A better Javelin....

Archibald said:
Main problem with the Javelin as a Missileer + Red Dean / Red Hebe: drag, drag, and more drag. The missiles were enormous (and draggy) and so was the Javelin.
A pity, because the combination might have been an intriguing alternative to F.155T: starting from Thin Wing Javelin last iterations: such as the P.376 with Olympus.

What is really fascinating is to compare Thin Wing Javelin with Arrow and Fairey F.155T winner. Also by 1956 the RAF hesitated between the three, drawing comparisons between them.
The Arrow was not good enough for F.155T but still buried any TW Javelin, even P.376. Main issue was that Red Dean / Red Hebe would not fit inside the weapon bay.
Another interesting aspect was that the Arrow's Sparrow II were ARH - active radar homing... just like Red Dean and Red Hebe. This amounted to building an AMRAAM with 1950's technology - and that was hopeless.
Click to expand...

The Hawker Siddley Group (HSG) found themselves in a difficult position in 1956 as two of their contracted full scale development projects (TWJ and Arrow) were rejected by their U.K. customer, who launched a new full scale development contract for what they thought they wanted with another Vendor I.e Fairy 155T . HSG responded by proposing P376, and indeed privately funding to full size mock up. P376 really was HSG take on what the customer wanted as a suggestion to salvage something out of what they had already paid for with the TWJ (P354). P376 didn’t exist when F155T was in the bid stage, I wonder why? About the same time Gloster P376 emerged, Hawker Kingston P1103 went to 1116 to 1121 and became the companies preferred private venture funded project.

To me the real opportunity missed here was a single ambitious offering that could have satisfied both Canadian and U.K. requirements in airframe, systems and missiles.
 
Last edited:
Zoo Tycoon said:
To me the real opportunity missed here was a single ambitious offering that could have satisfied both Canadian and U.K. requirements in airframe, systems and missiles.
Click to expand...
Sadly Blackburn pursued Canada with a Buccaneer evolution. Not good enough.

Arguably P.1103-like aircraft with a new twin engined fusilage more like P.1129 or Avro's take on OR.339 might have met this.

Though it was DH's DH.117 that had the most logical solution that could be shaped to requirements.
 
zen said:
No it could have been done, based on Thunderbird mkII or Bloodhound technologies.

No that doesn't mean trying to mount Thunderbird from a pylon, rather it means trying to squeeze the guidance package into a large AAM.

Or just buying in the Eagle AAM, which looks like the strongest case. Until Sea Dart.....though earlier A5 seeker technology is a possibility.

But.....this probably favours the larger V-Bomber or converted Civilian Airliner concept better than the Javelin.
Click to expand...
An air to air version of the Thunderbird mounted below the wings of an HP Victor (two per wing) as a flying battleship was actually considered.
 
Zoo Tycoon said:
The Hawker Siddley Group (HSG) found themselves in a difficult position in 1956 as two of their contracted full scale development projects (TWJ and Arrow) were rejected by their U.K. customer, who launched a new full scale development contract for what they thought they wanted with another Vendor I.e Fairy 155T . HSG responded by proposing P376, and indeed privately funding to full size mock up. P376 really was HSG take on what the customer wanted as a suggestion to salvage something out of what they had already paid for with the TWJ (P354). P376 didn’t exist when F155T was in the bid stage, I wonder why? About the same time Gloster P376 emerged, Hawker Kingston P1103 went to 1116 to 1121 and became the companies preferred private venture funded project.

To me the real opportunity missed here was a single ambitious offering that could have satisfied both Canadian and U.K. requirements in airframe, systems and missiles.
Click to expand...
The P.376 was not the final edition of the Javelin; these were the P.384 and P.386. While still not in the same speed class as the CF-105, they would definitely have been supersonic (mach 1.4 - 1.6) with its afterburning Olympus engines and would have had a rather large combat radius.
 
Basil said:
The P.376 was not the final edition of the Javelin; these were the P.384 and P.386. While still not in the same speed class as the CF-105, they would definitely have been supersonic (mach 1.4 - 1.6) with its afterburning Olympus engines and would have had a rather large combat radius.
Click to expand...
If a designer needs two afterburning Olympus engines on a fighter in order to go Mach 1.4-1.6, the design office of that company needs to be shut down post haste.
Great fuel consumption + great drag = short combat radius, not a rather large one.
 
uk 75 said:
Early Sidewinders, Falcons and Genies might be better than Firestreaks but not much.
Sorry I know you want those paper British missiles but they were never going to happen.
Click to expand...
Really? In an alternative universe, why not? It does require a systems-integration decision for a common radar for both Javelin and Sea Vixen to provide illuminator capability, accepting at a fairly early stage that the best - active radar homing - is the enemy of good enough. BSP4 mentions a last-minute redesign of Red Dean that brought the weight way, way down and went for semi-active, but details on this final form are lacking, even in Forbat's in-depth account. This happened in 1956, and a conversion to SARH at this stage (if continued as a test bed) could have driven illuminator integration for at least the two subsonic interceptors.
Yellow Palace said:
You could do worse than put Red Top on it, and Blue Dolphin isn't that much of a pipe dream. But neither is anything to get excited about.

Fundamentally, I think the best thing you can do for the Javelin is to get it replaced with a supersonic all-weather fighter a bit earlier. Could be worse, the Sea Vixen was bid to the same spec, and soldiered on until 1972!
Click to expand...
I'm surprised Red Top wasn't considered for the Javelin as soon as it was in service, for the same reason it was given to Sea Vixen.
uk 75 said:
Because we ended up using US missiles not French or Soviet ones.
Sidewinders should have been evolved in partnership with the US. Sparrow became the RAF bomber killer.
A UK platform with US missiles might have worked. Javelins with Genies and Falcons like US Daggers and Darts.
Click to expand...
Sparrow isn't actually that much bigger than Firestreak, although it is 150lb heavier, and IIRC some of the AI radars used by Javelins were actually American. I don't see it being that much of a problem to make a decision for a radar to integrate Sparrow with the Javelin, which would give it a far better punch at longer range than Falcon.
 
tomo pauk said:
If a designer needs two afterburning Olympus engines on a fighter in order to go Mach 1.4-1.6, the design office of that company needs to be shut down post haste.
Great fuel consumption + great drag = short combat radius, not a rather large one.
Click to expand...
Well, 1000 nm combat radius isn't bad at all and they were quite impressive area ruled designs. See Tony Buttler's book "British Jet Bombers since 1949".
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0041.jpeg
    IMG_0041.jpeg
    361.8 KB · Views: 41
pathology_doc said:
BSP4 mentions a last-minute redesign of Red Dean that brought the weight way, way down and went for semi-active, but details on this final form are lacking, even in Forbat's in-depth account. This happened in 1956, and a conversion to SARH at this stage (if continued as a test bed) could have driven illuminator integration for at least the two subsonic interceptors
Click to expand...
Post and then edited due to quoting issues....

Had the axe fallen on F.155 in '56, and the 'interim' order for Sea Vixen, Scimitar and Lightning gone through at this point. It is arguable that Red Dean should continue and enter service on Sea Vixen and Javelin.
As this would be the 400lb revised SARH design. Such a weapon would give greater flexibility to the two aircraft and allowed the development of further improvements.
We could envision changes to materials to increase speed/temperature, changes to seeker to monopulse, changes to rocket motor and warhead. Even changes in aspects of external design.

Arguably in a more supersonic aircraft compatible form, this could arm a Lightning development.

It also potentially form the basis of a means to develop Orange Nell.
Even perhaps a limited ARM version.
 
Last edited:
zen said:
No it could have been done, based on Thunderbird mkII or Bloodhound technologies.

No that doesn't mean trying to mount Thunderbird from a pylon, rather it means trying to squeeze the guidance package into a large AAM.

Or just buying in the Eagle AAM, which looks like the strongest case. Until Sea Dart.....though earlier A5 seeker technology is a possibility.

But.....this probably favours the larger V-Bomber or converted Civilian Airliner concept better than the Javelin.
Click to expand...
For the BARCAP/Missileer flight mission, you really need something big. The F6D was roughly Intruder sized (and performance), so you'd really want something like the Buccaneer or one of the V-bombers. When you're talking about 1000-1500lb long range missiles, you need all the lifting capacity you can get!

And honestly, my recommendation at that point would be buying Eagle AAMs (1500lbs each!), and probably using something like Bucc S2s with the Spey turbofans for low fuel consumption in cruise at altitude. We can argue over whether to use British radar or the American APQ-81 and whichever AWG firecontrol applies (-10 or -11 later on in phantoms, obviously -9 with the F111B and Tomcat).
 
Scott Kenny said:
For the BARCAP/Missileer flight mission, you really need something big. The F6D was roughly Intruder sized (and performance), so you'd really want something like the Buccaneer or one of the V-bombers. When you're talking about 1000-1500lb long range missiles, you need all the lifting capacity you can get!

And honestly, my recommendation at that point would be buying Eagle AAMs (1500lbs each!), and probably using something like Bucc S2s with the Spey turbofans for low fuel consumption in cruise at altitude. We can argue over whether to use British radar or the American APQ-81 and whichever AWG firecontrol applies (-10 or -11 later on in phantoms, obviously -9 with the F111B and Tomcat).
Click to expand...
I think getting the V-Bomber....maybe Vulcan is the strongest BARCAP case for the period.

Later on HSA seems to have information on the big AIM-47 AAM developed for F108 and F12.
 
zen said:
I think getting the V-Bomber....maybe Vulcan is the strongest BARCAP case for the period.

Later on HSA seems to have information on the big AIM-47 AAM developed for F108 and F12.
Click to expand...
Will admit that the Bucc S2 was more for RN BARCAP than RAF. I'd fully expect the RAF to use one of the V-bombers instead of Bucc.
 
Basil said:
Well, 1000 nm combat radius isn't bad at all and they were quite impressive area ruled designs. See Tony Buttler's book "British Jet Bombers since 1949".
Click to expand...
1000 nm combat radius is indeed great. Provided that it was not a sales pitch, of course, but something the actual aircraft were actually doing.
'Quite impressive designs' - they never existed, so pitching them as such is kinda ... odd.
 
tomo pauk said:
1000 nm combat radius is indeed great. Provided that it was not a sales pitch, of course, but something the actual aircraft were actually doing.
'Quite impressive designs' - they never existed, so pitching them as such is kinda ... odd.
Click to expand...
Designs = concepts ... and there is no obligation to like these various Javelin concepts ;)
 
Basil said:
hushkit.net

The Gloster Javelin jet fighter was not as terrible as people say, here’s why…

We have often knocked the Britain’s Cold War Javelin interceptor as a sluggish mess. For the sake of balance, we asked former Tornado pilot and author Michael Napier to defend Gloster’s…
hushkit.net hushkit.net
Click to expand...
A useful defence of the Javelin- a Tornado ADV sort of fighter.
Unlike the Sea Vixen FAW2 it never got 4 Red Tops.
All were obsolescent when they entered service compared with US types.
 
uk 75 said:
A useful defence of the Javelin- a Tornado ADV sort of fighter.
Unlike the Sea Vixen FAW2 it never got 4 Red Tops.
All were obsolescent when they entered service compared with US types.
Click to expand...
More like obsolete. The F-102 operating with the SAGE ground control system was generations ahead of the Javelin. The 102 was supersonic, could be automatically steered to an intercept, had an advanced fire control system that allowed all-angle attack patterns on a target, and was all-weather. Yes, the 102 didn't have a gun, but it was supposed to be a bomber killer, not an attack aircraft / fighter killer.

I get the British had a far smaller budget. I also get that British bureaucracy at the time was beyond pedantic when it came to aircraft procurement. It takes a special kind of stupid in bureaucracy to destroy an entire industrial sector that was relatively successful prior to its involvement.
 
Drag comes in many flavors. Javelin looks like it was not optimized for transonic flight but should have been very favorable for distance in a subsonic role relying upon purely dry thrust. It had pretty exceptionally low wing loading which is good for subsonic flight characteristics. Give the pilot a high altitude suit and let it loft missiles from a high perch. Its hard to believe its nose diameter was so similar to much larger aircraft that came long after it. That should have given it a nice situational awareness of high flying targets in its day.
 
MadRat said:
Drag comes in many flavors. Javelin looks like it was not optimized for transonic flight but should have been very favorable for distance in a subsonic role relying upon purely dry thrust. It had pretty exceptionally low wing loading which is good for subsonic flight characteristics. Give the pilot a high altitude suit and let it loft missiles from a high perch. Its hard to believe its nose diameter was so similar to much larger aircraft that came long after it. That should have given it a nice situational awareness of high flying targets in its day.
Click to expand...

I'd also think with that huge delta wing that while you'd get a good initial turn rate, the drag would cripple the plane in a sustained turn or trying to do any sort of energy maneuvering.
 
Lack of turn rate is okay for an interceptor. And the heavy wings would make it a dog in rolls. Javelin's tail was not very well placed to try its hand in fighter roles. But for interceptions, that is not really any hinderance. And certainly as a missileer its not an issue as you pretty much need a stable platform to illuminate from.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
Oh, some contemporaries that could climb with a Lightning:

The F4D Skyray... It could make just shy of 50,000 feet from a standing start in two-and-a-half minutes climbing at a 70 degree angle, and that's doing it subsonic!

The F-104, particularly if you accelerated to above Mach before starting your climb. The climb rate was somewhere between about 50,000 fpm to 25,000 fpm depending on speed and altitude when entering the climb.
Click to expand...
And the F-104 held the climb records, not the Lightning.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I'd also think with that huge delta wing that while you'd get a good initial turn rate, the drag would cripple the plane in a sustained turn or trying to do any sort of energy maneuvering.
Click to expand...
Actually the big wing a low wing loading gave good sustained turn rate performance at high altitude.

It's really in the turn cases above sustained where you suffer as you decelerate (or lose altitude) quickly as Drag > Thrust. And it hurts for climb/acceleration too as you have both more drag and more weight
 
MadRat said:
Lack of turn rate is okay for an interceptor. And the heavy wings would make it a dog in rolls. Javelin's tail was not very well placed to try its hand in fighter roles. But for interceptions, that is not really any hinderance. And certainly as a missileer its not an issue as you pretty much need a stable platform to illuminate from.
Click to expand...
The T-tail was also a big detriment in pitch up maneuvers as it could easily be blanked off by the wing and fuselage of the aircraft. The F-101 had this issue big time. It was so bad, that the plane was fitted with a spin recovery drag chute to be used if the pilot pitched up too steeply and caused the plane to enter an unrecoverable spin.

 
uk 75 said:
All were obsolescent when they entered service compared with US types.
Click to expand...
I have a vision of you being reincarnated as a parrot, and you will sit on your perch screeching "Buy American! Buy American! Buy American!" :p

The saddest thing about this thread is that the "better Javelin" was (IIRC) cancelled with early examples actually on the production line. Given how long the Javelin actually served, I would be half-inclined to switch to the faster version and call it good.
 
pathology_doc said:
The saddest thing about this thread is that the "better Javelin" was (IIRC) cancelled with early examples actually on the production line. Given how long the Javelin actually served, I would be half-inclined to switch to the faster version and call it good.
Click to expand...

“better Javelin” I assume you mean Thin Wing Javelin?

As for “on the production line”

No on both counts;-

What Gloster’s was building at their prototype facility at Benham was the P371(Thin wing Javelin), which was not much better than the production Javelin, which indeed not much better than the Meteor NF.

Please open this link the find drawings and photos of it (well chunks of XG338)
on the Benham shop floor.

 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom