Replacing the Hunter

uk 75

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
27 September 2006
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
5,537
Only two modern British combat jets have been export successes: The Hunter and the Hawk.
Unlike the TSR2, P1154 and myriad complex paper projects beloved of us here, these two planes were simple, elegant solutions.
Of course its not that simple. Many Hunters were sold as fighters rather than fighter/ground attack aircraft.
They were replaced by planes as different as the F104 and the Saab F35.
RAF Hunters were eventually replaced by the Jaguar. By 60s standards Jaguar was a sensible, simple design.
Ironically, the Hawk started life as a "replacement" for RAF Jaguars re-roled as FGA.
A third aircraft deserves a mention, the Saab Gripen. This design owes much to the BAe light fighter studies of the 70s and is in many ways close to the Hunter on simplicity and cost effectiveness.
BAe now seems focussed on F35 Lightning and Tempest. Perhaps it needs to remember Hunter, Hawk and Gripen
 
Last edited:
Harrier?

Worth noting how much US cash went into developing and building Hunters and Harriers. And that basically all of Hunter, Harrier, Hawk were basically pilot eyeball laying down guns, rockets and iron bombs. Hardly all-weather attack.

Jaguar with a single turbofan and bigger wing and not supersonic feels like the best Hunter FGA.9 replacement to me

Nowadays I'm not sure any combat aircraft is focused on simplicity, or what this would even look like.
 
"Jaguar with a single turbofan and bigger wing and not supersonic feels like the best Hunter FGA.9 replacement to me"
= AMX?

A Harrier pilot would probably argue their eyeball is the best sensor there is (God's eye view!)

An aircraft can't focus on anything. Only a designer can.
 

Attachments

  • 1620081366762.png
    1620081366762.png
    705.2 KB · Views: 185
Ditto to the AMX, a lot of potential in that small design. I think of the all the plethora of Spey based projects that went nowhere, Mirage IIIK, Spey A-4, Supersonic A-7, F-100S etc (Calling on @Archibald ) Depending on your timeline departure, there could be a subsonic light attack Spey AMX type like the French wanted and either go for a Spey Mirage III/V or F1 for the supersonic attack and all-weather role.
 
A Harrier pilot would probably argue their eyeball is the best sensor there is (God's eye view!)
A lot has changed since then, but when A-10's were playing AFAC over Kosovo, they found when restricted to medium altitude, the gyrostabilized binoculars the A-10 pilots were using had better resolution, bigger images, and better contrast than the LANTIRN pods on the Beagles, Bombcats, and Vipers.
 
Jaguar with one engine gets my vote. At 1st with Avon (it is in mass production), later with RB.199 for lower weight and better mileage.
 
Is this allowed?

Don't cancel the Hawker P.1083 which is built as the Hunter F Mk 6 instead of the P.1099. The RAF uses about 160 in the FGA and FR roles in the 1960s instead of the converted P.1099s that it used in the real world.

A further development with Spey engines is built for the RAF instead of the P.1154 RAF and Jaguar.
 
Is this allowed?

Don't cancel the Hawker P.1083 which is built as the Hunter F Mk 6 instead of the P.1099.
If you're going to cheat, why not go a step further? ;)
p-1091-project-gif.319266
 
Is this allowed?

Don't cancel the Hawker P.1083 which is built as the Hunter F Mk 6 instead of the P.1099.
If you're going to cheat, why not go a step further? ;)
p-1091-project-gif.319266
A Hawker designed and built alternative to the Mirage III and 5. I like it! I like it a lot!

My guess is that couldn't be put into production instead of the P.1099. However, it aught to be possible to put it into service instead of the Hunter FGA.9 and FR.10. This Hawker Delta 1 with Avon engines is succeeded by the Hawker Delta 2 with Spey engines which is built instead of the P.1154RAF and Jaguar.
 
It is interesting to remember that the RAF found a way of using Hunters as "tactical weapons unit" aircraft and then replacing them with Hawk.
The Jaguar in 3 squadrons and the 1 Squadron Harrier became the UK based Hunter replacements.
In RAF Germany the Harrier was the Hunter replacement.
Interestingly this corresponds with the P1154 RAF planned lineup (if you bring the NEAF and FEAF aircraft home).
Jaguar and Harrier provided the planned P1154RAF capabilities in a more practical form avoiding the ingestion problems of supersonic VSTOL (still present with the F35 which is not planned to operate out of hides).
I note the suggested single engine Jaguar and Hunter variants above, but am not sure they would be better than what the RAF did by 1975.
 
Mildly Supersonic Hunter variants might last longer as Fighters. But don't add much to Ground Attack.

A Spey F100 Super Sabre however or even a Avon RA.19R delivers a lot more.
While a F104 is the German answer.

In a timing sense the P.1121 was a good domestic basis. But arguably best wrapped around a Sapphire 15 than various marks of Avons or the mighty Gyron.

Strictly the Brough Office P.146 and later P.159 offer the obvious UK alternative to Jaguar and Harrier.

But it's the Mirage F2 and F1 that actually seem the most logical of all designs.

And frankly the F2 and F3 hit a sweet spot in terms of cost/capability.
 
I note the suggested single engine Jaguar and Hunter variants above, but am not sure they would be better than what the RAF did by 1975.
The RB.199 engined Jaguars gave much greater reach and better field performance - even the singles. So more choice in basing and able to cover more targets. Whilst still "cheap".
 
It is interesting to remember that the RAF found a way of using Hunters as "tactical weapons unit" aircraft and then replacing them with Hawk.
For what it's worth the Tactical Weapons Unit was formed on 2nd September 1974 by renaming No. 229 Operational Conversion Unit. The OCU formed on 15th December 1950. It was equipped with Meteors and later Hunters. The TWU was renamed No. 1 TWU upon the formation of No. 2 TWU.

At the time of its transformation into the TWU the OCU had three reserve squadrons (Nos. 63, 79 and 234). No. 63 transferred to No. 2 TWU and a fourth reserve squadron No. 151 was formed in September 1981 as part of No. 2 TWU.

About half of the 175 Hawk T Mk 1s were upgraded to T Mk 1A standard so they could be armed with two Sidewinders and one Aden gun pod. This was so the four reserve squadrons in the TWUs could be mobilised and used in the air defence role.

There were also two short-lived training squadrons that were equipped with Hunters. They were Nos. 45 and 58 which were formed 1972-73 and disbanded in 1976.
 
In RAF Germany the Harrier was the Hunter replacement.
The Devil's in the detail.

The two Hunter squadrons in Germany (Nos. 2 and 4) were reconnaissance units equipped with the Hunter FR Mk 10.

No. 2 converted to the Phantom FGR Mk 2 in 1971, Jaguar in 1974 and Tornado in 1988. It was a reconnaissance squadron based in Germany until the end of the Cold War.

No. 4 became a ground attack squadron equipped with Harriers in 1970 and was a Harrier squadron based in Germany until the end of the Cold War.

The second Harrier squadron to be formed in Germany was No. 20. It had been a Hunter FGA Mk 9 squadron in FEAF that disbanded in February 1970 reformed in December 1970 on Harriers in RAF Germany.

The third (and final) Harrier squadron was No. 3 which was one of four Canberra interdictor squadrons in Germany. It converted to the Harrier in 1972 and in common with No. 4 was a Harrier squadron based in Germany until the end of the Cold War.

RAF Germany's Harrier force was reorganised in 1977. The number of squadrons was reduced from three to two, but the total number of aircraft was the same because the two surviving squadrons took over the disbanded squadron's aircraft. The short straw was drawn by No. 20 Squadron.

However, a new No. 20 Squadron equipped with Jaguars was formed on the same day the Harrier squadron disbanded. It converted to Tornados in 1984.
 
Last edited:
The Jaguar in 3 squadrons and the 1 Squadron Harrier became the UK based Hunter replacements.
In RAF Germany the Harrier was the Hunter replacement.
Interestingly this corresponds with the P1154 RAF planned lineup (if you bring the NEAF and FEAF aircraft home).
At March 1964 there was a UE of 99 Hunters in 9 squadrons and one flight. That is 79 FGA 9s in 7 squadrons and 20 FR 10s in 2 squadrons and one flight. Or put another way:
  • 24 in 2 FGA squadrons in the UK
  • 16 in 2 FR squadrons in Germany (i.e. only 8 aircraft per squadron)
  • 36 in 3 FGA squadrons and a FR flight of 4 aircraft in AFME
  • 19 in 2 FGA squadrons in FEAF. That is one squadron of 16 in Singapore and one squadron of 3 in Hong Kong.
At that time the P.1154 was to enter service in 1971 and there were to be a UE of 96 aircraft in 8 squadrons of 12 at the end of March 1974. That is a pair of reconnaissance squadrons in Germany and pairs of ground attack squadrons in the UK, AFME and FEAF.

In the event the RAF had 4 Harrier squadrons, 5 Phantom ground attack squadrons and 2 Phantom reconnaissance squadrons at the end of March 1974. That's a total of 11 squadrons. Unfortunately, I don't know the number of aircraft per squadron. If it was 12 aircraft per squadron the total UE would have been 132 aircraft which was 36 more than the number planned in 1964.

At the end of 1977 there were 3 Harrier, 5 Jaguar ground attack and 2 Jaguar reconnaissance squadrons. That's still a total of 11 squadrons. Again I don't know what the number of aircraft per squadron was. However, if the pair of Harrier squadrons in Germany had 18 aircraft each and the other squadrons had 12 aircraft each that would make a total of 144 aircraft which was 48 more than the number planned in 1964.

Thus in 1977 the RAF's ground attack and reconnaissance force was 37.5% larger than the planned P.1154 line-up in terms of the number of squadrons and might have been 50% larger in terms of the number of aircraft.

My information on the P.1154 force came from Plan P dated 6th March 1964 which was the front-line squadron patterns from March 1964 to March 1975. The aircraft requirements section showed no aircraft on Air Ministry requisition, but there was a further requirement for 162 aircraft against a total requirement for 162 aircraft. Life provision was until 1980. The total requirement included some aircraft for training. The Aircraft Programme section had the 162 aircraft delivered in the 5 financial years commencing 1st April 1970 and ending 31st March 1975. That is 16 - 46 - 46 - 46 - 8.
 
Last edited:
The Jaguar in 3 squadrons and the 1 Squadron Harrier became the UK based Hunter replacements.
In RAF Germany the Harrier was the Hunter replacement.
Interestingly this corresponds with the P1154 RAF planned lineup (if you bring the NEAF and FEAF aircraft home).
This is part of a report called The Future Shape and Size of the Royal Air Force that I found in National Archives File AIR20/11465.
The covering loose minute was signed by Air Vice-Marshall D.F. Spotswood and is dated 2nd January 1964.

The paragraphs that I'm posting here are an extract from Part 1 - The Front Line - Section 3 - Force Requirements...

*** *** ***​

The Fighter/Ground Attack/Reconnaissance Force
43. The scale of land force intervention in limited war is indicated in para. 10 above. It must be accepted that a Brigade Group is unlikely to be able to fulfil its task without close support from the air amounting to the effort of at least two squadrons. Indeed the Army have recently calculated their requirements for air reconnaissance and close support strike effort (quite apart from the type of deep penetration reconnaissance and interdiction sorties which would be flown by the TSR2) in the opening stages of a limited war against a Brigade Group threat, and of non-nuclear operations in Europe. Although these figures have not yet been approved by the Chiefs of Staff, and the basis of calculations is purely statistical and related only to the dimensions of the enemy threat and not to any appreciation of what might, realistically, be provided, they to nevertheless more than bear out this contention. Certainly they demonstrate that present plans, based on Defence Review Costings, for an F/GA/R order of battle in the 1970s are quite inadequate. These plans call for the following:-

FGA Force Projected.png

44. The force planned for No. 38 Group is sufficient only to support the spearhead Brigade Group of the Strategic Reserve. However, should a limited war operation require this ground force to be reinforced by the second, or even more, by the third Brigade Group of the Strategic Reserve, these two squadrons would certainly require reinforcement. But present plans do not provide for this air reinforcement or, alternatively, for the replacement forces used for such a purpose, e.g. the replacement of squadrons from AFME, where we could not afford to reduce our "presence" for any appreciable length of time.

45. Moreover, in the context of war in Europe, even allowing for the effort of the combined air forces of 2 ATAF, the United Kingdom contribution of two F/GA/R squadrons is clearly inadequate. A further two squadrons are required to provide a realistic contribution to 2 ATAF and meet the need to balance the ground forces in NORTHAG. Moreover, the provision of these squadrons would help to mitigate any political objections resulting from the proposed redeployment of the TSR2s from Germany. Even with this increase on present plans, this force together with 72 TSR2s will provide SACEUR with half the number of aircraft at present assigned to him.

46. The concept of mutual reinforcement, upon which alone depends the prospect of keeping the front line within dimensions acceptable both militarily and economically, leads to another powerful reason for the provision of two additional squadrons in Germany. The most serious limited war operation in which we would likely to become involved in the Seventies would be in the Far East. The planned two resident F/GA/R squadrons with a detachment in Hong Kong, would only barely be sufficient to support, in co-operation with Australia and New Zealand air forces, troops already in the theatre. Thus any further army reinforcements flow to the Far East would be without adequate close air support unless we could call on two squadrons from Germany - and, unless we had at least four squadrons resident there, this would be extremely difficult.

47. Revised Order of Battle - F/GA/R. Thus, it is clear on all counts that our minimum requirements for F/GA/R squadrons, far from being the eight squadrons currently planned, is at least ten - and could indeed be argued as twelve on the basis of the effort of two squadrons to support each Brigade Group of the Strategic Reserve. If we are prepared to take the risk that we would not reinforce the Far East by more than two Brigade Groups, then our absolute minimum F/GA/R order of battle should be:-

FGA Force Minimum Requirement.png

These aircraft will require V/STOL characteristics, to enable them to disperse on the ground and to improve their chances of survival, response time and flexibility of operation, in the possible conditions of warfare both within and outside Europe envisaged in the period under consideration.

*** *** ***​

So the 11 ground attack and reconnaissance squadrons that the RAF had in the middle 1970s exceeded what the Report said the minimum requirement by one squadron which is close enough to what @uk 75 wrote.
 
Last edited:
In RAF Germany the Harrier was the Hunter replacement.
For what it's worth...

According to Plan P (which ran from 31st March 1964 to 31st March 1975) RAF Germany had 138 aircraft in 12 squadrons at the end of March 1964 as follows:
12 Canberra B(I) Mk 6 in one light bomber squadron (No. 213)​
36 Canberra B(I) Mk 8 in 3 light bomber squadrons (Nos. 3, 14 and 16)​
30 Canberra PR Mk 7 in 3 tactical reconnaissance squadrons (Nos. 17, 31 and 80)​
32 Javelin FAW Mk 9 in 2 fighter squadrons (Nos. 5 and 11)​
16 Hunter FR Mk 10 in 2 fighter reconnaissance squadrons (Nos. 2 and 4)​
12 Whirlwind HAR Mk 10 in one short range transport squadron (No. 230)​

I've added the squadron "number plates" which weren't in the original document.

According to Rawlings in the History of the Royal Air Force (P.270) the main duty of the Canberra light bombers was delivering nuclear weapons. However, they could also be converted rapidly to the ground attack role in which they employed air-to-ground gun firing and shallow dive-bombing techniques.

There was also a tactical reconnaissance squadron of 10 Canberra PR Mk 10s in Malta which was NATO assigned. It was originally formed at Laarbruch in Germany as 69 Squadron in October 1954 on Canberra PR Mk 3s. It remained at Laarbruch until April 1958 when the squadron moved to Luqa, Malta. It became 39 Squadron on 1st July 1958 and converted to the Canberra PR Mk 9 in October 1962. The squadron moved to Wyton in September 1970 and remained there until disbanding on 1st June 1982. [The squadron's history is from RAFWEB.] Therefore, I think its NATO assignment in March 1964 was to reinforce RAF Germany.

This would reduce to 101 aircraft in 9 squadrons by 31st March 1974 as follows:
24 TSR.2 in 2 strike squadrons​
16 TSR.2 in 2 tactical reconnaissance squadrons​
24 Lightning F Mk 2A in 2 fighter squadrons​
24 P.1154 in 2 fighter reconnaissance squadrons​
13 Wessex HC Mk 2 in one short range transport squadron​
There would be no change until then and 31st March 1975.

No. 39 Squadron would still be at Malta on 31st March 1975 and would still have 10 Canberra PR Mk 9s. The TSR.2 was due to replace the Canberra in the tactical reconnaissance squadrons in Germany in the period from 1st April 1968 to 31st March 1970. Therefore, my guess is that at the end of the 1960s its NATO assignment would change from reinforcing RAF Germany to something else.

According to Rawlings (Page 271) RAF Germany's front-line strength at early 1972 was:
2 Buccaneer S Mk 2B strike squadrons (Nos. 15 and 16)​
2 Lightning F Mk 2B fighter squadrons (Nos. 19 and 92)​
1 Phantom FGR Mk 2 reconnaissance squadron (No. 2)​
3 Phantom FGR Mk 2 ground attack squadrons (Nos. 14, 17 and 31)​
3 Harrier GR Mk1 and GR Mk 1A ground attack squadrons (Nos. 3, 4 and 20)​
1 Wessex HC Mk 2 short range transport squadron (No. 18)​

That's the same number of squadrons as at 31st March 1964 except there were 2 strike squadrons instead of 4 light bomber squadrons, the number of reconnaissance squadrons was reduced from 5 to one and there were now 6 ground attack squadrons when there had been none 11 years earlier.

Except that RAFWEB and Lake's Flying Units of the RAF say that 16 Squadron operated Canberras until disbanding on 6th June 1972 and it wasn't reformed on Buccaneers until 8th January 1973 having commenced training from 1st October 1972 as 16 Squadron (Designate).

That glitch aside, this was RAF Germany's front-line on 31st March 1974 and 31st March 1975.

Unfortunately, Rawlings didn't say what the number of aircraft per squadron was or what the total number of first-line aircraft was. However, if the Wessex squadron had 13 aircraft and the other squadrons had 12 aircraft each the total would be 145 aircraft.
 
Last edited:
This is another extract from the report quoted in Post 17.

*** *** ***​

The All-Weather Fighter Force
30. Ministers have agreed (D(62)54th Meeting) the following order of battle for the Lightning all-weather fighter force:-

AWF From January 1964 Report.png

This should be achieved by 1967.

31. Of these squadrons, the three in NEAF and FEAF are required to defend the nuclear bases at Akrotiri, Tengah and Butterworth. The two squadrons in Germany - which, being Mark 2As as opposed to Mark 3s, will be unsuitable for long range reinforcement - are required to meet NATO force goals, Berlin contingency plans and Tripartite air policing commitments and, coincidentally, help meet our need to show "presence" on the Continent; indeed, for Berlin contingency plans the two squadrons would have to be reinforced from the United Kingdom. The five squadrons approved for the United Kingdom have always been regarded as barely adequate for the dual role of preserving the integrity of British air space and providing squadrons for overseas commitments, since the "worst case" reinforcement situation requires the simultaneous despatch of four squadrons. However, the calculated risk involved in the retention of only this small force must be accepted in vice of the economic factors and other priorities involved, although there is little doubt that increased long term deployment overseas, e.g. AFME, will be required.

32. The present authorised purchase of Lightnings is sufficient to back this force until 1972/73. By the mid-1970s, a replacement will be required which could be either a variable geometry aircraft for joint use by the Royal Air Force and the Royal Navy or a derivative of the P.1154. Whichever aircraft is finally ordered this minimum force of 10 squadrons must be replaced on a one-for-one basis and the overall U.E. should thus remain as 120 aircraft.

*** *** ***​

The above corresponds to Plan P.

Plan P March 1964 All Weather Fighters.png

However...
  • The last Javelin squadron wasn't disbanded until 1st May 1968.
  • The Lightning force reached a maximum strength of 9 rather than 10 squadrons. This was because FEAF only received one of the 2 planned squadrons. It disbanded in September 1971 which reduced the total to 8 squadrons.
  • However, the first Phantom fighter squadron formed in September 1969. This squadron used F-4Ks that became available in 1968 following the cancellation of Eagle's "Phantomisation. As a result there were was a total of 10 fighter squadrons from September 1969 to the disbanding of FEAF's Lightning squadron in September 1971 and 9 fighter squadrons from then until October 1984. (See below.)
  • The 5 ground attack and 2 reconnaissance squadrons equipped with the F-4M Phantom converted to Jaguars between April 1974 and March 1977. This allowed 6 of the 8 Lightning squadrons to re-equip with the redundant Phantoms which was done between October 1974 and April 1977. The 2 remaining Lightning squadrons converted to the Tornado ADV in the first half of 1988.
  • Ark Royal paid off at the end of 1978. Her Buccaneers were used to form a third maritime strike squadron in the RAF and there were plans to use her Phantoms to form a second F-4K squadron in the RAF which would have increased the total number of fighter squadrons from 9 to 10. However, they were used to re-equip one of the existing F-4M squadrons which meant the grand total was still 9 fighter squadrons.
  • However, 74 Squadron (the unit that disbanded in September 1971) was reformed in October 1984 on ex-USN F-4J (UK) Phantoms which increased the total to 10 fighter squadrons.
 
Is this allowed?

Don't cancel the Hawker P.1083 which is built as the Hunter F Mk 6 instead of the P.1099.
If you're going to cheat, why not go a step further? ;)
p-1091-project-gif.319266
There was also a P.1102 for a thin-wing Hunter begun in May 1954.

The following is part of Post 142 of an Alternate History called "An 1-engined Mach-2 fighter for the RAF" that @tomo pauk started.

*** *** ***

My personal choices are a development of the Fairey Delta 2 or a further development of the Hawker P.1083. According to Wood in Project Cancelled...
With the subsequent trials of the Hunter with Fireflash and Firestreak air-to-air missiles and airborne radar, and the development of the Hunter two-seater and ground-attack variants almost any task could have been undertaken. Once the basic fuselage with an afterburning engine had been established the wing could have been further refined to allow for even higher speeds. In May 1954, in fact, the Hawker design team started work on a thin-wing Hunter variant, designated P.1102, but this, like P.1083, was still born.
According to the paragraph before the one above WN470 the P.1083 prototype was nearing completion in June 1953, but was cancelled on 13th July 1953.

According to my serial numbers spreadsheet WN470 was completed as XF833, the prototype Hawker P.1099, which led to the Hunter F Mk 6. It made its first flight on 22nd January 1954. WW592 the first production Hunter F Mk 6 made its first flight on 25th March 1955.

The first Hunter FGA Mk 9 flew on 3rd July 1959. The first Hunter FR Mk 10 flew on 7th November 1958.

Based on the above the RAF could have had the P.1083 in service instead of the Hunter F Mk 6 and the P.1102 instead of the Hunter FGA Mk 9 and FR Mk 10.

*** *** ***​

For what it's worth @Archibald liked the idea and declared it the winner.
 
Last edited:
Rather than start a new thread, I will pose this question here.
What needed to be done to RAF Hunter FGA9 to keep them in service until the late 1970s when AFVG would replace them after first replacing Lightnings. I am assuming that 48 Vulcan B2 remain in service until 1984 when they are replaced by UK Tomahawks in a deal similar to the early 60s basing of Thors.
 
Only two modern British combat jets have been export successes: The Hunter and the Hawk.
Unlike the TSR2, P1154 and myriad complex paper projects beloved of us here, these two planes were simple, elegant solutions.
Of course its not that simple. Many Hunters were sold as fighters rather than fighter/ground attack aircraft.
They were replaced by planes as different as the F104 and the Saab F35.
RAF Hunters were eventually replaced by the Jaguar. By 60s standards Jaguar was a sensible, simple design.
Ironically, the Hawk started life as a "replacement" for RAF Jaguars re-roled as FGA.
A third aircraft deserves a mention, the Saab Gripen. This design owes much to the BAe light fighter studies of the 70s and is in many ways close to the Hunter on simplicity and cost effectiveness.
BAe now seems focussed on F35 Lightning and Tempest. Perhaps it needs to remember Hunter, Hawk and Gripen
Canberra? Lots of nations operated them... many of which were bought off the assembly line. Exported to more than 15 countries: Australia, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Ethiopia, France, India, New Zealand, Pakistan, Peru, Rhodesia, South Africa, Sweden, Venezuela, and West Germany.
Australia built its own - and the US built a modified version.

Lightning? Saudi Arabia and Kuwait bought them.
 
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/uk-combat-aircraft-exports.40216/

There's some other types as well I'd include. Difficult to include Lightning on there.

Rather than start a new thread, I will pose this question here.
What needed to be done to RAF Hunter FGA9 to keep them in service until the late 1970s when AFVG would replace them after first replacing Lightnings.
Probably just keep putting fuel and pilots into them. For capability enhancements then look to Switzerland, Singapore etc. with AIM-9, Maverick, BL755, RWR integration etc. I doubt it'd be possible to find space for a better nav system like on Jaguar.
 
Canberra was a 1940s design whereas Hunter was a 1950s design. I was born in 1955 so treat that as when "modern" begins.
Sales to Kuwait and Saudi of Lightning do not really count as exports because the US gave us a clear path as an offset for RAF purchases of US equipment.
I stand by my assertion that the UK was better at nice airframes than anything more complicated
 
Nice airframe teams, led by creatives UK and other, were able to digest and command:
* move from wood to metal;
* move from modest to Hyper piston power;
* move from recip to turbine: all (just) in one career lifetime of a Geo DH, Fred HP, S.Camm...
Some, ultimately most, failed to digest the Lectonics-driven move from Airframe Rules OK! to the tin as platform. Not a British disease.

Although some ancient names survive (Boeing, Grumman, Lockheed, Martin, Northrop) only Dassault (are Bloch roots relevant) has any sense of family pedigree. There is no sense of heritage driving anybody working for a Unit owned by Raytheon, remembered by Grampa as Sikorsky, nor in BAES' black teams on a site once flying (real) Lightnings. They do the job of their skill.

This is not Aero-specific. A 17year old school-respected musician shocked me by saying she had never heard of the Rolling Stones and shocked me again by evident belief that Rap is a credible art form. We are all products of our time. Now Sparks Rule OK!
 
What needed to be done to RAF Hunter FGA9 to keep them in service until the late 1970s when AFVG would replace them after first replacing Lightnings...

I've had a visual stab at this concept. My assumption is that sensor sets from other operational aircraft would be adopted to make our modernised Hunter FGA9 a more effective weapons platform.

Image: Upper; Hunter FGA9 MLU based on Harrier GR3 systems. The most obvious change is the Harrier GR3-style extended, 'dolphin' nose with laser tracker. That thimble nose's pitot tube is also adopted (to allow for optional wingtip missile rails). [1] Less obvious are RWR (ARI 18228) antennae - the front antenna being mounted akin to the Harrier whilst the aft antenna is a bullet-shaped extension on the tailplane fairing.

A more intensive modification possibility is the introduction of a belly CFT (freeing-up pylons to carry ordnance rather than drop-tanks). Since the Hunter nose won't accommodate the Jaguar GR3's laser designator, I have move that down to the front of the CFT. [2]

Image: Lower; Hunter FGA9 MLU based on Jaguar GR3 systems. The most obvious change is the belly CFT with its integrated laser designator. In the rear of that CFT fairing would be chaff/flare dispensers. Less obvious is the fixed-armament reduction (to save weight) and elimination of 'Sabrinas' (after all, Jags and Harriers just dumped spent cases/links overboard). [3]

I have also extended the nose slightly for more avionics and added a bulged fairing on the spine for extra space. This aircraft is also fitted with wingtips with launch rails for AIM-9L Sidewinders for self-defence.

Anyway, not sure how convincing these are ... but they were fun to play with

_______________________________

[1] The Hunter's original pitot tube is mounted quite close to the portside wingtip.

[2] Note that, when the nosewheel is extended, its open aft door protects the laser designator from FOD.

[3] An obvious objection would be how the armourers get at the remaining pair of Adens. [Insert dead clever solution here]
 

Attachments

  • hunter-life-extended.jpg
    hunter-life-extended.jpg
    42.4 KB · Views: 102
I've had a visual stab at this concept. My assumption is that sensor sets from other operational aircraft would be adopted to make our modernised Hunter FGA9 a more effective weapons platform.

Image: Upper; Hunter FGA9 MLU based on Harrier GR3 systems. The most obvious change is the Harrier GR3-style extended, 'dolphin' nose with laser tracker. That thimble nose's pitot tube is also adopted (to allow for optional wingtip missile rails). [1] Less obvious are RWR (ARI 18228) antennae - the front antenna being mounted akin to the Harrier whilst the aft antenna is a bullet-shaped extension on the tailplane fairing.

A more intensive modification possibility is the introduction of a belly CFT (freeing-up pylons to carry ordnance rather than drop-tanks). Since the Hunter nose won't accommodate the Jaguar GR3's laser designator, I have move that down to the front of the CFT. [2]

Image: Lower; Hunter FGA9 MLU based on Jaguar GR3 systems. The most obvious change is the belly CFT with its integrated laser designator. In the rear of that CFT fairing would be chaff/flare dispensers. Less obvious is the fixed-armament reduction (to save weight) and elimination of 'Sabrinas' (after all, Jags and Harriers just dumped spent cases/links overboard). [3]

I have also extended the nose slightly for more avionics and added a bulged fairing on the spine for extra space. This aircraft is also fitted with wingtips with launch rails for AIM-9L Sidewinders for self-defence.

Anyway, not sure how convincing these are ... but they were fun to play with

_______________________________

[1] The Hunter's original pitot tube is mounted quite close to the portside wingtip.

[2] Note that, when the nosewheel is extended, its open aft door protects the laser designator from FOD.

[3] An obvious objection would be how the armourers get at the remaining pair of Adens. [Insert dead clever solution here]
Knowing how cheap HMTreasury is, the Harrier GR3 update is the likely answer.
 
In 1970 Hawker did propose to Switzerland the 'Super Hunter' (aka in Switzerland as S.2-minus).
This had extra underwing hardpoints (double the payload of the Mk.58), additional fuel capacity, an Avon 801, a laser-rangefinder and an updated cockpit and radios.

The RAF was never all that bothered about fitting Sidewinder to the Jaguars due to its lack of off-boresight capability (at that time), and not until 1982 did they seriously take up Sidewinder on GA aircraft. I think in the period that we're talking about, the key weapon would be BL.755 and making sure the Hunter could carry at least four with a decent fuel load. I agree RWR is a must. LRMTS might fit in an extended nose ok. Radio altimeter would be required too. Probably needs a chaff/flare dispenser, an outboard Phimat on an extra underwing pylon might do just fine. I'd be happy to sacrifice a pair of ADEN to save weight/free up space, if required.
 
Yes, I had assumed Phimat pod on outer starboard pylon, ALQ101 ECM to port. The chaff and flare dispensers I incorporated into the CFT on the lower image. But, as you imply, for the simpler conversion, you'd need to scab dispensers into the rear fuselage (or use up limited pylon space).

Agreed about Sidewinder timing/need ... those tip rails just make for a fun visual difference ;)
 
Yes, I had assumed Phimat pod on outer starboard pylon, ALQ101 ECM to port. The chaff and flare dispensers I incorporated into the CFT on the lower image. But, as you imply, for the simpler conversion, you'd need to scab dispensers into the rear fuselage (or use up limited pylon space).

Agreed about Sidewinder timing/need ... those tip rails just make for a fun visual difference ;)
I think wing pylons have enough depth to install chaff/flare dispensers into them, while still carrying ordnance or fuel tanks. Do that on your outer wing pylons, with the dispensers facing outward.

Though it's possible flares might be better launched from as close to the engine as possible.
 
With the withdrawal from East of Suez much of the close air support task for the RAF fell away after 1971.
Phantoms and Jaguars in RAF Germany replace Canberras rather than Hunters.
As soon as Tornado arrives to do that job (though F111K like TSR2 could have done it from UK), the Jaguar force remains in the original No38 Group role of providing three squadrons for support of UK forces on NATO flanks or out of area.
Given that some other NATO countries used F5s in this role the Hunters could have been used instead of Jaguars possibly being replaced by Hawks.
 
I've had a visual stab at this concept...

And then the New Pence finally dropped and I realised that Jaguar GR.3 upgrades are far too late for my Hunter scheme. So I've revised it to Harrier GR.3 systems exclusively.

As before, the upper image shows a minimal mod, the lower had the belly CFT. The latter now lacks the laser designation which probably means that the forward fairing could be detachable for gun access. [1]

As mentioned above, the ALQ-101 pod is seen mount on the outboard port pylon (Phimat would be to starboard). Just peaking out from behind the ECM pod is a Paveway II LGB. The upper view shows rocket pods on the outer pylons - I suspect that these would have still been SNEBs (likely too early ofr the CRV7s).

___________________________________

[1] Indeed, that fairing might also act as case/link collector - ie: a new-style 'Sabrina' scaled to just two guns ... sorry Pioneer :oops:
 

Attachments

  • hunter-life-extended-2.jpg
    hunter-life-extended-2.jpg
    40 KB · Views: 86
Instead of wingtip 'winders you could use the dual 30mm and twin Sidewinder pack that was mocked-up for the FR Hunters, just slots in to the normal gun pack bay. Gives self defence AAMs without structural changes or using pylons.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_20240112_205522_1_1.jpg
    IMG_20240112_205522_1_1.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 73
Instead of wingtip 'winders you could use the dual 30mm and twin Sidewinder pack that was mocked-up for the FR Hunters, just slots in to the normal gun pack bay. Gives self defence AAMs without structural changes or using pylons.
Nice!
 
Instead of wingtip 'winders you could use the dual 30mm and twin Sidewinder pack that was mocked-up for the FR Hunters, just slots in to the normal gun pack bay. Gives self defence AAMs without structural changes or using pylons.
Some more info:

9752C192-D338-4D56-8EA5-A686D98E90BB_zpsiphsewxs.jpeg
 
Wonder how heavy that wiring loom for the Sidewinders was?

And I bet the person who rejected the idea was some early war fighter ace who didn't like the idea of missiles at all!
 
Given that it was only a ground test, its unclear what aerodynamic effects might have been encountered. There might have been issues at higher AoA with airflow into the intakes for example and stability issues, or yawing.
 
Given that it was only a ground test, its unclear what aerodynamic effects might have been encountered. There might have been issues at higher AoA with airflow into the intakes for example and stability issues, or yawing.
I would believe potential issues for airflow into the intakes at even relatively low AoA, less than 15deg.
 
Back
Top Bottom