Modernising the Hawker Hunter

[KiwiZac]

Hi all,
I was caught out by an April Fool's prank this morning - probably as it's almost two weeks later, so I wasn't expecting it - by reading, and believing, an article at Hush-Kit about India's HAL company producing a modernised Super Hunter for the IAF:

The Langoor will differ from the Hunter in many respects-
•The original engine Rolls-Royce Avon will be replaced by the Eurojet EJ200
•Sensors will include the Swedish PS-05/A radar
•New lightweight helmet cueing system
•Internal armament of one GSh-23-mm cannon
•New wing to be designed with BAE Systems
•Glass cockpit
•Weapons to include R-73 short range air-to-air missiles

After a friend pointed out the date it was posted, I got to thinking about this as a model. Any takers?

[kitnut617]

it has always been my view that the Gripen is a Super Hunter, the fuselages are just about the same size and shape (apart from the obvious squared off flying surfaces), and as they were both designed by the same people (HS loaned designers to SAAB to do the Gripen)

[Weaver]

You could use Freightdog's P.1109 conversion to get the radar nose. The PS-05/A might be a challenge though: at the very least it would have to have a smaller dish. It would probably be easier to fit something like a FIAR Grifo.

[GTX_Admin]

A P.1099 would certainly provide a starting point here:




Dare I say the P.1100 might be close to what you are looking at though:

[GTX_Admin]

it has always been my view that the Gripen is a Super Hunter, the fuselages are just about the same size and shape (apart from the obvious squared off flying surfaces), and as they were both designed by the same people (HS loaned designers to SAAB to do the Gripen)

Sigh...some people and their 'conspiracy theories' :

[kitnut617]

Nice one Greg  :)

I did a lot of part comparing of a Gripen and Hunter before I came to my conclusion, apart from some info I got from Phil Butler and Tony Buttler

[GTX_Admin]

Wasn't me - the drawing was done by ysi_maniac a couple of years ago (see here along with other variants)

[KiwiZac]

Greg, thanks for those - the 1099 and 1100 both give me some ideas. Now to dig up a bashable Hunter from somewhere...

[Weaver]

A P.1099 would certainly provide a starting point here:

Point of order: that's a P.1109, testbed for the Firestreak conversion that never happened. The P.1099 was the prototype F.6 with the big-bore Avon and revised rear fuselage from the P.1083 thin-wing supersonic Hunter that was cancelled.

[Volkodav]

I have the Frieghtdog conversion but nothing to use it on, thinking of using it as a template for the 1/48 Italeri hunter I do have.  have been thinking of buying the remaining two or three Italeri Hunters from the local hobby store and doing a series of Super Hunters.

Been thinking along the lines of Australia continues to evolve and build the Hunter into the 70s (or maybe even later), Hawkers having set up shop in Australia during the early thirties to build Harts and Demons for the RAAF.  The Australian hunter would become a capable transonic, then supersonic land and carrier based interceptor, all weather interceptor, then fighter attack aircraft,  primarily for use by ADF but with some exports and military assistance transfer.  They would initially serve the RAAF but then Army Aviation, RAM and RAN FAA as the RAAF transitioned to more "bleeding edge" types.

[GTX_Admin]

Point of order: that's a P.1109, testbed for the Firestreak conversion that never happened. The P.1099 was the prototype F.6 with the big-bore Avon and revised rear fuselage from the P.1083 thin-wing supersonic Hunter that was cancelled.

Good spot:

[Weaver]

With AAMs and possibly sophisticated AGMs on board, you could usefully delete two of the guns.

The inboard guns are mounted further forward and feed from the forward pair of side-by-side magazines, while the outboard guns are mounted further back and feed from the aft magazine pair, so:

Option 1: Delete the inboard pair of guns, replace them with an internal link collector box (half as many links to catch) and delete the Sabrinas, thereby reducing drag. Use the space freed up by the removal of the forward magazines and the inner gun barrels for more avionics. You could replace the Sabrinas by fairings carrying electronic antennas.

Option 2: Remove the inboard gun on one side and the outboard gun on the other, then double the size of their magazines. In a close support situation, the increased combat persistance might be worth more than the reduction in instantaneous firepower, and in any case, 2 x 30mm is still equivalent to most jet fighters of the era. You'll probably have to keep the Sabrinas because you've still got the same number of links to catch.

IIRC, the Central Fighter Establishment recommended reducing the guns to two, stretching the forward fuselage slightly and adding an extra fuel tank. Not sure if that would be possible as a refit, but it's worth thinking about.

[Volkodav]

Replace the scabbed on airbrake with one or more flush ones, definitely stretch the fuselage between the cockpit and intakes and probably delete the inner pair of cannon. 

First super is radar nose, delete inner cannon and fit missiles.

Second is fuselage stretch, flush airbrake(s)

Third is the carrier version adding wing fold and arrester hook

Fourth adds thin, more highly swept wing

Fifth is a carrier version of four.

[elmayerle]

IIRC, the Central Fighter Establishment recommended reducing the guns to two, stretching the forward fuselage slightly and adding an extra fuel tank. Not sure if that would be possible as a refit, but it's worth thinking about.

I believe it was a three-foot stretch and, done right at the transport joint between the forward and center fuselage sections would be comparatively easy to do as a retrofit.

[Weaver]

IIRC, the Central Fighter Establishment recommended reducing the guns to two, stretching the forward fuselage slightly and adding an extra fuel tank. Not sure if that would be possible as a refit, but it's worth thinking about.

I believe it was a three-foot stretch and, done right at the transport joint between the forward and center fuselage sections would be comparatively easy to do as a retrofit.

Did they propose doing anything at the back to counter the increased side area?

[Weaver]

Just reading some stuff about the Hunter and one blindingly obvious and simple mod would be a refuelling probe...

[Weaver]

In the late 1950s, the UK Central Fighter Establishment proposed an advanced Hunter, the "CFE Hunter", which would have had only two cannon but a larger ammunition supply; a non-afterburning Avon 301 powerplant, as used on the Lightning, with 56.3 kN (5,735 kgp / 12,650 lbf) max thrust, or a Rolls-Royce Spey bypass turbojet; a fuselage stretch to permit greater fuel load; a drag chute and arresting hook; a new navigation system; and Sidewinder AAM support.

From here: http://www.airvectors.net/avhunt_1.html#m6

[tankmodeler]

First off, what is the role you want for this upgrade? Not front line fighter, so what?

I'd think a low cost ground attack/coin aircraft for 3rd world countries in low intensity combat.

Upgrade the engine to an F414 non-afterburning engine - add 30% more thrust, reduce weight 600 lb

modify inlets and exhaust to handle the much greater airflow

stretch fuselage for more fuel

replace Adens with a 25mm revolver canon

upgrade avionics to glass cockpit, plus ground attack suite from A-10 and electronic defenses from A-10.

enable carriage of precision weapons

enable carriage of SR AAW for self defense

armour the cockpit, engine and fuel tank

replace wing with higher strength version for more stores, use more composites to save weight for greater payload , add high lift devices to allow greater payload slower and shorter landing roll. Probably straighten out the wing a bit to optimize for lower speeds.

restrict top speed to 400 kts

equip for rough field landing.

Whattaya think?

Paul

[Weaver]

modify inlets and exhaust to handle the much greater airflow

Tricky: the intake ducts pass through the wing spars.

replace Adens with a 25mm revolver canon

Or 27mm Mauser Bk27s which are damned good guns.

upgrade avionics to glass cockpit, plus ground attack suite from A-10 and electronic defenses from A-10.

enable carriage of precision weapons

enable carriage of SR AAW for self defense

The Swiss and several other users did some or all of that. Swiss Hunters could carry Maverick and several countries fitted then with chaff/flare dispensers, RWRs and Sidewinder/Magic/Shafrir, the latter sometimes on extra inboard bylons ahead of the u/c bays.

[elmayerle]

Not that I know of; I believe they felt the existing vertical tail could handle it.  At least, that's the way I'm modeling it.

[Volkodav]

The biggest issue with upgrading the Hunter for ground attack is there were never enough to meet demand.  Compare it to the Etendard, Skyhawk, etc. and it is clear that had a new build attack version been built, or even a supersonic version with a radar nose, it would have remained in production for longer and provided a much larger pool of airframes for upgrade through the 70s and 80s and perhaps even into the 2000s with some customers.

One thing I am keen on is a carrier version with a radar nose that was capable of operating from modernised Colossus and Majestic class light fleet carriers or even a modernised (as opposed to rebuilt) Implacable.  Extending the usefulness of the armoured and light fleet carriers into the 60s and 70s could have been the reasoning behind continuing development while the advent of more and more bush wars and insurgencies that saw the development of the Hunter FGA.9 would have then had an in production airframe to use.

[Weaver]

Not that I know of; I believe they felt the existing vertical tail could handle it.  At least, that's the way I'm modeling it.

That makes sense actually: the real life two seat has rather more side area forwards and the proposed tandem two-seater would have had a lot more, but both used the standard fin.

I want to do a P.1083/P.1109 mashup and a tandem two-seater at some stage, so I'm now thinking of incorporating the three-foot stretch into the single seater. It would resonate well with the way the Meteor F.8 had a T.7-length fuselage in a way...

[Volkodav]

Not that I know of; I believe they felt the existing vertical tail could handle it.  At least, that's the way I'm modeling it.

That makes sense actually: the real life two seat has rather more side area forwards and the proposed tandem two-seater would have had a lot more, but both used the standard fin.

I want to do a P.1083/P.1109 mashup and a tandem two-seater at some stage, so I'm now thinking of incorporating the three-foot stretch into the single seater. It would resonate well with the way the Meteor F.8 had a T.7-length fuselage in a way...

Same here but the wing will be challenging so I will likely start with a stretched P.1083 based all weather fighter, possibly a naval one with a wing fold that leaves it less than 14' high for possible use on an angled decked but not fully rebuilt Implacable.

[elmayerle]

Down in the remote southern stash, I think I have one of the Maintrack 1/72 tandem-seat conversions.  I might be willing to retrieve it for reference usage if I get the chance for a road trip (~100 miles each way).  I might still retrieve it for use with a Revell kit.

[Weaver]

I've got one of Martin H's resin tandem two-seater conversions (intended for the Airfix kit) and Freightdog sets for the P.1083 and P.1109 bits. The latter are intended for the Revell Hunter though, so some interesting adapations might have to take place. the Revell Hunter's fuselage is (accurately) narrower than the Airfix and Matchbox versions, and all three treat the wing root/intake area differently....