fuel into a combustor in the jet pipe behind the turbine, "reheating" the exhaust gas. Afterburning significantly increases thrust as an alternative to using a bigger engine with its attendant weight penalty, but at the cost of increased fuel consumption which limits its use to short periods. This aircraft application of "reheat" contrasts with the meaning and implementation of "reheat" applicable to gas turbines driving electrical generators and which reduces fuel consumption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Folland Gnat</span> Type of aircraft

The Folland Gnat is a British compact swept-wing subsonic fighter aircraft that was developed and produced by Folland Aircraft. Envisioned as an affordable light fighter in contrast to the rising cost and size of typical combat aircraft, it was procured as a trainer aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF) as well as by export customers, who used the Gnat in both combat and training capacities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bristol 188</span> British supersonic research aircraft

The Bristol 188 is a British supersonic research aircraft built by the Bristol Aeroplane Company in the 1950s. Its length, slender cross-section and intended purpose led to its being nicknamed the "Flaming Pencil".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Saunders-Roe SR.53</span> Type of aircraft

The Saunders-Roe SR.53 was a British prototype interceptor aircraft of mixed jet and rocket propulsion developed for the Royal Air Force (RAF) by Saunders-Roe in the early 1950s. As envisaged, the SR.53 would have been used as an interceptor aircraft, using its rocket propulsion to rapidly climb and approach incoming hostile bombers at high speeds; following its attack run, the aircraft would then return to its base using jet propulsion.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Saunders-Roe SR.177</span> 1950s British cancelled interceptor aircraft project

The Saunders-Roe SR.177 was a 1950s project to develop a combined jet- and rocket-powered interceptor aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF) and Royal Navy. It was an enlarged derivative of the Saunders-Roe SR.53, which was itself an experimental combined jet-and-rocket interceptor aircraft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supermarine Swift</span> British single-seat jet-propelled fighter aircraft

The Supermarine Swift is a British single-seat jet fighter aircraft that was operated by the Royal Air Force (RAF). It was developed and manufactured by Supermarine during the 1940s and 1950s. The Swift featured many of the new jet age innovations, such as a swept wing. On 26 September 1953, a Swift F.4 piloted by Commander Mike Lithgow broke the world absolute speed record, reaching a speed of 737.7 mph (1,187 km/h).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hawker Siddeley P.1127</span> British experimental V/STOL aircraft

The Hawker P.1127 and the Hawker Siddeley Kestrel FGA.1 are the British experimental and development aircraft that led to the Hawker Siddeley Harrier, the first vertical and/or short take-off and landing (V/STOL) jet fighter-bomber.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Fairey Delta 2</span> Type of aircraft

The Fairey Delta 2 or FD2 is a British supersonic research aircraft that was produced by the Fairey Aviation Company in response to a specification from the Ministry of Supply for a specialised aircraft for conducting investigations into flight and control at transonic and supersonic speeds. Features included a delta wing and a drooped nose. On 6 October 1954, the Delta 2 made its maiden flight, flown by Fairey test pilot Peter Twiss; two aircraft would be produced. The Delta 2 was the final aircraft to be produced by Fairey as an independent manufacturer.

de Havilland Gyron 1950s British turbojet aircraft engine

The de Havilland PS.23 or PS.52 Gyron, originally the Halford H-4, was Frank Halford's last turbojet design while working for de Havilland. Intended to outpower any design then under construction, the Gyron was the most powerful engine of its era, producing 20,000 lbf (89 kN) "dry", and 27,000 lbf (120 kN) with reheat.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dassault Mirage IIIV</span> French vertical take-off and landing prototype fighter aircraft

The Dassault Mirage IIIV, also spelled Mirage III V, was a French vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) prototype fighter aircraft of the mid-1960s developed and produced by Dassault Aviation.

The Hawker Siddeley P.1154 was a planned supersonic vertical/short take-off and landing (V/STOL) fighter aircraft designed by Hawker Siddeley Aviation (HSA).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">EWR VJ 101</span> Experimental aircraft by Entwicklungsring Süd

The EWR VJ 101 was an experimental German jet fighter vertical takeoff/landing (VTOL) tiltjet aircraft. VJ stood for Versuchsjäger,. The VJ 101 was one of the first V/STOL designs to have the potential for eventual Mach 2 flight.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Avro 730</span> Type of aircraft

The Avro 730 was a planned Mach 3 reconnaissance aircraft and strategic bomber that was being developed by Avro Aircraft for the Royal Air Force (RAF). It had been originally envisioned as a very high-speed aircraft to perform aerial reconnaissance missions, conforming with the requirements of Air Ministry Specification OR.330. Avro subsequently decided to modify the design of the proposed 730 in order to accommodate its arming with nuclear weapons; this change therefore meant that the type would be able to perform the nuclear weapons delivery mission as well, which had been called for under Air Ministry Specification RB.156T which sought a high speed reconnaissance-bomber aircraft.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rockwell XFV-12</span> American VTOL fighter prototype

The Rockwell XFV-12 was a prototype supersonic United States Navy fighter which was built in 1977. The XFV-12 design attempted to combine the Mach 2 speed and AIM-7 Sparrow armament of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II in a VTOL fighter for the small Sea Control Ship which was under study at the time. On paper, it looked superior to the subsonic Hawker Siddeley Harrier attack fighter. However it was unable to demonstrate an untethered vertical takeoff and its inability to meet performance requirements terminated the program.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Operational Requirement F.155</span> British military defense specification

Operational Requirement F.155 was a specification issued by the British Ministry of Supply on 15 January 1955 for an interceptor aircraft to defend the United Kingdom from Soviet high-flying nuclear-armed supersonic bombers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Armstrong Whitworth AW.681</span> 1960s British military transport aircraft design study

The Armstrong Whitworth AW.681, also known as the Whitworth Gloster 681 or Hawker Siddeley HS.681, was a projected British long-range STOL military transport aircraft design of the early 1960s. Developed by manufacturer Armstrong Whitworth Aircraft, it was intended to be capable of achieving both Short Takeoff and Landing (STOL) and Vertical Takeoff and Landing (VTOL) performance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Avro 720</span> Type of aircraft

The Avro 720 was an in-development British single-seat interceptor of the 1950s. It was designed and being developed by Avro in competition with the Saunders-Roe-built SR.53. While at least one prototype was partially-constructed, the order for the Avro 720, and quickly thereafter the project entirely, was terminated prior to any aircraft having been completed.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hawker P.1103</span> Cancelled British interceptor aircraft design

The Hawker P.1103 was a design by Hawker Aircraft to meet the British Operational Requirement F.155; it did not progress further than the drawing board.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Supermarine 545</span> 1950s British cancelled fighter aircraft

The Supermarine 545 was a supersonic jet fighter project designed by the British aircraft manufacturer Supermarine. A single aircraft was built, but remained unflown, largely due to the project having fallen out of political favour.

References

Citations

  1. Mason 1991, pp. 80–81
  2. 1 2 3 Wood 1975, p. 207.
  3. Wood 1975, pp. 207–208.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Wood 1975, p. 208.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Wood 1975, p. 211.
  6. Wood 1975, pp. 211–212.
  7. 1 2 Wood 1975, p. 212.
  8. Wood 1975, pp. 212–213.
  9. 1 2 Wood 1975, p. 213.
  10. Wood 1975, pp. 208–209.
  11. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wood 1975, p. 209.
  12. Wood 1975, pp. 209–211.

Bibliography