Handley Page HP.124 Military Herald


ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
2 January 2006
Reaction score
Has anybody got a three view drawing of the propossed Military version of the Handley Page Herald with the aft lamp and revised Tail. This design being the runner up to the Andover for the RAF.

I have seen a Pic of the original model but not the 3 views


Just a 3-view of the Herald, with a side view of the military version.
Think, I posted it already here, but couldn't find now .. ???
(from Flying Review 6/65)


  • Handley-Page_Herald-400_HP-131.JPG
    25.5 KB · Views: 1,151
Cheers Jemba

Thats a nice start, just a pity no sign of a full 3 view, found bits on the jet versions but very little on the military Andover contender.


here is the Handley Page HP.124 a military Herald.


  • HP.124.JPG
    31.8 KB · Views: 274
    24.2 KB · Views: 271
Do you have any info on the military Herald's cargo capacity? How many vehicles was it to carry and how many paratroopers?

Completely off-topic question. How can you extract pictures from the pdf-documents from The Flight Global Archive? I tried several times, using my Adobe Reader ver. 8.1.2 - selecting and copying text from the pdf's is quite simple, but the pictures apparently cannot be selected and copied (which is standard feature of Adobe Reader). As far as I know the files are not being protected whatsoever.

Can you tell me how you made it?

Hi Petrus,

I can't say how Hesham does it - but when I open the archive page in a Firefox window there's a toolbar above the PDF page with an image copy icon. The icon looks like a camera. I've attached it to this message. I hope that helps.


  • Image copy icon.jpg
    Image copy icon.jpg
    3.9 KB · Views: 457
Thanks a lot. It has helped indeed!

From the following page in Flight.

Added: Since Flight cut off the HP124's tail in their drawing, I'm attaching a more complete sideview of the Canadair equivalant (courtesy of boxkite).


  • military-herald-ramp.jpg
    26.5 KB · Views: 215
  • canadair-CL-202-Herald.jpg
    24.4 KB · Views: 237


  • 11951131_10208044885506491_2468321400289028986_n.jpg
    221.6 KB · Views: 679
According to Hawker Siddeley Aviation and Dynamics: 1960-77 by Stephen Skinner which has a brief narrative of the acquisition offers made by Hawker Siddeley to Handley Page the military version of the Herald was initially selected to meet the requirement (OR.224/ASR.373) but was subsequently rejected due to the failure of HP to merge with another company.
JFCF: The 1976 Putnam HP is even more explicit: P.543: (RAF) "preferred H.P.124 to its costlier competitor, H.S.780...came thro (7/61 try before buy trials) with flying colours but (MoA) declined to place a contract for H.P.124 except with BAC or HSA with whom (Sir Fred) refused to merge unless (at his valuation of his Co.)...little doubt that the Govt's political intransigence deprived RAF of a transport ideally suited to their short term {?short haul} needs...and that the conflict hastened Sir Fred's death" 21/4/62 (31 Avro 780 had been ordered 3/62).

But it is not so. Like most Aero-hagiographers bemoaning myopic pols. Sir Fred was, ah, a positive personality: “The role of the State is to provide facilities for fattening the goose which will lay the golden eggs” Sir Fred., Flight,15/1/60, at P.6, K.Hayward,Govt and British Civil Aerospace,MUP,1983. That State supported HP A/c, 1962-65, with Victor K.1 conversion and nominated HP, in F-111K offset, which secured USAF C-10A, planned to be 300. 780 was selected for good reasons, not coloured by any juvenile prejudice.
Yes, the H.P.124 was judged technically the best by the Air Staff, the Ministry of Aviation wanted the HS.748/780. The rationalisation strategy was still in full flow and politically it made little sense to keep HP independent by ordering the H.P.124 when the differences in price and technical performance were not too great to confer a decisive advantage either way. The War Office just wanted its promised light cargo carrier (it was they and not the Air Ministry who had raised the requirement for such a type in the first place) and they wanted the DHC Caribou. In addition Macmillan had promised the Indian government they would support whatever transport type (748 or Herald) they selected in 1960, they had chosen 748 and it was feared political embarrassment would ensue.

I have looked at the archival documents on this, I have no doubt that Sir Frederick was sincere about merger with HSA and talks with Dobson had been ongoing since 1960. However, he was always clear that he would only agree to a deal that was beneficial to his shareholders (he knew they probably wouldn't sell out for a silly low price) and hence he overvalued and that ultimately pulled the plug when HSA refused to pay. There are other factors at play too, at this HSA was divesting itself of surplus factory space (Christchurch etc.) and HSA were in serious financial trouble themselves having been refused more funds by the banks. Realistically I don't think any takeover was likely unless the government was prepared to put its hands in its pockets. Unfortunately, this was not going to happen.

HP were willing to allow licence production and there was even talk of licence-production by Canadair. HP tried everything to get the order, even fighting back with revised lower bids to try and get the order reversed. Many of the company's letters, especially Sir Fred's later letters, have an air of desperation about them. The MoA were content to let HP wind down and they had other reasons for awarding the contract to HSA too with a dose of political smokescreening to the Public Accounts Committee into the bargain.


Does anyone here really wish to castigate UK pols for buying for RAF Avro 780, not Herald?
Under today’s procedures, it would have been F-27.

Taxpayers’ Launch Aid for Herald was by us buying 3 to be leased for BEAC’s Highlands & Islands, operated 1/62-11/68. In all 45 more were sold.

Avro 748 had no Launch Aid, sold 253 (plus the 31 Andover C.1 and 6 CC.2), 89 more were built by Hindustan. BA leased 8 748 Budgies across 3/82-12/91 (and wished their replacement ATP had been stillborn).

And then there was F-27: 581 built by Fokker, 205 by Fairchild: Launch Customer was BEAC’s Associate Co. Aer Lingus. Channel Express acquired 9 pre-loved, operated to 3/99; their first F-27 service for FedEx was in 1990: in ’95 they bought a ’71-built F-27 for $1.2Mn. to replace a Herald whose ’63 price was less. So…why did all these unpatriotic folk not buy from HP?

Flight Intnl.23/12/98 obituary (last flight of type, 3/99): “taxiing (is) something of a black art (the) pilot feels he is exercising some skill if he taxies (smoothly ...cockpit tolerably comfortable for elatively short flights” but its virtue had been seen as “pleasant handling characteristics...pilot appeal.” Airliners are not sold to pilots.
Last edited:
Tenuous, loosely-related trivia on military DC-3 replacement.
RAAF/SAAF/RAF Desert Air Force, 1943-44, learning how to sustain upfront Units: C-47: named by Ike as the only aircraft in his list of the 5 war-winning utensils.

RAAF keeps C-47 (last R&D hack) to 11/99: 56 years since acquistion; adds Caribou 2/64 and retains them 45 years to 11/2009. SAAF continues today to rely on Turbo-C-47: so, 1943-now = 72 years and counting.

UK starts to replace C-47, 1949, with Valetta (as transport to 1968, to spare $). Starts thinking of replacement, 1956; looks at vertical insertion by Fairey Rotodyne compound device, and Westland WG.1 (V.107, to be CH-47 Chinook); at STOL DHC Caribou, and Short P.D.17 (Bréguet 941); bridges with SAL Twin Pin, 10/58-68 and pyrotechnic Bristol Belvedere, 1961-69; re-looks at this in 1961 and settles for Andover C.1 (12/66-8/75, as transport). Decides that rotors are now reliable, taking Puma (1971->2025: >54 years) and Wessex HC.2 (1964-1997 as transport: 33 years). In 1967 orders 15 Chinooks; cancelled 1/68; in 1978 orders 33, then many more to work >2030…so, >63 years since first ordered.
Yes alertken,
A large part of the "problem" was the thousands of war-surplus C-47s available for cheap.
Dozens of companies built "DC-3 replacements" during the 1940s, 1950s and 1960s, but only sold handfuls (Convair, deHavilland of Canada, Fairchild, Fokker, Illyushan, Martin, SAAB, Shorts, etc.). It was not until stocks of war-surplus radial engines ran out (during the 1980s) that operators seriously considered replacing DC-3s. Piston-pounding DC-3s and Beech 18s only faded from skydiving during the 1990s!
Now companies like Basler are converting the last airworthy DC-3 airframes to turboprops.
The government in 1959 were fully prepared to offer Hawker Siddeley launch aid of equal value to that given to the Herald (~£1 million) if the India deal had not been successful. The government policies of private-venture development and seeking exports clashed head-on and pragmatically it was seen that some modest state support to guarantee exports was worth it if the returns could pay off the investment.

Interestingly in terms of Alertken's comparison of numbers, the Cabinet in 1959 conceded the F-27 already had 100 orders just as they were trying to get 748 and Herald into the market.
Managed to find a copy of the original brochure a while back.. mean meaning to post it for ages!

If folks are interested I can scan the entire document, unfortunatly its a tad fragile and an awkward size to scan!



  • hp124-001.jpg
    259 KB · Views: 113
  • hp124-002.jpg
    313.3 KB · Views: 139
  • hp124-003.jpg
    134 KB · Views: 164
  • hp124-004.jpg
    147 KB · Views: 165
  • hp124-005.jpg
    151.7 KB · Views: 159

Similar threads

Top Bottom