Article on Foxhunter
Too many howlers for my liking, the worst (given the ISD of Foxhunter) being;
“Part of the problem was lack of experience in fighter radars in Britain”
The previous 10-15 years had seen Ferranti’s Fire Control and Surveillance Radar Division, Edinburgh develop and produce Blue Fox (FRS1), Blue Vixen (FRS2), ECR90 (Typhoon) and Blue Kestrel (Merlin 1). OK, the last is not for a fighter, but contains some of the juicy bits of the others. Then add Sea Spray (RN Lynx), some commercial variants of the above and a multitude of overseas customers. And their work on AI23, AWG 10/11/12 and Blue Parrot.
Then;
“with Ferranti supplying some components”
As I recall, Ferranti supplied most of the clever but their LRUs sat on the shelf for years waiting for the prime contractor’s output.
Looks like the article was written post-2000 so the lack of understanding as to Ferranti’s capability is perhaps understandable – they lost many an MoD contract because of similar ignorance in MoD.
“Part of the problem was lack of experience in fighter radars in Britain”
The previous 10-15 years had seen Ferranti’s Fire Control and Surveillance Radar Division, Edinburgh develop and produce Blue Fox (FRS1), Blue Vixen (FRS2), ECR90 (Typhoon) and Blue Kestrel (Merlin 1). OK, the last is not for a fighter, but contains some of the juicy bits of the others. Then add Sea Spray (RN Lynx), some commercial variants of the above and a multitude of overseas customers. And their work on AI23, AWG 10/11/12 and Blue Parrot.
Then;
“with Ferranti supplying some components”
As I recall, Ferranti supplied most of the clever but their LRUs sat on the shelf for years waiting for the prime contractor’s output.
Looks like the article was written post-2000 so the lack of understanding as to Ferranti’s capability is perhaps understandable – they lost many an MoD contract because of similar ignorance in MoD.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: uk(occasionally)
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not bad considering the level of classification the author has access to (ie none) and to be fair the
“Part of the problem was lack of experience in fighter radars in Britain”
Refers to 1983, I think, when FRS1 was operational, but was very different and very limited in its own ways, FRS2 was probably a paper requirement (I'm sure someone knows exactly!) ECR90 was a dream and Merlin wasnt even that!
Overall a good stab. Wouldn't use it for a tech lecture though!
“Part of the problem was lack of experience in fighter radars in Britain”
Refers to 1983, I think, when FRS1 was operational, but was very different and very limited in its own ways, FRS2 was probably a paper requirement (I'm sure someone knows exactly!) ECR90 was a dream and Merlin wasnt even that!
Overall a good stab. Wouldn't use it for a tech lecture though!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AI23 Radar designed by Ferranti in the Lightning. AI24 (Foxhunter) designed by GEC Marconi in the F-2/3 (and who subsequently brought the radar part of ferranti and replaced their people with the vastly experienced LOL GEC people).
NoseGunner
Fair comment about 1983. Fox was getting its first upgrade to bring it up to spec, as final development had been curtailed by the Falklands. (BF0100 series mods I recall). The mid-life upgrade (to Fox Mk2) was also planned by that time which was also, in effect, a technology demonstrator for Vixen and ECR90. Mk2 kit was available in 85.
Far from being a dream, Kestrel predates Vixen and was being trialled at RAE Bedford in a Sea King around 1984 – certainly no later than early 85. At the time, Ferranti regarded Kestrel as a simple upgrade to Sea Spray, which itself dates to around 73. Bear in mind the published ISD of Merlin at that time was late-80s. We had kit to play with, all the reliability data was known and accurate costings available. This is why so much of Merlin’s avionics is obsolescent – it is a mixture of 70s and 80s designs.
I first saw Vixen working as an early development model in late 85. ECR90 was not far behind. I stand by my point that, given the development timescales for such complex systems, state-of-the-art radar design expertise resided in Edinburgh throughout the 70s.
Ali - You obviously know RSD(S) but for my money the RSD(N) team in Edinburgh was the dogs *******. To my certain knowledge, the Chief Designer, Chief Test and Production Engineers and their teams were still in place many years after the International Signal, GEC-Ferranti, GEC-Marconi days.
Fair comment about 1983. Fox was getting its first upgrade to bring it up to spec, as final development had been curtailed by the Falklands. (BF0100 series mods I recall). The mid-life upgrade (to Fox Mk2) was also planned by that time which was also, in effect, a technology demonstrator for Vixen and ECR90. Mk2 kit was available in 85.
Far from being a dream, Kestrel predates Vixen and was being trialled at RAE Bedford in a Sea King around 1984 – certainly no later than early 85. At the time, Ferranti regarded Kestrel as a simple upgrade to Sea Spray, which itself dates to around 73. Bear in mind the published ISD of Merlin at that time was late-80s. We had kit to play with, all the reliability data was known and accurate costings available. This is why so much of Merlin’s avionics is obsolescent – it is a mixture of 70s and 80s designs.
I first saw Vixen working as an early development model in late 85. ECR90 was not far behind. I stand by my point that, given the development timescales for such complex systems, state-of-the-art radar design expertise resided in Edinburgh throughout the 70s.
Ali - You obviously know RSD(S) but for my money the RSD(N) team in Edinburgh was the dogs *******. To my certain knowledge, the Chief Designer, Chief Test and Production Engineers and their teams were still in place many years after the International Signal, GEC-Ferranti, GEC-Marconi days.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Muscat, Oman
Posts: 604
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tucumseh, I agree with you. I always thought we should have given the contract to Ferranti and let them develop their Blue Vixen rather than give the contract (and eventually, the company) to GEC.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London, UK
Age: 50
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the author of the article I'm glad to see its travelling around the internet. Please make whatever comments you like, additional information is especially welcome. It isn't actually finished yet; this is a first draft.
Regarding the two sentences quoted by tucumseh:
"lack of fighter radar experience in Britain"
After the Lightning, which had a reasonable but unexceptional monopulse radar, the cancellation of any future UK fighters meant a gap in fighter radar development continuity. The US was working on pulse doppler fighter radars from the late 1950s onwards, for example the Hughes AN/ASG-18 from the F-108 which evolved through the 1960s and ended up being the basis of the AWG-9 radar. Behind the US pulse-doppler radars like AWG-9, APG-63, etc, lay decades of research.
The Sea Harrier entered development around 1972. Ferranti used the Seaspray helicopter radar to create a lightweight pulse radar to equip it, and it didn't enter service until 1979. Ferranti, having got the contract to license build AWG-10 in the mid 60s, definitely qualify as the most experienced fighter radar contractor in Britain. However, Ferranti didn't start its pulse doppler fighter radar research, which led via Blue Vixen to CAPTOR, until 1976 when J F Roulston was appointed to form a research team.
So, in 1976 when the AI24 contract was awarded, you had, I argue, a "missing generation" of fighter radar design in Britain. The US had been though the early pulse-doppler technologies and was making second generation pulse doppler radars already. The USSR had built Sapfir-23 using a hybrid MTI technique to achieve lookdown and was moving to true pulse doppler radars like N019 and Zaslon.
“with Ferranti supplying some components”
With Foxhunter Ferranti supplied the transmitter (IIRC) and some other vital radar components, but crucially the processing was all Marconi.
If you'd like to point out some more "howlers", I will do my best to address them.
Regarding the two sentences quoted by tucumseh:
"lack of fighter radar experience in Britain"
After the Lightning, which had a reasonable but unexceptional monopulse radar, the cancellation of any future UK fighters meant a gap in fighter radar development continuity. The US was working on pulse doppler fighter radars from the late 1950s onwards, for example the Hughes AN/ASG-18 from the F-108 which evolved through the 1960s and ended up being the basis of the AWG-9 radar. Behind the US pulse-doppler radars like AWG-9, APG-63, etc, lay decades of research.
The Sea Harrier entered development around 1972. Ferranti used the Seaspray helicopter radar to create a lightweight pulse radar to equip it, and it didn't enter service until 1979. Ferranti, having got the contract to license build AWG-10 in the mid 60s, definitely qualify as the most experienced fighter radar contractor in Britain. However, Ferranti didn't start its pulse doppler fighter radar research, which led via Blue Vixen to CAPTOR, until 1976 when J F Roulston was appointed to form a research team.
So, in 1976 when the AI24 contract was awarded, you had, I argue, a "missing generation" of fighter radar design in Britain. The US had been though the early pulse-doppler technologies and was making second generation pulse doppler radars already. The USSR had built Sapfir-23 using a hybrid MTI technique to achieve lookdown and was moving to true pulse doppler radars like N019 and Zaslon.
“with Ferranti supplying some components”
With Foxhunter Ferranti supplied the transmitter (IIRC) and some other vital radar components, but crucially the processing was all Marconi.
If you'd like to point out some more "howlers", I will do my best to address them.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London, UK
Age: 50
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By the way, if any Tornado pilots can add any (unclassified, of course) details that would be very welcome. Even if you can just tell me something's wrong, that's helpful too.
Though there were no new in service fighter radars between Lightning and SHar, you should not ignore the work done with the RRE's many long nosed Canberras, which flew a number of precursors to AI24, some of them proving quite successful, and certainly keeping the UK in the radar game.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London, UK
Age: 50
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, but weren't those RRE / Elliott prototypes using FMICW? Hence, in 1976, Marconi seemed to be the only choice for primary AI24 contractor. Ferranti (perhaps because they lost this contract?), the same year built a team and gained the experience necessary to build the Blue Vixen and CAPTOR.
What transpired with Marconi might I feel be partly blamed on the difference between designing a test radar and flying it in some benign test flights in a Canberra and operating a radar in a Tornado in day to day service, in mock combats. The Canberra is pretty nimble for a bomber, but I doubt the tests involved close combat etc.
What transpired with Marconi might I feel be partly blamed on the difference between designing a test radar and flying it in some benign test flights in a Canberra and operating a radar in a Tornado in day to day service, in mock combats. The Canberra is pretty nimble for a bomber, but I doubt the tests involved close combat etc.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 194
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blue Circle was our first look-down, drop-down radar. Its range was oddly allied to the altimeter and was far better than than the later US look-down, shoot-down radars as it combined the wiggly amps (worms?) bit with an inbuilt anti-ecm capability in one handy sack-like package.
Mind you, tended to work a bit faster with water ingress around the radome...
Mind you, tended to work a bit faster with water ingress around the radome...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In the dark
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The US was working on pulse doppler fighter radars from the late 1950s onwards, for example the Hughes AN/ASG-18 from the F-108 which evolved through the 1960s and ended up being the basis of the AWG-9 radar. Behind the US pulse-doppler radars like AWG-9, APG-63, etc, lay decades of research.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London
Age: 69
Posts: 237
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by NURSE
what were the performance figures for the Blue Circle radar on the tornado F2?
Ahhhh, Ferranti....the company of FM1600B fame.....ask them for a dog and you get a cat with a conversion package. I once knew someone who worked for them in Edinburgh who stated that the company was making money hand over fist on military contracts, so the fact that they were going down the pan meant that someone/some persons within the collective was spending/losing money hand over fist as well!
“Ahhhh, Ferranti....the company of FM1600B fame.....ask them for a dog and you get a cat with a conversion package. I once knew someone who worked for them in Edinburgh who stated that the company was making money hand over fist on military contracts, so the fact that they were going down the pan meant that someone/some persons within the collective was spending/losing money hand over fist as well!”
I think you’ll find the reason they hit trouble was a fraud involving International Signal, which had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Ferranti’s excellent staff or their products.
As for excessive profit, or any suggestion they were stiffing the MoD, I recall them turning down numerous production contracts the RAF tried to let on them. Well, would you want to see taxpayers money wasted on a 15 year spares buy for a radar that had gone out of service, knowing the money would be better spent on an in-service radar?
I think you’ll find the reason they hit trouble was a fraud involving International Signal, which had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Ferranti’s excellent staff or their products.
As for excessive profit, or any suggestion they were stiffing the MoD, I recall them turning down numerous production contracts the RAF tried to let on them. Well, would you want to see taxpayers money wasted on a 15 year spares buy for a radar that had gone out of service, knowing the money would be better spent on an in-service radar?
Join Date: May 2006
Location: East Anglia
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Green Meat
Blue Circle was our first look-down, drop-down radar. Its range was oddly allied to the altimeter and was far better than than the later US look-down, shoot-down radars as it combined the wiggly amps (worms?) bit with an inbuilt anti-ecm capability in one handy sack-like package.
Mind you, tended to work a bit faster with water ingress around the radome...
Mind you, tended to work a bit faster with water ingress around the radome...
