P1154

#21
Or burning the carrier deck. Interestingly, this proves what nonsense the "carriers without aircraft" (referring to CVF/QEC) are talking. As a child, my ex matelot father pointed out that you should develop carrier and aircraft together..

I had no idea that integrating P1154 into a smaller carrier would have been so challenging. The things you learn!

Did anything developed for P1154 benefit P1127/Harrier/Sea Harrier?
PCB aside, they were analogous in many ways. We just ended up getting the cut-price/baby version in the Harrier.
 
#22
There was also a VTOL platform mooted which would lift TSR-2 into the air, the aircraft then continuing on its own merry way.

All has to be remembered in the Cold War context, where 10 minutes after the word 'Go' most airfields were expected to be glowing holes in the ground.
Possibly the maddest of which was the AW681 VTOL medium air lifter...

...or the Zero-launch F-104!

...Did anything developed for P1154 benefit P1127/Harrier/Sea Harrier?
Not as far as I'm aware. However, we got a lot from the P1127...

...Kestrel...

...and P1127(RAF)...

...such as inflatable engine intakes are a really bad idea!

As ever, @Archimedes will probably be able to add far more on the P1150/P1154(RN)/P1154(RAF)/P1127/Kestrel/P1127(RAF)/Harrier saga.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
#23
Possibly the maddest of which was the AW681 VTOL medium air lifter...

...or the Zero-launch F-104!



Not as far as I'm aware. However, we got a lot from the P1127...

...Kestrel...

...and P1127(RAF)...

...such as inflatable engine intakes are a really bad idea!

As ever, @Archimedes will probably be able to add far more on the P1150/P1154(RN)/P1154(RAF)/P1127/Kestrel/P1127(RAF)/Harrier saga.

Regards,
MM
What do you mean by inflatable engine intakes?
 
#24
What do you mean by inflatable engine intakes?
If you look at the photos of the P1127 and Kestrel above, you can see black rubber lips to the intakes. These were a novel method of trying to develop a variable intake to cater for the very different requirements of hovering and high speed aerodynamics and intake flow.

Unfortunately, trials showed that they somewhat predictably ripped at high speed so they were dropped.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
#26
Yep.



The P1154 was to have been powered by the BS100, one of the prototypes of which still exists at the FAA Museum.

Alternatively a 'nozzled' variant of the Spey was being considered.

Both employed extremely risky Plenium Chamber Burning (PCB) technology which effectively placed an afterburner in the 2 forward nozzles. I'm not sure it would have been named Pegasus although PCB prototypes were run on a 'Pegasus 2' and the BS100 did conduct some test runs.



I doubt it. The PCB technology required to provide supersonic flight via nozzles was extremely complex and maintenance intensive.

Of note, I seriously doubt whether the USN would have allowed the USMC to buy the P1154 as it would have undermined their F-111B/F-14 programme (which the USMC were initially bought into). Similarly, the USMC may not have been interested in the 1154 due to the additional ground erosion associated with the PCBs when operating from austere land bases. Indeed, the main export appeal of the Harrier GR1 and Sea Harrier was that they allowed navies to operate tactical fast jets from smaller and cheaper carriers. The larger and more expensive P1154 would therefore have proved less attractive to subsequent 1st Gen Harrier customers such as Spain and India as they'd have needed larger decks.



It was designed for CVA01 which was cancelled the year after the P1154RN.



Very little without AEW in my view.



P1154RN wouldn't have had Blue Fox but likely would have had a more powerful pulse radar. That would have presented the same look-down issues that Blue Fox suffered over land and high sea states but it would have presumably enjoyed longer detection ranges when clutter was not a factor.

Regards,
MM
In Wings On My Sleeve, Captain Winkle Brown gives a description of CVA-01, entitled Phantom Carrier. He makes no mention of P1154, although he mentions the idea of the carrier being reinforced by RAF P1127/Kestrels in a crisis.

This article was from 1967.
 
#27
In Wings On My Sleeve, Captain Winkle Brown gives a description of CVA-01, entitled Phantom Carrier. He makes no mention of P1154, although he mentions the idea of the carrier being reinforced by RAF P1127/Kestrels in a crisis.

This article was from 1967.

PCB - anyone who's seen the photos of the test engines oxygen acetylene torch exhaust unleashed on a test deck, along with the noise it generated will realise why it was simply a non starter for deployment.
 
#28
In Wings On My Sleeve, Captain Winkle Brown gives a description of CVA-01, entitled Phantom Carrier. He makes no mention of P1154, although he mentions the idea of the carrier being reinforced by RAF P1127/Kestrels in a crisis.

This article was from 1967.
The same Cpt Brown RN was to be its first skipper…..until the ship was cancelled effectively ending his career afloat and aloft….
 
#29
The same Cpt Brown RN was to be its first skipper…..until the ship was cancelled effectively ending his career afloat and aloft….
Sorry for the very very late reply - not noticed your comments before. How would Captain Brown have been CVA-01's (was there a name assigned?) Captain without having had other sea commands first?
 
#30
Sorry for the very very late reply - not noticed your comments before. How would Captain Brown have been CVA-01's (was there a name assigned?) Captain without having had other sea commands first?
I'll dig out the reference later, but effectively he was eligible for command due to seniority but had the common sense to back off and let the First handle it.
Same as the USN - one must be a naval aviator to command a carrier. many hadn't handled a ship for a decade or two, but 'leant on' their captain or exec.
 
#31
Also do not forget the proposed BAE P1214 forward swept wing A/VSTOL...



and the supersonic P1216, which Maggie went to see the mock up back in 82 at Kingston.

https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4846/45857623592_889771a117_z.jpg[img]

cheers
 
#32
Sorry image of P1216 did not come out, let me try again



Anyhow this was suppose to be an ASTOVL vectored thrust single engined, 3 nozzle, twin boom fighter
1 x RB.422-48/-60, RB.532 or Pegasus 11 PCB



cheers
 
#33
I'll dig out the reference later, but effectively he was eligible for command due to seniority but had the common sense to back off and let the First handle it.
Same as the USN - one must be a naval aviator to command a carrier. many hadn't handled a ship for a decade or two, but 'leant on' their captain or exec.
No. He simply would not have been able to exercise sea command. The Navy does not allow people to drive ships just because of their rank. Ask someone like @alfred_the_great or @seaweed. I am not sure how the US System works - ask someone like @ECMO1.

Sorry image of P1216 did not come out, let me try again



Anyhow this was suppose to be an ASTOVL vectored thrust single engined, 3 nozzle, twin boom fighter
1 x RB.422-48/-60, RB.532 or Pegasus 11 PCB



cheers
How could you have integrated that with a circa 20 000 tonne ship (Invincible class)?
 
#34
WInkle Brown as a Ship’s CO - that would have been extremely unusual.
 
#35
Sorry for the very very late reply - not noticed your comments before. How would Captain Brown have been CVA-01's (was there a name assigned?) Captain without having had other sea commands first?
I don't think they'd been officially named but it's generally assumed they'd have been HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Duke of Edinburgh
 
#36
Putting it into context, there was a lot of barmy designs round at thetime e.g. the undercarriage-less experiments oflanding on a rubber deck. It actually worked (as Winkle demonstrated) but the hassle of getting the aircraft out of the way for for the next landing and setting it up for launch massively outweighed the weight saving in not having an undercart. 7% weight saving and hence longer range / better performance.


VTOL requires an enormous amount of energy (and hence fuel) which is why we don't do it.
 
#37
Tbh nver quite understood why a lot of our aircraft carrier skippers were non aircrew unlike the USN.......especially in a Navy this small as ours..

Helps if a skipper has an Aviation background I would have thought

Cheers
 
#38
Sorry for the very very late reply - not noticed your comments before. How would Captain Brown have been CVA-01's (was there a name assigned?) Captain without having had other sea commands first?
I don't think they'd been officially named but it's generally assumed they'd have been HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Duke of Edinburgh
The names had been chosen, but not officially announced - as JBM says, CVA-01 was Queen Elizabeth. CVA-02 would've been Duke of Edinburgh.

As I have observed both here and elsewhere, given the carrier's job was to go about the world being offensive to foreigners, CVA-02 would've been perfectly named...

(As an aside, the old boy really ought to have a significant ship named after him, or we need a Duke of Edinburgh class)
 
#39
Tbh nver quite understood why a lot of our aircraft carrier skippers were non aircrew unlike the USN.......especially in a Navy this small as ours..

Helps if a skipper has an Aviation background I would have thought

Cheers
Didn't work that well with Lin Middleton, to be honest. Indeed, there is a persistent - and fairly credible - rumour that when the TF got back and Admiral Woodward reviewed what had gone on, he refused (or had to be persuaded) to support the award of Middleton's DSO. Conversely, JJ Black, a non-WAFU, was thought to have been brilliant at the job; if Sharkey Ward hasn't a bad word to say about you, you've probably done pretty well...
 
#40
WInkle Brown as a Ship’s CO - that would have been extremely unusual.
AIUI Brown had never done any manner of bridge watchkeeping (or whatever it was called back then!). He certainly didn't hold the relevant tickets, and hadn't done sea command exams, if I understand the terminology correctly.

Ergo, regrettably for Yokel's fantasies, he'd not have been able to command at sea.
 

Latest Threads

Top