Folland Gnat - Development & Derivatives

[sienar]

Mk.II with a funny looking radome

https://www.diomedia.com/stock-phot...e-hawker-siddeley-gnat-mk2-image18095906.html

 

[taildragger]

There's nothing funny about ugly.

 

[Petrus]

Here you've got a cut out from the book "TSR2. Britain's Lost Bomber" by Damien Burke (p. 30) showing the Folland Light Bomber. The book mentions the project as follows:

Another outside contender very briefly looked at was a small aircraft from Folland, but the range and bomb load of such a small aircraft immediately ruled it out of the running for GOR.339.

The bomber was quite a small aircraft indeed. Elsewhere on the Internet I found info on its dimensions, which is very similar to that you may calculate using the drawing:

Length, 44ft
Height, 11ft
Span, 37.5ft
Wing Area, 375sq.ft
Wheel Track, 6.25ft
Engines, 2x Bristol Orpheus 11 (uprated Orpheus 2)

As for the engines, thrust of 5,250 lb would indicate non-reheated Orpheus 11. At https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/folland-postwar-aircraft-projects.5776/post-4158 there is a quote from the book "Folland Gnat – Sabre-Slayer and Red Arrow" stating the reheated Orpheus 12 was also being considered.

By the way you may buy "TSR2. Britain's Lost Bomber" at Google Books.

Additionaly you've got here an original drawing of the Folland bomber - I downloaded it in 2009 (!), so I cannot tell now its source (quite possibly I had found it in this forum, but if I am not mistaken the drawing has disappeared).

Piotr

 

[nuuumannn]

I've always been a bit suspicious about plans to upgrade the Gnat, short of completely redesigning it, I mean, it's tiny! Where is all the electroniccy bits gonna fit? Here's a picture of a Lightning with an AI-23B next to it. Note the diameter of the unit and Lightning's nose cone, within which the unit sat. This also doesn't show the cockpit display unit or associated boxes required to power the thing. Where is all that gonna go in the Gnat?

 

[Hood]

Two aircraft that proved difficult to kill and kept popping up all over the place were the Gnat and the Miles Student. Just when you think its dead and buried, up it pops again.
Petter didn't even want to fit Tacan into the T.Mk.1 as he couldn't fit it in so tried to the convince the Air Staff they didn't need it. "These aren't the avionics you are looking for" - sadly for Teddy, his Jedi powers failed to hoodwink them.

I have seen the two-seat night fighter version too, a stretch too far I think.

 

[hesham]

From Aeroplane monthly 2008/9,

the Sea Gnat.

 

[blackkite]

Hi!
I feel that the drawing "wing track arrangement for variable sweep on the Folland F.O.147" is little strange.
Wing trailing edge shape of wing 20° is not equal to wing trailing edge shape of wing70°.
Source : Derek Wood, PROJECT CANCELLED.
　　　　　　US & British Experimental & Projected Aircraft after W.W.Ⅱ(3), DELTA publishing Co.,Ltd Tokyo.

Tailless desing has wing tip controller.

 

[hesham]

From Aeroplane magazine 1957.

 

[TsrJoe]

Folland/Shorts PD.35 Gnat target drone

 

[hesham]

From Aeroplane 1960.

 

[hesham]

From Flight 1960.

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

Perhaps it is related in some way to this:


Ground attack trials for the Gnat F.1, apparently in response to a requirement to replace the Venoms in the Middle East, which would ultimately be won by the Hunter FGA.9. Does anyone have more information about these trials? Perhaps the Gnat T.1 in the above reply was based off of this experience.

I apologise for the bad photo quality however I had to take this photo using my phone on the floor of a Boston bookshop as I could not buy the book as it was too heavy and I was travelling.

Source: “The British Fighter since 1912” by Francis K. Mason

 

[robunos]

A better version . . .



and the caption.




cheers,
Robin.

 

[Jason Dykstra (Wyvern)]

@Flame2512 and some other researchers were looking into armament options for the Gnat. According to the Brochure, the Gnat could carry Firestreak missiles and other armaments. We were unsure as to whether this was referring to the F.1 or T.1, as the brochure was for the latter. This is a highly interesting find as alongside some of the posts in this thread, most notably reply #91, this shows that there was interest at least from the manufacturers perspective to arm the trainer variant.

 

[TsrJoe]

Gnat Mk.5 with x2 Firestreak AAM.

 

[Hood]

The podded armament seen in reply #91 seems to have been Folland's own design with a single 7.62mm machine gun with 126 rounds.
An armed Gnat T.1 utilising the pod and RPs/bombs etc. was offered to the RAF as a weapons trainer, but they were not interested in the type for weapons training.

 

[TsrJoe]

 

[TsrJoe]

Gnat T.1 prototype, XM681, Farnbrough (note underfuselage tank)

Gnat T.1 pre production, XM698, Farnbrough (note underfuselage tank)

 

[GTX]

A few recent photos I took:

 

[Petrus]

From Aeroplane magazine 1957.

Recent posts on armament options for the Gnat have made me wonder how many rockets were to be carried in the rocket pack (alternative for twin Aden guns) in the fighter’s early versions. These are second and third (Fo.140) from the top in the picture posted by Hesham.

Piotr

 

[Hood]

View attachment 736679

Looks like Folland had a couple of different gun pods in mind.

A few recent photos I took:

Haha, that's a cute dinky step ladder. Must be for the kiddies as an adult can easily see into a Gnat cockpit whilst standing on the ground. It always amazes me how small the Gnat is, even the Me 163 looks like a chonker beside a Gnat.

 

[GTX]

Haha, that's a cute dinky step ladder. Must be for the kiddies as an adult can easily see into a Gnat cockpit whilst standing on the ground. It always amazes me how small the Gnat is, even the Me 163 looks like a chonker beside a Gnat.

Correct

 

[hesham]

Hi,

The Gnat projects,notice Fo.140.

http://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1957/1957 - 1710.pdf

The whole article.