Hawker Sea Hawk

[sagindragin]

as anyone more images of 801 sqn, i need ones showing the serials. and below, my latest one, WF158 F.1 coded 697 of 764 sqn RNAS Abroath 1959https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1297x1030/10504957_664465740343127_8446483680730916180_o_0a11ff5c2019e d822e42f6e7da2646fb96899dba.jpg
https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1716x495/wf158_1b186d9211411dadd0b045044b89e1fb6763acc0.jpg

[Lordflasheart]

......
Saggin - That Seahawk F1 is tailcoded FD for RNAS Ford. If it was Arbroath-based as a flyer, it would be AO. 764 moved from Ford to Lossiemouth (tail-code LM) in about 1955 and the last Seahawk departed 764 in 1959 - replaced by Hunters. The side number is correct for 764. The 764 badge is very pre-1959. By 1959 all flying Seahawks would be FGA6.

I suggest your picture as shown would correctly represent a non-flying instructional airframe at the Artificers School at Arbroath where WF158 was re-numbered as A2441, and probably remained unmodified as an F1 - and not re-painted either. That suggests the RN School of Aircraft Painting and Decorating was based elsewhere. ;)

(other than personal knowledge, info courtesy of 'Squadrons of the Fleet Air Arm' by Ballance, Howard and Sturtivant, and UK Serials - UK Serials (http://www.ukserials.com/)

......
LFH

[sagindragin]

LFH,
from what i understand this is how it looked just after arriving at Abroath, as you say carring the Ford tail code, what it was doing there i have no idea,, and now i can't find the photo i used for confirmation, could it have been flwon to Abroath for a display or something like that.
this is why i like to post my work so you guys can sort out any mistakes i make.

[Vampiredave]

The BARG book 'Royal Navy instructional Airframes' states: WF158/A2441 Class II GI Arbroath 9/11/58 coded 697/FD (ex-764 Sqn); WOC 22/10/59; downgraded to Class III at Arbroarh 25/9/61; to Staravia dump, Ascot 4/66

[Fareastdriver]

The last Sea Hawks I saw was a clutch of them at the RAF Regiment Fire School at Catterick in about 1972.

[Bergerie1]

Such a beautiful looking aircraft, did it fly as well as it looked?

[langleybaston]

I totally agree, a truly handsome aircraft, part of a long heritage of such from Hawker. I exclude the Typhoon in its early lumpiness, but the rest .................

[Sleeve Wing]

Such a beautiful looking aircraft, did it fly as well as it looked?

Apart from a couple of little foibles, B1, absolutely perfectly.
First class, very stable ground attack platform and a pussy cat to the deck. Performed flawlessly during the Suez campaign.

[sagindragin]

thank you Vampire Dave, that confirms it

[Buster Hyman]

Terrific illustration Sagindragin. :ok:

May I ask what software you use to render it?

[Wander00]

I too thing the Sea Hawk one of the most attractive, in the air or on the ground. would love to see it flying again, but perhaps a pipe dream. Oh, and Happy New Year to all

[DaveReidUK]

I too thing the Sea Hawk one of the most attractive, in the air or on the ground. would love to see it flying again, but perhaps a pipe dream.

No reason why it should be a pipe dream, you can help to make it happen..

Navy Wings (https://www.navywings.org.uk/support-us/join-us-yearly/)

[Pontius Navigator]

The picture in the OP has to be a classic, it looks like an oil painting.

[sagindragin]

Buster, i use Jasc PSP 7 plus Corel paintshop pro 9.

[ancientaviator62]

Sleeve Wing,
I would be interested in hearing about the 'little foibles' and any other stories. It does look the part.

[Bergerie1]

Sleeve Wing,
Yes please.

[Wander00]

Dave - thank you - done + gift Aid