after looking at various aircraft pics.. I never noticed it before, but it seems that some aircraft don’t have that long antenna/tube at the end of the radome.
For example, the MiG-31, Su-27, J-10 have them. but when I look closely at the Typhoon, Rafale, or F-15E, they don’t.
any special reason?
If you take a look at the Typhoon they are located under and behind the nose, Harriers have them in a simlar position but more to the side, older aircraft use to have them mounted on the wing and even the tail plane (check out the SHAR), the side mounted tubes are designed to sit out side the aircraft boundry air layer (dirty air) and as such are designed to suit that aircraft. On some aircraft you will also find a static plate which is mounted on the side of the fuselage.
I believe the problem with mounting the probes in front is that they can cast a shadow on the radar scanner.
Why is it that as soon as defense cuts are ever talked about, out comes the knock British engineering and buy off-the-shelf kit brigade. A hell of a lot of engineers working across the UK have worked very hard on trying to give our armed services the best equipment they possible can, these guy’s have had to work with new design tool’s, new processes, new technology, changing customer requirements, lack of data, more changes in requirements etc.
Yes we can by ‘off-the-shelf kit’ Ships, Sub’s, Aircraft, land vehicles etc, yes we can close down the last of the UK’s engineering industry, yes we can put tax payers money into the pockets of Europe and the States, but what would we be left with? A poor country dependent on others for our defense!
Does everyone truly believe that all of these off-the-shelf platforms come trouble free! What will happen when the MoD want to add this and change that? Well we will get cost overruns, late programmes etc.
If we want value for money kit we need to improve the way these major projects are managed, we need to control the customer requirements; we need to start learning from Nimrod, Type 45 etc.
“waste of money”, depends on your view point, as a kid I use to look up every time Concorde flew overhd, my Nan always wanted to fly in it too in fact I help my Nan pay for a flight in the old girl.
I would love to see her fly again and if Mr Branson has the money, the will power etc to put a Concorde in the air again then good on him.:)
Does anyone have an address for this yard? are they selling any of the items?
“therefore we felt that this programme would interest viewers in Yorkshire more than viewers elsewhere.”
Luckly I’ve got sky so I can see this programme, however what a load of C**p from the BBC, they spend most of their time showing us programmes we don’t want to see, yet they can’t show us the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight, which reminds us all of those who gave up their lifes to protect all of the UK not just Yorkshire during ww2.
Some nice pics mate ! Must say the GR3 is the best looking Harrier for me ! 😀
See u at some point over weekend
Scott
GR3 is good looking but the FRS1 and FA2 give it a run for its money, all Harrier 1’s are better lookers then the plastic Harrier II’s.
Waybridge, Kingston, Dunsfold, Chadderton, Woodford and Brough on the cards, what is left of aviation history in the uk, shame.
I’ve collect sales brochures of aircraft I’ve worked on and the sites I’ve worked over the years to show my kids when its all gone.
Maybe this Aviation Forum should start a thread where we could capture photos of the sites in their former glory. I have some from Kingston if someone could let me know how to load them.
The outer sleeve nut shown also needs a collett that sits between the sleeve and the flaired tube end, without seeing the fuel **** you may also need a nipple.
AGS were used on Sea Hawk, Hunter, Harrier 1’s
Sean
Hi There
Models of what, how many? are they diecast/kit? what is he after for the lot?
Has anyone got a picture of the 1-11 or HS125 with the sea Harrier nose used on the shar development programme?:eek:
Where I would like to believe that we all need to sign this petition (if they are in deed are under threat), I feel that if the money saved kept the RAF with servicable front line aircraft in addition to introducing new platforms for the future my vote would be on servicable front line aircraft and new platforms for the future.
I have enjoyed watching the Reds for many years, seeing my kids faces as the Reds over fly our house at the Farnbo airshows is great and brings a smile to my face, however what are the RAF in place for, protecting our country or entertaining us.
It would be great if we could have both, however with the cost of 2 war zones how can the services cope, yes we could just increase their funding but at what cost, higher taxes, closed hospitals etc.:(
If you have a read through Hawker Aircraft by Putnam it claims that the design had some roots in the Fury design, it also states “the aircraft combined the well-proven tubular metal cross-braced fabric covered Warren fuselage”, if you dug deep enough into the drawing system for the Harrier you will find parts that were used on Hunters, in fact there is a sringer section from Hurricane.
The design was right at the time, just the same as the Hunter, Harrier and Hawk designs where right at the time, I’ve worked with and in fact still do designers who started out on the Hunter then moved onto the Harrier and then Hawk, thus design methods and techniques do end up being used on the different aircraft.
I’ve also seen designs on the same aircraft that vary depending on where the designers where based, ie Warton, Brough and Kingston, all had there differnt construction methods, even in Germany parts of the Tyhoon designed by MBB in Munich differed to these designed in north germany.
Sean
Evertt Aero Sale has one on there web site, it doesn’t look complete though.
Sean
Does anyone know where I can get hold of the beak structure (above the radome).
Sean
The Sea Harrier FA2 nose probes were based on the Harrier 2 probes, due to the profile of the Nose cone a lot of problems were hold on the static side of things, hence the addition of the static probe on the tail fin. If you check early photos of the P1127 you will also note the probe located on the fin.
One problem you have when mounting side probes is ensuring that the probe head is out of the dead air zone close to the skin, and kept in clean air.