• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Hawker Siddeley VTOL/STOL Concepts

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
My dear Jemiba,

can I ask you if there was a project to Hawker called HS-810
VTOL transport aircraft or not ?.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
164
Acording to R.Payne "Struck on the Drawing Board", the HS.810 was a Circulation Control
Rotor designs, with rotors at the wingtips, powered by four RS 660-06 in two pods. Forward
thrust was provided by three RB 211. The concept was axed, because maximum speed was
limited to Mach .70 .
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
Thank you my dear Jemiba.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,169
Reaction score
24
And if you look at the "VTOL port" you see where the whole idea fell apart.
By the time you have a site that big, no big deal to add a 2000 foot runway and operate a quiet STOL aircraft instead.
 

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,159
Reaction score
20
Barrington Bond said:
Twin Pegasus VTOL Strike aircraft - number unkown to me at the moment.

Is the second Pegasus mounted back to back but with the rear one pointing backwards? that reminds me of Dan Raymer's RIVET (something like reverse installation vectored thrust...). i thought he had a patent on it, but this seems to precede it.


http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=238.0
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
82
From Air Enthusiast Vol.1 No.1 dated June 1971, the Hawker Siddeley H.S.803 compound project, which I couldn't find elsewhere on the forum.
 

Attachments

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,159
Reaction score
20
Yep, thanks for the picture and for the date - definitely precedes Raymer's.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,243
Reaction score
82

AeroFranz

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
2,159
Reaction score
20
Good stuff. Never seen or heard of this before. I wonder what the cross-sectional area distribution of this configuration looks like. Might have some transonic advantages.
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
47
It would also have reduced 'suck down' with the canard/wing not over the main jets in vertical flight.


Interesting that it shows Sparrows on a UK design of the time. Trim change on missile firing would have been fun!
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
164
A modification of the Nord Noratlas (maybe based on the N.2508, because of the auxiliary wing tip jet engines)
by fitting lift engine pods was proposed by Hawker Siddeley during 1966. The nose spike would have housed the
forward puffer jet. The type wasn't meant as an operational type, but for development according to NMBR.3.
(from Der Flieger, May 1966)
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
That's great one,


thank yo my dear Jemiba,now I am in a journey,when I will back home,I will
check about N.2508 and all variants.
 

ksimmelink

Phormer Phantom Phixer
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
53
Reaction score
0
Website
phantomphacts.blogspot.com
Jemiba said:
A modification of the Nord Noratlas (maybe based on the N.2508, because of the auxiliary wing tip jet engines)
by fitting lift engine pods was proposed by Hawker Siddeley during 1966. The nose spike would have housed the
forward puffer jet. The type wasn't meant as an operational type, but for development according to NMBR.3.
(from Der Flieger, May 1966)
Why would someone propose using jet lift engines, yet keep the main propulsion a radial piston engine? You would need to carry two types of fuel. Why not just convert the main propulsion to a turboprop and then it could all use JP-4. Curious.
 

Jemiba

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,001
Reaction score
164
ksimmelink said:
... and then it could all use JP-4. Curious.
Principally true, but AFAIK this conversion was never meant as a service aircraft, but just as a testbed
for a purely lift negine based VTOL transport. So, fitting additional fuel tanks to the cargo hold perhaps
wouldn't have been regarded as an obstacle, as the test results wouldn't have been impeded.
All what was looked for, was an aircraft, that would be the best basis for a simple conversion, I think.
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,442
Reaction score
744
The Hawker P.1121 just called, it wants its wings and tail surfaces back :) Probably a John Fozard design?
 

harrier

BAe P.1216 book: harrier.org.uk/P1216.htm
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2006
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
47
Yes, one of John Fozard's complex lift jet designs (RB.162s and a reheated RB.177). Seems to be undecided on more wing area or more jet lift for carrier landing.


The P.1121 would have been 'fun' on a carrier - narrow undercarriage and low tailscrape angle.
 

Abraham Gubler

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2008
Messages
3,559
Reaction score
15
The P.1152 looks to be trying to achieve the same design goals as the other OR 346 era strike fighter designs (Vickers 581, Vickers 582, De Havilland DH.127, Blackburn B.123, HS Advanced Projects 1017). That is very slow landing on speed for carrier operations. The variable incidence wing and large vertical thrust provided by the lift engines would enable this heavy aircraft to approach the flight deck at low speeds. On takeoff the main engine can be vectored downwards to add to the vertical thrust as the catapult provides most horizontal thrust. There would appear to be a design option(s) with a larger wing and eight lift engines. Possibly for a RAF land based variant without variable incidence and with full VTOL. The low tailscrap angle is not much of a problem because of the variable incidence wing which provides a few extra degrees of angle of attack without needing to lift the nose and therefore lower the trail.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
Barrington Bond said:
Joint Study - Fixed wing Bi-Service aircraft.Fixed high aspect ratio wing with twin deflected thrust main engines plus additional lift boost engines.

Great find Barrington.
 

LowObservable

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 18, 2006
Messages
2,169
Reaction score
24
Interesting to see STO/VL in 1958. It was another 15 years before the term was widely used.
 

Antonio

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2006
Messages
3,363
Reaction score
40
Joint Study - Fixed wing Bi-Service aircraft.Fixed high aspect ratio wing with twin deflected thrust main engines plus additional lift boost engines.
Is its design number unknown?
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
Jemiba said:
A modification of the Nord Noratlas (maybe based on the N.2508, because of the auxiliary wing tip jet engines)
by fitting lift engine pods was proposed by Hawker Siddeley during 1966. The nose spike would have housed the
forward puffer jet. The type wasn't meant as an operational type, but for development according to NMBR.3.
(from Der Flieger, May 1966)

Also from fzt.haw site;


http://www.fzt.haw-hamburg.de/pers/Scholz/dglr/hh/text_2004_04_01_Senkrechtstarter.pdf
 

Attachments

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
Hi,

what was this Hawker Siddeley VTOL Project ?.

http://archive.aviationweek.com/image/spread/19620917/16
 

Attachments

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,442
Reaction score
744
Read the frigging caption!

Its a generic model by Bristol Siddeley (engine makers) with the basic layout of the P.1154.
 

hesham

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
23,857
Reaction score
893
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
Read the frigging caption!

Its a generic model by Bristol Siddeley (engine makers) with the basic layout of the P.1154.
OK my dear Paul,and thanks.
 
Top