F-4s & Hawks in the Air Defence role

[cargosales]

Am I dreaming or did such an idea exist in the 80s and 90s - to use a pair of Hawks + one F-4 as an air defence 'unit', making the most of the formers' manoeuverability with a couple of AIM-9s plus a cannon, coupled with the F-4's radar and better situational control, plus rather more missiles.

I vaguely seem to remember hearing this in a bar somewhere in Germany but cannot find any reference to it online. Too many Dortmunders on my part?

Rubbish or roughly correct?

CS

[andrewn]

Yes it did exist it was called the Mixed Fighter Force (https://www.flightglobal.com/FlightPDFArchive/1988/1988%20-%201420.PDF) (MFF)

[BEagle]

You are correct, but MFF was a rubbish idea....

With those cumbersome AIM-9 pylons, the Hawks were just too slow.

[Pontius Navigator]

Am I dreaming or did such an idea exist in the 80s and 90s - to use a pair of Hawks + one F-4 as an air defence 'unit', making the most of the formers' manoeuverability with a couple of AIM-9s plus a cannon, coupled with the F-4's radar and better situational control, plus rather more missiles.

I vaguely seem to remember hearing this in a bar somewhere in Germany but cannot find any reference to it online. Too many Dortmunders on my part?

Rubbish or roughly correct?

CS
Not quite right. The aim was to get more missiles in the air with the Hawk's manageability a very minor factor. The theory was that the the F4 could detect the incoming raid and guide the Hawks to contact. Once the F4 went Tally the Hawks were on their own. If they could get in amongst the bandits then so much the better.

It was the MFF or mixed fighter force. Another mismatch was the ability of the F4 to AAR. It was really intended to counter a mass raid by Badger ASM carriers where the kill had to be around 180 miles out.

[ORAC]

Stupid idea. The few times it was tried the F-4s accelerated away and left the hawks needing FC control, which we could have given without all the complexity of getting them together and limiting the F-4 performance in the first place.

The only real real role was as point defence of an airfield under tower control for any “leakers”. The hunters were much more fun, though Teeside never really forgave us for the grooves they left in the pan and taxiways....

Almost as ridiculous as the wartime role of the 85/100 Canberras. Go out with a Nimrod and be sent silent to investigate a suspicious surface contact. If they didn’t come back it was a bad guy.....

[Just This Once...]

The idea continued beyond the F-4 era and in the '90s someone decided that we would do it with F3s. So a bunch of us were sent from Chiv to participate in an AD exercise based from Leuchars during their TacEval.

There is nothing more soul-destroying than staggering around at high level far out over the North Sea in a single engine jet dragging an empty gun and a pair of acquisition limas around. The Hawk didn't like it, the performance was rubbish and with no RWR, radar, ECM or even chaff / flares we were nothing more than an uninteresting target with limited SA. Zero chance of keeping up with even a co-operating F3 let alone anything else. Even Hawk v Hawk with acquisition missiles and gun fitted was a lesson on nose authority and energy management, or lack there of.

[beardy]

Very occasionally we would tow a couple of Lightnings into the fray. They knew what they were doing once they got contact.

[BEagle]

Indeed, beardy ! I recall CAP-ing on 56(F) paired with a Lightning being flown by 'Porky' Page. At the debrief he asked why we were flying so slowly and was pretty miffed when I told him it was an OC 'A' Flt edict to save our fuel allocation....

[Davef68]

Almost as ridiculous as the wartime role of the 85/100 Canberras. Go out with a Nimrod and be sent silent to investigate a suspicious surface contact. If they didn’t come back it was a bad guy.....

On a similar note, did the 360 Canberras have a war role?

[sycamore]

"Don`t tell him,Pike"...

[Lonewolf_50]

A bit over 35 years ago, the use of A-7 (IIRC with AIM 9's mounted) to supplement the F-14 in the air defense grid (blue water, brown water) was in USN doctrine as the F-18 was just beginning to come on line. Only got to see it once during a exercise as I was usually on the sub hunting side of that business. (was on a cruiser and our bird was down, so I kept myself occupied in CIC, both doing and learning).
I hadn't heard of the Phantom/Hawk lash up, but it looks like a similar innovation.

[RAFEngO74to09]

88 of the original 175 original Hawk T1s got the Sidewinder capability mods from 1983 becoming Hawk T1As.


https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1024x678/british_aerospace_hawk_t1a_2c_uk_air_force_an1517250_5bc7e65 a60347d22095dd9fabeefe91ceb08a267.jpg

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

MFF was also a standard tactic practised in the Falklands in 1982 when RAF Stanley received the F4s. They worked in conjunction with the Lima armed GR3 Harriers; seemed to work from what we could see on the AR-1 and I don't recall Phandet or 1(F) Sqn grumbling about it either.

(or were the 'arriers armed with AIM9Gs at that time????)

[MPN11]

MFF was also a standard tactic practised in the Falklands in 1982 when RAF Stanley received the F4s. They worked in conjunction with the Lima armed GR3 Harriers; seemed to work from what we could see on the AR-1 and I don't recall Phandet or 1(F) Sqn grumbling about it either.

(or were the 'arriers armed with AIM9Gs at that time????)
Not heard of that in 83 ... AD was all left to Phandet/23 Sqn by then, AFAIK.

But I still counted them all out and back.

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Hi MPN-11 (or should that be CPN-4?!)

Definitely MFF Ops conducted between Sep 82 and Feb 83; see my post #38 (last para) https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/588496-raf-hercules-tankers-2.html#post9617499

[Onceapilot]

I flew some MFF in the Hawk. Agreed, not the solution to LL air defence, unless you are being attacked by hoards of JP5's! What it really showed for UK AD was that we were short of real AD capability compared to the potential threat. Hmmmm...I wonder if the Hawk can get off those carriers...? :rolleyes:

OAP

[orca]

There is a wonderful line in Hugh Bichenot’s excellent Razor’s Edge (about the Falklands War from a strat/ operational perspective).

It goes something along the lines of:
Something is better than nothing in most walks of life - but not always in warfare.

I think it might apply here.

[typerated]

I always thought the Hawk would have had a better wartime role in Germany:
CAP over point targets.
But mainly for CAS.
Interesting to compare to the Germans using the Alpha jets, especially with the anti helicopter role.

They probably would not have had a HAS but would it have mattered?

[Just This Once...]

typerated - The comparison between the GAF Alpha Jet and the Hawk T1/1A could not be more stark. The basic Alpha out-performs the basic Hawk in all regards, even if you knock the toblerones off the T1 wing. Add stores to either and performance dip for the T1 is far greater than the equivalent Alpha.

The GAF Alphas were built as light attack aircraft from the outset and improved in service. Multiple hardpoints, external fuel, full spec wing, HUD, INS, stores management system, ECM, ESM, integral chaff/flare dispensers, proper gun, uprated engines et al. The only thing that was very late to the GAF Alpha was AIM-9 capability, which was introduced towards the end of their operational life. They are very different to the advanced training Alphas built for the French. If the GAF had had their way they would have selected different engines entirely for the Alpha Jet.

The Hawk family did include single-seat light attack variants but they were a ground-up redesign and far removed from the humble T1.

[Phil_R]

To the uninitiated (me) this seems rather a desperate measure.

It had occurred to me before that between Lightning becoming obsolete and Typhoon becoming available - a multi-decade period at least some of which was at the height of the cold war - the RAF simply did not have any fighters (differentiating carefully from interceptors.)

What would actually have happened if a bunch of MiG-29-escorted bombers had risen into view over the north sea in about 1989? Presumably nothing nice.

[pr00ne]

Phil R,

Where on earth would the Fulcrums have come from, Denmark? And with their range issues, where would they have been going, Norway?

There was no perceived manned air threat to the UK from about 1958 to 1979 ish, as the Soviet threat was IRBM/ICBM for which NO aircraft was a counter, then the Backfire/Fencer panic kicked in which led to an increase in UK AD assets, of which the 88 Hawk T1A's in a local point defence and MFF role were a small part. For most of the life of the Lighting it was a small UK force of 5 squadrons with an ID and shepherd away commitment.

[Navaleye]

Didn't BWoS design a "fighter" version of a Hawk with wingtip AIM-9s with an Aden plus Blue Fox? I think they sold a few

[Speedywheels]

Didn't BWoS design a "fighter" version of a Hawk with wingtip AIM-9s with an Aden plus Blue Fox? I think they sold a few

Hawk 200 - built 60ish of them

[ORAC]

There was no perceived manned air threat to the UK from about 1958 to 1979 ish, as the Soviet threat was IRBM/ICBM for which NO aircraft was a counter, then the Backfire/Fencer panic kicked in which led to an increase in UK AD assets, of which the 88 Hawk T1A's in a local point defence and MFF role were a small part. For most of the life of the Lighting it was a small UK force of 5 squadrons with an ID and shepherd away commitment. Really? I must have been serving in a different AD system then.

Mine had 2 x F4 Sqns at Wattisham; 2 x F4 squadrons plus a double strength OCU at Coningsby; 2 x F6 Ltg squadrons plus the LTF at Binbrook plus 2 x F4 squadrons at Leuchars. All facing a threat of manned Bear B bombers carrying A-S2 Kangaroo nuclear ASM, plus Backfires and Blinders with a mixture of AS-4 Kitchen and AS-6 Kingfish nuclear ASM.

The first RAF F-4 AD squadron, 43Sqn, formed in 1969.

That, of course, was ignoring their SACLANT role to protect the fleet against the same plus Bear-D surveillance and Bear-F ASW assets. The scores of live QRA intercepts against such in my log books must be fake news.

[Phil_R]

Where on earth would the Fulcrums have come from, Denmark? And with their range issues, where would they have been going, Norway?

Since you ask, why not? Places are sometimes invaded during wars.

But in all seriousness, none of this puts the lie to what I originally proposed - that the RAF simply didn't have a useful fighter force for decades (and only does now depending how you feel about Typhoon.) The fact that this might have been done quite deliberately on the assumption that it probably wouldn't be needed isn't entirely comforting.

[Pontius Navigator]

ORAC, I would disagree slightly. I thought the Bear may well have been targeted on the USA. You also missed out the Badger/AS6 whose mission was assumed to be your bunkers and radar heads.

I think the Fencer threat might have been exaggerated and at best limited to East Anglia.

[Steepclimb]

I remember photos of Red Arrows Hawks toting Sidewinders. How bad would things be if the Reds were pressed into service?

[Tashengurt]

I remember photos of Red Arrows Hawks toting Sidewinders. How bad would things be if the Reds were pressed into service?
At least the smoke would be pretty!

[Tashengurt]

I used to like seeing the little Hawks arrive at Leuchars for Taceval, it evoked something of the BofB

Easy for me to think from my nice warm PBF of course!

[ORAC]

Especially when they were parked on the ORP and, literally, held RS02 reclining in deckchairs beside their aircraft.

[typerated]

typerated - The comparison between the GAF Alpha Jet and the Hawk T1/1A could not be more stark. The basic Alpha out-performs the basic Hawk in all regards, even if you knock the toblerones off the T1 wing. Add stores to either and performance dip for the T1 is far greater than the equivalent Alpha.

The GAF Alphas were built as light attack aircraft from the outset and improved in service. Multiple hardpoints, external fuel, full spec wing, HUD, INS, stores management system, ECM, ESM, integral chaff/flare dispensers, proper gun, uprated engines et al. The only thing that was very late to the GAF Alpha was AIM-9 capability, which was introduced towards the end of their operational life. They are very different to the advanced training Alphas built for the French. If the GAF had had their way they would have selected different engines entirely for the Alpha Jet.

The Hawk family did include single-seat light attack variants but they were a ground-up redesign and far removed from the humble T1.


Thanks JAR - Interesting, I always thought the Hawk had the edge on the Alpha!

I remember the Germans often coming across on Priory/ Elder Forrest/ Joust with large formations of Alphas 16 or so!

From that I pictured Hawks doing something similar in Germany.

Tornados or similar taking out a bridge and then a large formation of Hawks with SNEBs trying their luck with the resulting traffic jam.

Certainly never got my head round what use Hawks would be for UKAD

[PapaDolmio]

Memory not what is used to be but did some Alphas used in the CAS role have their back seat removed? I vaguely recall seeing at least one at some point?

[Dominator2]

BEagle
You are correct, but MFF was a rubbish idea....

With those cumbersome AIM-9 pylons, the Hawks were just too slow.

BEagle you are wrong. MFF was a good idea, poorly introduced by HQ11GP.

2ATAF developed MFF in the late 70s to operated with F4s and F104s and later F16s. The F4Fs at Wittmund also tried it with the RNAF 104s. It was a very successful way to get the less able fighters into a merge. The change in benefits was obvious with the change from 104 to F16. The Wildenrath/Beauvechain Wings were very adept at MMF.

Even had early F15s from Soesterberg flying on our wing in 81/82 because their radar was so poor low level overland (great for intercepting speeding cars!)

In the UK MFF with the Hunter was just viable. Unfortunately , the Hawk with an Aim9 was a sled and was a pain to fly with. As a F4/F3 crew we had to take too long worrying where the Hawks had got to.

[Just This Once...]

Memory not what is used to be but did some Alphas used in the CAS role have their back seat removed? I vaguely recall seeing at least one at some point?

if your memory is of a German Alpha then yes, the rear STENCEL seat was optional role equipment and could be fitted when needed, along with a bunch of connector blanks for the rear bulkhead. In single-seat / operational fit the rear cockpit area was filled with the ECM pack.

[PapaDolmio]

if your memory is of a German Alpha then yes, the rear STENCEL seat was optional role equipment and could be fitted when needed, along with a bunch of connector blanks for the rear bulkhead. In single-seat / operational fit the rear cockpit area was filled with the ECM pack.
Thanks, it was a Luftwaffe jet and my memory isn't going as quick as I thought!

[pr00ne]

ORAC,

You describe the AD set up of 1979, which is why I chose that date. It may be out a few years either way but it iS true for the majority of the period post 1957 until the increase from 5 Lightning squadrons was proposed. The 1969 reformation of 43 Sqn was the first stage of that process.

Oh, and you slightly exaggerate. It was ONE F4 sqn at Coningsby, No. 29.

[XR219]

Hawk 200 - built 60ish of them
And the radar was AN/APG-66, not Blue Fox.

[howiehowie93]

I was at Coningsby when this subject resulted in the Award of the Wilkinson Sward of Peace to some one or other - Instructor on 228 OCU maybe ??.

As an LAC Linie at the time, told, along with a load of other Linies to get my Best Blue on and report to the Station Briefing Room.
MRAF Sir Micheal Beetham was there too - I thought he looked a bit bored with it all.

[oldmansquipper]

My first recollection of the subject, was spotting the proposal as an alternative assumption......About the same time as disbanding the Reds as a cost saving measure first surfaced.

Connected? I couldn't possibly comment.

[Minnie Burner]

I was at Coningsby when this subject resulted in the Award of the Wilkinson Sward of Peace to some one or other - Instructor on 228 OCU maybe ??.

As an LAC Linie at the time, told, along with a load of other Linies to get my Best Blue on and report to the Station Briefing Room.
MRAF Sir Micheal Beetham was there too - I thought he looked a bit bored with it all.

I believe it was a project for a QWI course. Maybe spring 81, maybe earlier. The studes did the pitch. Anything non-pulse doppler (e.g. Lightning) topping up an F-4 force that was a bit thin on availability.
The Hawk involvement: the Next Great Idea by some neddy at 11 Gp.
About ten years before an IWI course had proposed AiM-9s for the Lightning. Rejected as the aircraft would be out of service within 5 years.

[jindabyne]

And as for those night PI's in the Hunter - which many a WIWOL cut his teeth on! :eek:

[Chairborne 09.00hrs]

On a similar note, did the 360 Canberras have a war role?

Dave,


I was told Comms Jamming by one of their aircrew when chatting at their retirement photocall.

[Dominator2]

I believe it was a project for a QWI course. Maybe spring 81, maybe earlier. The studes did the pitch. Anything non-pulse doppler (e.g. Lightning) topping up an F-4 force that was a bit thin on availability.
The Hawk involvement: the Next Great Idea by some neddy at 11 Gp.
About ten years before an IWI course had proposed AiM-9s for the Lightning. Rejected as the aircraft would be out of service within 5 years.

As mentioned previously, the MFF concept originated in 2ATAF in the late 70s. It was briefed at TLP when at Furstenfeldbruch and employed airborne once TLP moved to Jever as a flying course.

In the UK the concept was used with the F4 and the Hunter reasonably successfully. With the end of the Hunter the Hawk was introduced to replace it. Very quickly it was evident to most that the Hawks poorer performance made it less complimentary to the concept.

The ideas that were evolved in those years were paramount to be able to counter the threat at the time when both in the Central Region and the UK we were severely outnumbered.