Here's a new project I got thinking about, the RN realized that they needed a long range intercept capability for their carriers, the ideal solution would have been an aircraft with Phoenix but not being able to procure this system, the Navy decided to develop their own. A consortium of Thorn/Ferranti developed a highly capable system where they modified a Martel missile into a long range AIM controlled by a phased-array radar, the package being a complete missile/radar combination. The only kink to the plan was it needed a two-man aircraft.
The requirement was very urgent considering what was envisioned to happen on the global environment, so a quick solution was needed. Plus with the uncertainty of the F-35 ever getting into production, BAE proposed an intrim aircraft for the system, the Sea Harrier F.14 (not sure if it would have been an F.13 [superstition :huh: ]). This would be a highly modified T.10/T.12 with the new radar system installed plus two of the new missiles.
So here's what I'm planning, give a T.10/TAV-8B a new nose (actually from an F-4E) which required the forward fuselage to be widened slightly, a fuselage plug behind the wing (length to be determined LOL ) , I'm only giving it two pylons to each wing, for fuel tank and missile, plus the centerline pylon for a data-link pod (I'll explain that later on). The rear cockpit will be changed to represent the radar station (left-over items from a Prowler set I have).
I was going to use some Martels from a Buccaneer but then I found some similar missiles in the Airfix MRCA kit, only I'm not sure what they are. Top pic shows a comparison of the Phoenix, Martel and these other ones (white ones), anyone have a clue what they might be?
Interesting project: I think both your Airfix missiles are meant to be Martels. The only similar thing I can think of that might be in an MRCA kit would be Kormorans, but they have swept wing trailing edges are straight rear body instead of a tapered one.
Yeah, the white missiles seem to be Martel too, but appear more accurate in proportion. The missiles from the Bucc kit look too short. I'm pretty sure they're not Sea Eagle, which is longer than Martel, has a blunter nose & an intake scoop for the turbojet.
Oh looking great so far....loving this.....any idea of colour scheme/sqn markings? The missiles in the Bucc kit seem to have a choice of 3 different nose cones...2 diff pointy ones and 3 blunt caps.....I'm sure load out was 3 missiles n a data link pod which I think is supplied.......
Quote from: Army of One on March 03, 2010, 08:53:27 AM
Oh looking great so far....loving this.....any idea of colour scheme/sqn markings? The missiles in the Bucc kit seem to have a choice of 3 different nose cones...2 diff pointy ones and 3 blunt caps.....I'm sure load out was 3 missiles n a data link pod which I think is supplied.......
There's not a lot of choice for a colour, but I'm thinking it will have to be late Sea Harrier greys. I've got a few Harrier decal sheets which have quite a few Sea Harrier options, but I think I'll use the 801 Sqn ones from the Model Alliance 'UK Air Arm Update 2005-2006' sheet. It's for an FA.2 really.
Quote from: Army of One on March 03, 2010, 08:53:27 AM
Oh looking great so far....loving this.....any idea of colour scheme/sqn markings? The missiles in the Bucc kit seem to have a choice of 3 different nose cones...2 diff pointy ones and 3 blunt caps.....I'm sure load out was 3 missiles n a data link pod which I think is supplied.......
There are options for TV Martel (blunt cone), Radar Martel (short pointy cone) & Sea Eagle (long pointy cone, with extra intake). The missiles aren't given as an option in the instructions of the new release.
Fantastic, love the two seat Harrier/Sea Harrier!
What is the time frame for your WHIF? 2010 or the past? Perhaps AIM-120 might be a better fit?
You will have to address an engine upgrade in the backstory at least (nothing in plastic, except perhaps some zero scarf front nozzels if you desire), as the bringback capability with even the single seater was marginal in the later days. The heavier nose, second seat, plug, big tanks and weapons would make for a tired Pegasus.
I went for a spine mounted radar, to preserve sensitive center of gravity and airflow concerns for an urgent Falklands AEW capabilty.
Keep it going!
Interesting idea. Isn't Martel a subsonic missile, though? As an alternative, you cold go with an air-launched version of Sea Dart; either the original proposal (which used the Sea Dart body with larger wings), or a hypothetical version with smaller wings (maybe long strakes instead of triangular wings) to make it take up less space.
That nose looks very good on a twin-sticker Harrier! :wub:
Thanks everyone ---
Quote from: Hobbes on March 03, 2010, 10:14:27 AM
Interesting idea. Isn't Martel a subsonic missile, though? As an alternative, you cold go with an air-launched version of Sea Dart; either the original proposal (which used the Sea Dart body with larger wings), or a hypothetical version with smaller wings (maybe long strakes instead of triangular wings) to make it take up less space.
I'm not sure of it's speed Hobbes, I'll have to have a re-read of my copy of BSP, Hypersonics etc. But all I was thinking here was that the airframe of the missile would be used, the internals would be totally different. I looked at a number of existing missiles which the RAF/RN uses and the Martel is the nearest to the Phoenix in size (and weight I think) so that's why I chose it. But you're right, there are other options, this was the easest because I've got a bunch of them in the spares box.
sandiego89, I'm thinking time frame is now ---, and the idea is to have something on par with the Phoenix, 100 miles or something like that. I don't think the AIM-120 goes that far. Engine upgrades will have to be addressed, at least the equivalent to what the GR.9's are getting. I don't want to get into the bigger proposed engine as that would mean the aircraft wouldn't be a converted T.10, but a totally new aircraft.
Quote from: Mossie on March 03, 2010, 09:25:44 AM
Quote from: Army of One on March 03, 2010, 08:53:27 AM
Oh looking great so far....loving this.....any idea of colour scheme/sqn markings? The missiles in the Bucc kit seem to have a choice of 3 different nose cones...2 diff pointy ones and 3 blunt caps.....I'm sure load out was 3 missiles n a data link pod which I think is supplied.......
There are options for TV Martel (blunt cone), Radar Martel (short pointy cone) & Sea Eagle (long pointy cone, with extra intake). The missiles aren't given as an option in the instructions of the new release.
So.......to make 4 sea eagles, I use the missile bodies with the long pointy cone and I take it parts 59/60/61/62 (intakes??) as they are four parts not used in the build?
Quote from: Army of One on March 03, 2010, 12:03:00 PM
So.......to make 4 sea eagles, I use the missile bodies with the long pointy cone and I take it parts 59/60/61/62 (intakes??) as they are four parts not used in the build?
Yes I think that's right Ao1.
I've refined the nose a bit, I tilted it down a touch, lined up the top profile which then leaves a small area to fill with putty on the bottom. This would then straighten out the bottom profile to where the bottom dips down for the front seat anyway
great project so far
Many thanks for that......looking forward to the finished item
Can't get enough of the Harrier. This looks wonderful :wub:
I've revised the designation, there are other RAF aircraft which are Mk. 13's so this should be one too.
Looking beauty so far, Robert !
:wub:
I did a two seat naval SHAR way back when....never did finish the darn thing. Had no wheels so I called it a SlingSHAR. I'll resurrect her someday, when i start all my naval stuff again.....someday......
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fv729%2Fbuzzhemply%2Ftwshar.jpg&hash=0b0f9bd8d835c1d240dfb8db80d5c3e1a9ae9550)
Quote from: Mossie on March 03, 2010, 08:37:16 AM
Yeah, the white missiles seem to be Martel too, but appear more accurate in proportion. The missiles from the Bucc kit look too short. I'm pretty sure they're not Sea Eagle, which is longer than Martel, has a blunter nose & an intake scoop for the turbojet.
I'm actually rather taken with the idea of an air-to-air Sea Eagle. The turbojet confers tremendous range. Speed wouldn't actually be much of a problem, if the targets are intended to be strike aircraft/bombers hunting the carrier. You could pack a really big, unitary warhead or go for a non-unitary one. Even if you reduced the warhead by half, you'd have a hell of a punch!
Quote from: Captain Canada on March 03, 2010, 07:31:57 PM
I did a two seat naval SHAR way back when....never did finish the darn thing. Had no wheels so I called it a SlingSHAR. I'll resurrect her someday, when i start all my naval stuff again.....someday......
:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I started out by trying to fit the FA.2 nose cone to mine too Todd, I thought about using an FA.2 forward fuselage and then grafting the rear half of the two-seater cockpit onto it, the idea being I could get the two crew closer to the same level. After lining up the various fuselage halves, I realized that I just needed to change the very front part of the nose and find a suitable nose cone, but an even larger one than the Blue Fox nose cone. Rumaging through the stash I looked at various nose cones until I found the old Airfix F-4 which has multiple nose cones.
My thinking is this would be primarily a 'fleet defence' interceptor but you wouldn't need very many of them, one or two to each squadron (so they would be converted T.10/12's). I'm very intrigued with this new data-link technology, in my opinion it opens up a whole different way of fighting. I know data linking has been around for a while but mostly it's been between the AWAC/AEW and an aircraft, but now each aircraft can data-link to each other independantly. I'm not sure why this has taken so long to be, probably related to advancements in electronic miniaturization.
Anyway the scenario behind this is that the defending force needs to engage the attackers much further out, like F-14 Tomcats did. The very powerful phased-array Blue Wolf radar installed in the F.13 allows for dozens of aircraft to be tracked at the same time and the computer selects the most likely targets as needing attention first and locks onto them. This is where the data-link comes into play, as the F.13 can carry only two missiles you'd think it wouldn't be very effective, but the data-link allows for a squadron of defenders to be used, I'm not sure how many aircraft are in a RN squadron. The defending force would comprise of one F.13 and as many FA.2's or, as the time line is now, JFH GR.9's that are servicable. Each aircraft would have the data-link capability and carry one or two AIM Martels which would all be controlled by the F.13. The initial engagement would see all the AIM Martels get fired at selected targets from beyond visual range and then afterwards the JFH GR.9's would continue onwards to attack the remaining targets with AIM-120 or AIM-9's or whatever. The F.13 would stand-off and continue monitoring the situation, and at the same time continuing to update the other aircraft through the data-link, sort of acting like an AWAC.
Of course this would only work if there was some advance warning of an attack on the fleet, I would imagine there would have to be some pickets way out in front, a submarine or an AWAC, so the F.13 wouldn't be the total answer to defending a fleet.
You know what bugs me most ? You keep coming up with these ideas that I want to build ! Now cut it out ! The whole scenerio makes to much sense....I guess some of the other SHARs could carry three missiles, eh ? And you could also arm the GRs with the Meteor for a little more reach. I'm looking for an excuse to go buy another Typhoon if you need some !
The nose on mine was the front half of a german WWII era bomb, btw
Quote from: Captain Canada on March 04, 2010, 07:33:16 AM
You know what bugs me most ? You keep coming up with these ideas that I want to build ! Now cut it out !
;D
I hadn't thought of the Meteor ---hmm! I was thinking the SHAR's got only a couple of AIM Martels, because they would need to have the shorter range missiles too, to finish off what got through the first salvo.
Quote from: Captain Canada on March 04, 2010, 07:33:16 AM
The nose on mine was the front half of a german WWII era bomb, btw
It works ! :thumbsup:
Do you have Meteors or do you need me to get you some ?
:thumbsup:
Could I get four of them please.
You know what this means though, I've got a few more SHAR's to build :lol: I know Airfix is supposed to be coming out with a GR.9 sometime too.
My plan is to add a fuselage plug just behind the wing so I've studied how it was done on the FA.2 Sea Harrier, the plug for that aircraft was added in between the main u/c bay and the airbrake which moved the airbrake backwards. Comparing the two Airfix Club kit Harriers (GR.7 & FA.2) reveals that the GR.7's fuselage was extended about the same amount when I line up the main u/c bays of both types only the airbrake on the GR.7 was moved back to it's original position just behind the u/c bay.
In the top photo below you can see what I mean, although it doesn't explain the differences the two kits have in the wheel bay lengths ?????
So I've cut the rear of the fuselage off the T.10 but had to do a 'Z' cut, I carefully cut along a panel line which comes down about half way along the airbrake opening then horizontally across then down in between the wheel bay and the airbrake bay.
Next thing I did was glue the rear fuselage halves together and then fabricated a plug which I glued in place, and afterwards filed it down to be just a little bit bigger than what the finished article will be. I'll smooth that out once the front half gets glued on but I've some cockpit work to do first.
The way I have done the cut it would seem that this might have been considered in real life as it works out really good. It should end up something like the bottom photo though.
She's really coming along nicely, this is going to be way cool when finished. :thumbsup:
Below is just a recap on this project---
OK, I'm going to expand on this idea, and for the GB I'll add the 'slave' missile carriers to it, an FA.2 and a GR.7. This will now be a project that gajillions of bucks got spent on it developing the system, only to have it binned just when it looks really promising (I've been reading Project Cancelled and BSP again :lol: )
Quote from: kitnut617 on March 04, 2010, 07:10:57 AM
My thinking is this would be primarily a 'fleet defence' interceptor but you wouldn't need very many of them, one or two to each squadron (so they would be converted T.10/12's). I'm very intrigued with this new data-link technology, in my opinion it opens up a whole different way of fighting. I know data linking has been around for a while but mostly it's been between the AWAC/AEW and an aircraft, but now each aircraft can data-link to each other independantly. I'm not sure why this has taken so long to be, probably related to advancements in electronic miniaturization.
Anyway the scenario behind this is that the defending force needs to engage the attackers much further out, like F-14 Tomcats did. The very powerful phased-array Blue Wolf radar installed in the F.13 allows for dozens of aircraft to be tracked at the same time and the computer selects the most likely targets as needing attention first and locks onto them. This is where the data-link comes into play, as the F.13 can carry only two missiles you'd think it wouldn't be very effective, but the data-link allows for a squadron of defenders to be used, I'm not sure how many aircraft are in a RN squadron. The defending force would comprise of one F.13 and as many FA.2's or, as the time line is now, JFH GR.9's that are servicable. Each aircraft would have the data-link capability and carry one or two AIM Martels which would all be controlled by the F.13. The initial engagement would see all the AIM Martels get fired at selected targets from beyond visual range and then afterwards the JFH GR.9's would continue onwards to attack the remaining targets with AIM-120 or AIM-9's or whatever. The F.13 would stand-off and continue monitoring the situation, and at the same time continuing to update the other aircraft through the data-link, sort of acting like an AWAC.
just proves that twin seaters look awesome! :tornado:
Kitnut - this looks very interesting: more power to you! :thumbsup:
Quote from: rickshaw on March 04, 2010, 02:22:21 AM
Quote from: Mossie on March 03, 2010, 08:37:16 AM
Yeah, the white missiles seem to be Martel too, but appear more accurate in proportion. The missiles from the Bucc kit look too short. I'm pretty sure they're not Sea Eagle, which is longer than Martel, has a blunter nose & an intake scoop for the turbojet.
I'm actually rather taken with the idea of an air-to-air Sea Eagle. The turbojet confers tremendous range. Speed wouldn't actually be much of a problem, if the targets are intended to be strike aircraft/bombers hunting the carrier. You could pack a really big, unitary warhead or go for a non-unitary one. Even if you reduced the warhead by half, you'd have a hell of a punch!
Wonder if it would be feasible to give it an afterburner? It would cruise subsonically most of the way, but if the autopilot determined that fuel range exceeded target range, it could dump the excess fuel in the jetpipe for extra terminal velocity.
Cool, I like it!
Quote from: G777 on September 06, 2010, 03:37:34 PM
Cool, I like it!
Cheers mate !!
I'll get on with this in earnest later in the month, got our final visitors coming from the UK this weekend for two weeks. It's been really hectic this year, our nephew and his wife came in April for two weeks, followed by his younger brother a week after they went home for two weeks. Then the younger brother (he's currently stationed at Suffield in the south of Alberta) came again for three weeks with his girlfriend in June followed by the first nephew and his wife again for two weeks in July. Younger brother came again for a week last week and now on Sunday, their Mom (SWMBO's sister) and Dad arrive. I'm just about 'visited' out --- :lol:
Quote from: kitnut617 on March 04, 2010, 07:10:57 AM
Of course this would only work if there was some advance warning of an attack on the fleet, I would imagine there would have to be some pickets way out in front, a submarine or an AWAC, so the F.13 wouldn't be the total answer to defending a fleet.
You need the AWACS version of the Osprey.
Always enjoy your projects, Robert.... looking forward to seeing this one progress.
Ian
Thanks Ian, I'll be able to concentrate on this after this weekend, the last of our visitors for this year who are from the UK are leaving on Sunday (wife's sister and hubby) so things should get back to near normal :lol:
Anyway, some bits arrived from Heritage Aviation today, 100% LERX for the F.3 (after some discussion with a member of the ATF forum, I think as this is a Sea Harrier it's designation should really be an F.3 so I've re-named it) and some nozzles, these are to replace the ones I'm using on my STOVL Canberra (which will be finished off sometime soon too). Plus from Ed, some more MRCA Martels (many thanks Ed and already assembled [bonus :thumbsup:] )
Going all out! :wacko:
Quote from: kitnut617 on March 12, 2010, 10:54:43 AM
Comparing the two Airfix Club kit Harriers (GR.7 & FA.2)
it doesn't explain the differences the two kits have in the wheel bay lengths ?????
The reason is that they are completely different aircraft. (SHAR2 being based on the original GR1/GR3/FRS1 airframe)
The latest radars use AESA (active electronically scanned array), meaning no moving parts at all. They use lots of tiny transmitters to form the search beam. This would be a better bet for your system.
The radar would only be needed to initially search for the targets as, if your missile is like Phoenix, it will be fully active.
The data-link system wouldn't need a seperate pod (if that's the way you are still going?) as it would be fully integrated to the aircrafts systems.
Other than those minor points, I love this idea ;D
Quote from: Devilfish on September 29, 2010, 04:39:21 AM
The reason is that they are completely different aircraft. (SHAR2 being based on the original GR1/GR3/FRS1 airframe)
Um, yes - I realise that they are from the two different versions, but looking at the models I see that the two edges of the bays that are closest to each other(the back edge of the front bay and the front edge of the rear bay) they're in the same place. What's different is the length going from these edges and I hadn't thought there was any difference in the u/c legs, at least from what I've read.
Quote from: Devilfish on September 29, 2010, 04:39:21 AM
The latest radars use AESA (active electronically scanned array), meaning no moving parts at all. They use lots of tiny transmitters to form the search beam. This would be a better bet for your system.
Isn't that also known as a 'phased-array' system :huh:
Yes.
I've experimented with a jet engined Martel here, it could be either a ramjet or a turbojet
Nice idea! I'd make the intake a bit bigger, though. See the Sea Eagle below.
(https://www.whatifmodellers.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.skomer.u-net.com%2Fprojects%2Fimages%2Fseaeagle.jpg&hash=7bb141c6ded4ba1131bc0561d4ecec45943a788e)
I'd wondered if it was big enough, I'll have to have a look through my styrene stock to see if I got a bigger channel section to use.
Drinking straws are nice source material for this.
Cutting the nose off an Aim-7 Sparrow half will work well for a scoop too :thumbsup:
OK, jet engined Martel, take 2
Nice! :thumbsup:
Looks just like a mini-Sea Eagle. ;)
Perhaps a Sea Kite?
Yup, that's better.
Right then, 8 or 10 more to go ------- :wacko: :lol:
Really great job on take 2 there :thumbsup:
cheers everyone ---
Any more on this............?? I liked the work put in so far...............H
It's come to a grinding halt, I got swamped with work which were projects that could have been done last year, but the customers sat on them until now. Now they want them last month -----
Quote from: kitnut617 on December 11, 2010, 07:18:49 AM
It's come to a grinding halt, I got swamped with work which were projects that could have been done last year, but the customers sat on them until now. Now they want them last month -----
That sounds about right...
I'm very interested in your Sea Harrier F.3 kitnut617!!
I for one think the Harrier design still has some operational give in it!
It's unfortunate that the design as a whole has been dropped like a hot spud for the overly expensive, overly complicated F-35B! It's like the 1960's all over again - supersonic (with the now obsession of Stealth) or nothing thinking!
Looking forward to the end product!!
M.A.D
I'll try to get this finished in the New Year but it's not going to be done by the end of the Gb unfortunately
I for one will wait......I am sure it will be worth it.......I really wanna see the missiles finished,what did you make the scoops out of...?....H
Quote from: Army of One on December 26, 2010, 06:30:37 PM
what did you make the scoops out of...?....H
Well I started off with a piece of 1/4"x1/8" rectangle hollow section (top pic), which I cut along the 1/4" side to make a channel {second pic) I would have use a channel to begin with but I didn't have any the right size.
next, I cut a series of cuts with the razor saw (five or six would do) about 1/32" apart in the open side of the channel (3rd pic), then just by squeezing the ends you can form a curved section (4th pic) which you then flood with liquid cement. It's best to just hold this in your fingers while this dries because spring clamps just squash the whole thing into a blob. While it's drying though, you can manipulate the shape until you get the right looking curve to the outside edge. Don't worry about the inside edge though (see next post)
Here's the result of the glued item (top pic). Let this thoroughly dry before trimming the sides to match the un-bent side (2nd pic)
I had previously determined that the total length of the scoop would be about 36" long (that's scale inches --- ;) ) and that the part of the scoop which is part of the missile would be 18", so from there I carefully cut out some shapes in the sides which would eventually be the boundary air slot for the intake (3rd pic)
Next stage was to use some flat strip styrene and bend a curve on the end (top pic). I then glued the scoop to the strip and then once dried cut the strip at the end of the scoop (2nd & 3rd pics). I flooded the whole thing in liquid cement and now this is drying thoroughly before I go on with the rest of it, later today maybe)
Nice! Thank you for the tip :thumbsup:
Thanks ---
I've just edited how many cuts I made, I did five actually. Depending where you place these cuts will determine how much of a curve you can get, closer together you can get a fairly small curve, spaced futher apart will give you a more gradual curve
Now that the plastic has hardened again, I trimmed the excess plastic off, cleaned out the insides of the air intake and made the walls a bit thinner, then sanded it up a bit (top pic). Next was to file a nice groove into the side that mates to the missile using a round file close to the diameter of the missile. The scoop measures at about 1/2" long
Voila ---
one scoop glued onto a missile --- now I have two done, six to go (or maybe more)
I just need to put the tail pipe in though.
Now, that's what I call scratchbuilding! Amazing. You can turn even a simple scoop into a handmade work of art.
I am seriously impressed. I know, I know, you think it's easy. The rest of us think it would be easier just to get YOU to make our stuff! :bow:
Quote from: John Howling Mouse on December 27, 2010, 01:38:41 PM
Now, that's what I call scratchbuilding! Amazing. You can turn even a simple scoop into a handmade work of art.
I am seriously impressed. I know, I know, you think it's easy. The rest of us think it would be easier just to get YOU to make our stuff! :bow:
Where's that "embarrassed" smiley when you want it --- :lol: