September 26, 2011 at 8:34 am
It is 60 years to the day that the de Havilland D.H.110 made its first flight at Hatfield.
For me no other type has encapsulated the era of early fast-jet test flying, British political military indecision, and the heyday of British test piloting as the 110 did. The drawn-out and late end result was a superbly, capable naval all weather fighter in the shape of the Sea Vixen.
A Brave New Fighter Is Born
The 110 was de Havillands’ submission to a January 1947 specification N.40/46 to reflect the Naval Staff operational requirements of NR/A.14 (itself the results of a meeting between D.H.s’ R.E. Bishop and Rear-Admiral M.S. Slattery, RN/MoS in 1946) calling for a two seat, twin jet, radar equipped, 30mm cannon armed, all weather fighter (FAW) for Fleet Air Arm use primarily aboard their new Audacious Class of carriers. The submitted design was close enough to be put forward for the Air Ministrys’ spec F.44/46 of August 1947, itself based on OR.227 which called for a night fighter aircraft very similar to the N.40/46 but for RAF use. In March 1948 the RAF issued a revised specification, F.4/48, which more closely reflected the 110s capabilities and refined the details of the intended service aircraft. Unfortunately for de Havilland Gloster Aircraft submitted their G.A.5 design to this latter spec.
Ronald E. Bishop C.B.E. headed the design team which also featured J.P.Phil Smith C.B.E and W.A.Bill Tamblin O.B.E., from early 1947 the D.H.110 drawings and models bore a close resemblance to the final service machine, the large swept wings, side by side turbojets and crew positioning, and probably most distinctly the twin tail booms with the tailplane mounted high up on the swept fins. Two features changed over a short period, the tailplane was trialled with both a rear and a forward swept layout, coupled with the fact that it was mounted between the booms this resulted in a strange ‘boomerang’ appearance in planform. Eventually it ended up as the straight edged affair that was fitted to all machines. The crew compartment originally bore a strong resemblance to the Mosquito night fighter layout and canopy arrangement (later refined in Vampire and Venom NFs/FAWs) and this was favoured for better crew cooperation, it was also seen that it would have to be modified to allow the successful fitment and use of ejection seats, and this is when the design evolved to the highly distinctive, though restricted (and criticised in service) later cockpit layout of a pilots fighter style canopy offset to port and radar operators position buried within the fuselage to stb’d. Envisaged engines had also changed from the Metrovick F.9 to the Rolls Royce A.J.65 (Axial Jet 6,500Ib thrust).
During the late 1940s more specifications were issued and the design was refined, however the Royal Navy dropped the D.H.110 design in favour of a Fairey submission to a new specification, N.14/49. The RAF, after several meetings and specific concerns (and Bishops’ reassurances) over the use of British AI radar as opposed to the American AN/APG-43 with its superior displays (as later used in the Javelin as AI.22) and the knock on consequences for the radar operators poor external visibility, decided to go ahead and order five prototypes of the thirteen originally envisaged when the RN were onboard with the project. Of these only WG236 and ‘240 completed.
When the first 110 was rolled out at Hatfield it presented a dramatic looking and advanced radar equipped fighter, distinguished and legendary Flight Test-pilot John Cunningham (C.B.E., D.S.O., D.F.C. & Bars) the carried out taxy trials on the 16th September 1951, and on the 26th he took off with Flight-Test observer Tony Fairbrother for a 46 minute maiden flight.
This aircraft then underwent an in-depth test programme, and alongside WG240, which first flew in 25th July 1952, conducted a set of demonstrations to RAF and USAF delegations. Both aircraft were powered by the AJ.65 which were now known as the Avon, ‘236 being powered by the early 6,500 Ib RA.3.
WG236 had a series of small aerodynamic and strengthening modifications made to it, while WG240 was rolled out as the definitive DH.110, it looked very dramatic in its all over gloss black ‘night fighter’ scheme, it was also powered by the more powerful 7,500 Ib Avon RA.7s.
Tragedy And Cancellation
The Sea Vixen story cannot be told without the mention of the tragedy at the Farnborough SBAC show of September 1952, to this day it remains the UKs’ worst air show disaster and was to have serious implications to the whole DH110 programme.
John Derry DFC had taken over John Cunningham as the fast-jet test-pilot at de Havilland, Cunningham moving over to the equally valuable Comet trials programme. He was a pilot of great renown, especially for his RAF Typhoon operations, demonstration test-flying, and of course being the first British pilot to break the sound barrier, while flying the D.H.108. He was a house hold name in an era where the test-pilot was highly revered and it seemed that new jet aircraft were appearing all the time, both were appearing in the latest movies (most notably, and ironically ‘The Sound Barrier’), the SBAC show at Farnborough was arguably the arena which showcased all of this to the public and so both the D.H.110 and Derry were highly anticipated. Throughout the show week the lighter and more powerful (not to mention the dramatic black look with white ‘de Havilland 110 Day and Night Fighter – Rolls Royce Avon’ script) of the two prototypes, WG240, had been flying the demonstrations, including laying a sonic boom for the crowds to marvel at, it suffered engine problems on the Saturday and so WG236 was substituted. After flying in a shallow dive and leaving a sonic boom it darted low across the crowd line before performing a tight turn to port, the crowd then witnessed a separation of major parts of the airframe in front of them, the cockpit came crashing to the ground in front of the crowd line, Derry and Flight test Observer Tony Richards were killed instantly, the inner wings and booms came fluttering down like a Sycamore leaf and crashed in the parked aircraft area. Crucially the engines had separated from the airframe and had continued in a trajectory into a crowd area and a car park, and it was these that had caused the deaths of 29 spectators, aswel as injuring 63 others.
There was immediate blame by the uninitiated, doubtlessly fuelled by the hype surrounding the sound barrier at the time, apportioned to the supersonic runs, however it was found through extensive manufacturers and AIB investigations to have been a complex structural failure which started in the stb’d wing outer leading edge. The wing was also found to be much weaker than initially thought, lacking in outboard forward spars and relying ion reinforced ‘D’ section leading edges. Many lessons, both for the aircraft industry and for air show guidelines were digested after this event. WG236 had made a total of 133 flights.
Within a month of the tragic accident the RAF withdrew from the DH.110 programme, and the Gloster GA.5 was chosen as the RAFs all weather fighter. It had slightly inferior performance in some respects to the 110 but crucially it could be fitted with the American AI.22 radar, alternatively with the British AI.17, and with their superior displays this allowed for a far better crew placement under a tandem canopy and two sets of eyes to be available when needed. The Javelin went on to serve the RAF until 1968.
Below, 2nd prototype WG240 in its first and very short lived natural metal sceme. (source unknown)
By: mhuxt - 31st October 2011 at 00:37
Marvelous thread, thanks to all!
By: mhuxt - 31st October 2011 at 00:37
Marvelous thread, thanks to all!
By: Paul Holtom - 30th October 2011 at 22:05

This 892 squadron FAW 2 was part of the “Simons Sircus” display team formed in April 1968.
892s last embarkation with the Sea Vixen was on Hermes finishing in February 1968.
893 squadron embarked their FAW 2s on Hermes from May 1968 to June 1970. Their previous service in Victorious which was cut short after the infamous fire which proved very convenient for the politicians in getting another carrier out of service!
By: Paul Holtom - 30th October 2011 at 22:05

This 892 squadron FAW 2 was part of the “Simons Sircus” display team formed in April 1968.
892s last embarkation with the Sea Vixen was on Hermes finishing in February 1968.
893 squadron embarked their FAW 2s on Hermes from May 1968 to June 1970. Their previous service in Victorious which was cut short after the infamous fire which proved very convenient for the politicians in getting another carrier out of service!
By: lindoug - 3rd October 2011 at 21:03
893 Squadron FAW.2
By: lindoug - 1st October 2011 at 10:56
A photo of Freds Five 766 Squadron taken in July 1962. Photo is copyright “Courtesy of Archives of Captain Allard Guy “Slim” Russell, USN”. Captain Russell spent some time with the RN at Yeovilton and Lossie in mid 1962, flying the Vixen, Scimitar and Hunter. This signed photo was presented to him by the team.
By: Flanker_man - 29th September 2011 at 12:00
Just coincidence or were those chaps showing a very keen interest in the Sabres taking notes?
…. and the policeman(?) by the Sabre’s nose is the lookout ??
I’ve also just noticed the concrete slabs – they are hexagonal, just like a Soviet airfield… 😮
Ken
By: pagen01 - 29th September 2011 at 09:38
Just a thought, as the D.H.110 was the first British aircraft to feature the ‘all flying’ tailplane (Apr ’54), I wonder how much this F-86 visit (Apr ’52) and the aircrafts features influenced DHs’ decision?
Just coincidence or were those chaps showing a very keen interest in the Sabres taking notes?
By: lindoug - 29th September 2011 at 06:51
Yes I managed to get some good responses to that plea for help.
here’s another ‘historic ‘ photo; this one with the DH.110 and the Comet.
Photos from BAe Systems.
By: pagen01 - 28th September 2011 at 09:46
Brilliant stuff, thanks for posting Lindoug, I remember in another thread you were asking details of that event, did you find these marvelous pictures as a result of that?
The pics show well the ugly longitudinal boom stiffeners that had to be added to WG236, alongside the extra fin extensions added under the rear booms, both of these problems were remedied in the factory on WG240.
By: lindoug - 28th September 2011 at 08:43
Here’s a couple more taken at the same time.
Sorry the photos are a bit pixilated. I had to dramatically reduce the file in order to post.
By: pagen01 - 28th September 2011 at 08:22
Early days at Hatfield with the USAF’s 92nd FIS lending a hand.
Fantastic pic Lindoug, first I’ve seen of this event, which is I assume when the 110 was put in mock combat conditions with the F-86s, this is from another post of mine,
4 April ’52, WG236 piloted by John Derry with flight test observer Tony Richards carried out dogfights with two F-86s
29 April, high mach number trials with F-86s, Derry & Richards
30 April, USAF familirization flights with Col Richard Johnson, General Albert Boyd, and Col Fred Ascani piloting, Richards as observer and Derry in chase F-86.
By: Wyvernfan - 28th September 2011 at 07:48
Excellent photo lindoug and possibly taken quite late on in WG236’s development, as the rather crude strengthening bars can be seen on her tail boom sides. Shame the photo’s not in colour.
Great thread James :).
By: mike currill - 27th September 2011 at 23:57
I would be surprised if this were the case as the layout and structure of the nose in the first three DH.110s was significantly different to that of the production Sea Vixen in many ways. Mind you it would not be unlike DH to do the minimum possible work to make a production aircraft from a prototype…
Going fromprototype to productionaircraft with minimum mods seemed to work OK for them though, a lot better than it did for some others doing far more modification.
By: mike currill - 27th September 2011 at 23:51
As long as that? Yet still looks modern now.
By: lindoug - 27th September 2011 at 22:58
Early days at Hatfield with the USAF’s 92nd FIS lending a hand.
Photos courtesy of BAe Systems.
By: pagen01 - 27th September 2011 at 21:04
The structure of all Sea Vixens retained the gun bays.
The latter points about deletion of guns/cannons from XF828 and retaining gun bays in all Sea Vixens are incorrect.
I can’t be certain as I’m away from my sources & APs, but I thought that the production machines did retain the gun bay mounting structure (possibly wrong term?) complete with the distinct four cutouts under the main cabin floor, the high pressure air bottles and airbrake were fitted in the rear of that space, and the rocket cells in the front.
I’ve just checked the APs (to check my sanity I think!) and there is a major transverse structure with the four cutouts for the cannon barrels, it is actually called ‘Beam, gun assemby – 10.20 FS 11645A’. It sits under the floor immediately aft of the nose gear bay, and the airbrake hinge brakets are mounted to it. Looking at the HP bottle bay (above the airbrake) it really does look like the structure could contain four cannon, but is adapted for bottles. It is present on both FAW.1 & 2s.
However it was bad wording on my part and I will correct it.
Mind you it would not be unlike DH to do the minimum possible work to make a production aircraft from a prototype…
I think that is probably correct. I think some parts of the SV fuselage structure are not that far removed from the 110 to be honest.
Thanks for the extra pictures, Buzzer when was the ‘828 picture taken?
By: Flanker_man - 27th September 2011 at 20:21
I can’t contribute to the history, but I can add a photo….
Recently repainted FAW.2 at the Midland Air Museum, Coventry…
Ken
By: buzzer - 27th September 2011 at 19:02
and to think.. this is how DH-110 XF828(P3) ended its days!!!:eek:
burnt to a crisp in Culdrose fire pits!!!
By: XF828 - 26th September 2011 at 20:25
I can’t be certain as I’m away from my sources & APs, but I thought that the production machines did retain the gun bay mounting structure (possibly wrong term?) complete with the distinct four cutouts under the main cabin floor, the high pressure air bottles and airbrake were fitted in the rear of that space, and the rocket cells in the front.
I would be surprised if this were the case as the layout and structure of the nose in the first three DH.110s was significantly different to that of the production Sea Vixen in many ways. Mind you it would not be unlike DH to do the minimum possible work to make a production aircraft from a prototype…