Hi All,
CD,
Nobody’s suggesting that programmes are on time and within budget as I have said I agree it happens as with anything, development problems and cost over run is part of the process and no matter how you pitch an idea it will inevitably have the x factor of overspend some of which can be helped some of which cannot, but this F-35 is beyond belief if it was a dog and in that much pain it would have been put out of it’s misery for the want of a better analogy.
The only reason we had French and U.S. help according to wiki anyway was the engine was a result of an adaption based on a French (Michel Wibault)design as far as international funding goes it was only the U.S., they only became involved because our wonderful government never gave Hawker any funding because of the defence white paper of 1957, so they went cap in hand to the U.S. for money, NASA was only involved in wind tunnel testing with the sub scale models also Hawkers test pilot Hugh Merewether was asked by NASA to test the Bell X-14.

Geoff.

Hi All,
Trumper and Sopwith,
I thought that starting a thread of it’s own would end up being displayed within this thread in a similar vain as did my post on the V1 it was taken down and reposted by the mods which makes sense I suppose. If you contact Ian Hancock nsam.flixton@tesco.net he can put you in touch with Mr Raynor or provide any additional info other than the sites I provided as most of P3708’s history are on those sites. There are more additional sites below some showing some more dig photos. :eagerness:
http://www.aviationmuseum.net/ouraircraft.htm

http://flickrhivemind.net/Tags/p3708/Interesting

http://www.backtonormandy.org/the-history/air-force-operations/airplanes-allies-and-axis-lost/hurricane/4154378.html

http://auctions.holtsauctioneers.com/asp/fullcatalogue.asp?salelot=A1068++++899+&refno=&image=3

http://www.goodall.com.au/warbirds-directory-v6/hawker-hawker-siddeley.pdf

http://flickeflu.com/set/72157626126452280

Geoff.

But Geoff the British and the British without any help from Europe or the US developed and built the Harrier and the Sea Harrier. The US then took the development a stage further with a more powerful Pegasus. All the dirty work had been done.

Hi All,
Charlie you are quite correct I was being polite with my reference being as we are a global forum. 😀 It’s just a shame that we never fully developed the plenum chamber burning or indeed utilised two engines of coarse not to mention the development of the supersonic P1154 with said plenum chamber burning, yet another example of this country’s excellent ability to interfere.Personally liked this design to follow on the Harrier – The super Harrier below. 😎

Geoff.

Can I just say I was a vocal advocate of Scots ‘independence’, and was really miffed when it didn’t happen.

Now see how right I was?

Moggy

Hi All,
Moggy you will not like this but we are in agreement…:highly_amused:

Geoff.

Hi All,
Mike,Alan and Charlie,
Exactly my thoughts.
CD,
Well if the fan isn’t an engine what is it ? It must have moving parts to make it turn and produce a lifting force/thrust and thus needs fuel(PLEASE CORRCET IF WRONG :eagerness:) and in my mind that defines an engine, it does however have one jet engine. Like I said before their have been other designs that would have followed on naturally from the Harrier I will say what some American said about the Harrier while they developed the AV8B ” We looked at the Harrier and thought nice try but we can do better” all you need to do is substitute F-35 for Harrier.
As for the Boing that never reached it’s development potential, how do you define “Wasn’t even as good as” other than a problem with the intake (Which I cant think of off hand.) I cannot recall it had any major issues unlike the F-35 has had an is continually having, yes I agree with you every programme has development problems but the F-35 has just a continuation from one to the next and if they cannot solve these issues before service entry what will it be like in service ?
Not for one instance we Europeans could have developed the Harrier without the Americans as for the rest of Europe well the only reason they are sticking with it is simply because of the amount of money they have all pumped into the programme and are to worried about the outcry if they pulled the plug, incidentally there are a number of country’s seriously thinking about pulling out simply because they are being asked for increased expenditure on top of what has already been pledged.
I suppose at the end of the day there is no quick fix but the amount of money that has been pumped into this project could well have been split between Boeing and Lockheed-Martin and I know who I would have put my money on to get their aircraft sorted first.
Another truth mentioned is politics while in the Avro Arrow and TSR2’s case it was their demise IMHO it is the opposite in the F-35’s case and that is why the programme continues somebody somewhere is making a mint on the back of this white elephant allegedly. It’s just common sense that you just do not pump money to the amount that has been spent on the F-35 if your product continually has problems you pull the plug and start again why this has not been done is anybody’s guess, I have my own ideas but I could be completely wrong.

Geoff.

Hi All,
CD,
Like I mentioned before aircraft should evolve naturally not try and force them to do what it has been proved that it cant, as for the TSR2 that was not just funding and technical difficulty’s politics had a great deal to play with it and dare I say other US aircraft manufacturers who saw this technical achievement as a direct competition threat to their edge in the aircraft sales department allegedly.
I say again about the two engines in the F-35 one is being lugged around and not utilised until VTOL, the Russians gave up on exactly the same layout principle only difference is they had two lift behind the pilot they never got it right and the F-35 suffers from the same inefficiency. If you say the next development of the Harrier then were are the similarities as other VSTOL it has no other redeeming qualities that I can see the negative features and literature surrounding this aircraft are to many to ignore this programme is emerging money, you just cannot keep throwing money at a project in the hope of that is the fix needed it isn’t, it was a badly thought aircraft design and programme you cannot even begin to compare it to the TSR2, the TSR2 while having teething troubles like any programme has was on the verge of being corrected the F-35 keeps getting sticking plasters when it obviously needs an amputation.
You ask what is the solution cancel the programme simple, start again with realistic possibility’s instead of wanting something that is fanciful.

Geoff.

Hi All,
Talking of Hurricanes Geoff Rayner who is trying to restore Mk1 P3708 could do with a boost in help as due to some health issues and promised work being put on hold has had an adverse affect on the restorations progress, slowly it is coming together but it would benefit from some more support from all you Hurricane fans out there myself included, here is a quote from an e-mail I was sent :- ” There are some quite complicated procedures to rescue the metalwork and re-use it after all these years. The work is skilled and there are few companies that can do it. Consequently, more important projects on their books have tended to occupy their resources” that in a nut shell is why I have taken this step in putting it on the forum that if anybody knows who can give this chap a hand or donate why not get in touch with a Mr Ian Hancock at nsam.flixton@tesco.net He can point you in the right direction.
I bought Geoff Hunt’s print (6 sig’s)when it first came out being tied in to the restoration and I am actively saving for the (40 BOB signature edition) which is still available at the waltonnaze link below the other links are just some history on this Hurricane about the Recovery/It’s Pilot etc.etc.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/67251416@N08/sets/72157637885607055/
http://www.sweffling.freeserve.co.uk/foulness.htm
http://www.waltonnaze.demon.co.uk/print/index.html
Six Sigs.
40 Sigs.

Geoff.