Gnat vs. Hawk Flight Characteristics
Well, I taxied it out, took it off flew it around for a bit, tried a few steep turns, rolls etc and then a couple of circuits so yes - I'd say I flew it. In fact the last landing was pretty good, if I say so myself. I wasn't P1, never claimed to be.
Last edited by DaveUnwin; 6th Mar 2019 at 08:20. Reason: Dodgy grammar!
KenV - I have flown all three.
My Hawk time is very limited - but I found it an easy aircraft to fly and very forgiving. The view from the rear is great for a trainer, but because the rear cockpit is raised above the rolling axis of the aircraft, it is slightly uncomfortable in a dynamic ACT sortie where there is lots of rolling under "g". Very easy to fall over when getting out at the end of the sortie! But a good trainer, albeit not good at instilling some of the important aspects of flying such as landing on speed on the numbers. Too forgiving!
The Gnat was an absolute delight to fly, as others have said. Very quick, and very responsive. Tiny jet which you strapped on, rather than in. But it was a trainer and carried no external stores - other than semi-embedded "slipper" tanks for fuel. A great trainer but a dreadful view from the rear cockpit. However, I think that all who flew it loved it.
The Scooter (I flew the A-4M, so it had the big engine - P408?) was as delightful as the Gnat in many ways with a similarly small cockpit which you strapped on. I never flew a clean-wing A-4, but it's load carrying ability was remarkable for such a small aircraft and it performed supremely well even when loaded. It was very close to the responsiveness of the Gnat - but those aerodynamic full leading edge slats which could deploy asymmetrically at times when pulling "g"and rolling in a dynamic ACT setting was disconcerting to say the least, and the cause of the odd headache! I loved the A-4M - however, the TA-4 with the P6 or P8 engine - you can keep!!
If offered the choice of which to fly one more sortie in - I'd go for the A-4M - simply because you could do so much more in it. If it had to be a two-seater, then the Gnat wins without question.
My Hawk time is very limited - but I found it an easy aircraft to fly and very forgiving. The view from the rear is great for a trainer, but because the rear cockpit is raised above the rolling axis of the aircraft, it is slightly uncomfortable in a dynamic ACT sortie where there is lots of rolling under "g". Very easy to fall over when getting out at the end of the sortie! But a good trainer, albeit not good at instilling some of the important aspects of flying such as landing on speed on the numbers. Too forgiving!
The Gnat was an absolute delight to fly, as others have said. Very quick, and very responsive. Tiny jet which you strapped on, rather than in. But it was a trainer and carried no external stores - other than semi-embedded "slipper" tanks for fuel. A great trainer but a dreadful view from the rear cockpit. However, I think that all who flew it loved it.
The Scooter (I flew the A-4M, so it had the big engine - P408?) was as delightful as the Gnat in many ways with a similarly small cockpit which you strapped on. I never flew a clean-wing A-4, but it's load carrying ability was remarkable for such a small aircraft and it performed supremely well even when loaded. It was very close to the responsiveness of the Gnat - but those aerodynamic full leading edge slats which could deploy asymmetrically at times when pulling "g"and rolling in a dynamic ACT setting was disconcerting to say the least, and the cause of the odd headache! I loved the A-4M - however, the TA-4 with the P6 or P8 engine - you can keep!!
If offered the choice of which to fly one more sortie in - I'd go for the A-4M - simply because you could do so much more in it. If it had to be a two-seater, then the Gnat wins without question.
Bomber, PM sent on another subject.
Mog
On the Gnat, apart from the very neat seat harness and arming mechanism, anyone recall the equally neat mic/tel connection through the oxygen hose?
Last edited by 57mm; 6th Mar 2019 at 12:21. Reason: More data
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: New Braunfels, TX
Age: 70
Posts: 1,954
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KenV - I have flown all three.
My Hawk time is very limited - but I found it an easy aircraft to fly and very forgiving. The view from the rear is great for a trainer, but because the rear cockpit is raised above the rolling axis of the aircraft, it is slightly uncomfortable in a dynamic ACT sortie where there is lots of rolling under "g". Very easy to fall over when getting out at the end of the sortie! But a good trainer, albeit not good at instilling some of the important aspects of flying such as landing on speed on the numbers. Too forgiving!
The Gnat was an absolute delight to fly, as others have said. Very quick, and very responsive. Tiny jet which you strapped on, rather than in. But it was a trainer and carried no external stores - other than semi-embedded "slipper" tanks for fuel. A great trainer but a dreadful view from the rear cockpit. However, I think that all who flew it loved it.
The Scooter (I flew the A-4M, so it had the big engine - P408?) was as delightful as the Gnat in many ways with a similarly small cockpit which you strapped on. I never flew a clean-wing A-4, but it's load carrying ability was remarkable for such a small aircraft and it performed supremely well even when loaded. It was very close to the responsiveness of the Gnat - but those aerodynamic full leading edge slats which could deploy asymmetrically at times when pulling "g"and rolling in a dynamic ACT setting was disconcerting to say the least, and the cause of the odd headache! I loved the A-4M - however, the TA-4 with the P6 or P8 engine - you can keep!!
If offered the choice of which to fly one more sortie in - I'd go for the A-4M - simply because you could do so much more in it. If it had to be a two-seater, then the Gnat wins without question.
My Hawk time is very limited - but I found it an easy aircraft to fly and very forgiving. The view from the rear is great for a trainer, but because the rear cockpit is raised above the rolling axis of the aircraft, it is slightly uncomfortable in a dynamic ACT sortie where there is lots of rolling under "g". Very easy to fall over when getting out at the end of the sortie! But a good trainer, albeit not good at instilling some of the important aspects of flying such as landing on speed on the numbers. Too forgiving!
The Gnat was an absolute delight to fly, as others have said. Very quick, and very responsive. Tiny jet which you strapped on, rather than in. But it was a trainer and carried no external stores - other than semi-embedded "slipper" tanks for fuel. A great trainer but a dreadful view from the rear cockpit. However, I think that all who flew it loved it.
The Scooter (I flew the A-4M, so it had the big engine - P408?) was as delightful as the Gnat in many ways with a similarly small cockpit which you strapped on. I never flew a clean-wing A-4, but it's load carrying ability was remarkable for such a small aircraft and it performed supremely well even when loaded. It was very close to the responsiveness of the Gnat - but those aerodynamic full leading edge slats which could deploy asymmetrically at times when pulling "g"and rolling in a dynamic ACT setting was disconcerting to say the least, and the cause of the odd headache! I loved the A-4M - however, the TA-4 with the P6 or P8 engine - you can keep!!
If offered the choice of which to fly one more sortie in - I'd go for the A-4M - simply because you could do so much more in it. If it had to be a two-seater, then the Gnat wins without question.
I do not know why everybody is being so rude about the Vampire T11. Six hundred of them trained an awful lot of pilots and they didn't lose many compared with the Meteor T7. I had a very pleasant time with them. Why have a searing take off performance when you leave 1,000 yards of runway untouched.
I can still remember circling over London at FL 320 on a gin clear night seeing the lights from Birmingham to the Channel in the days when civil ATC stopped at 290.
I can still remember circling over London at FL 320 on a gin clear night seeing the lights from Birmingham to the Channel in the days when civil ATC stopped at 290.
I dont think we were being rude about the T11 per se, just its dreadful cockpit, gear, flap and airbrake levers all together !
Having said that, at t least they got two MB. Seats in the later T1. and having had to use one in a JP I was glad they did !
I too, remember climbing to 30 k plus at night over London, and, frankly, marvelling at the view.
Dont think we can be too critical of the Meteor T7, much of the asymmetric traning was, by todays training standards, b. dangerous.
Having said that, at t least they got two MB. Seats in the later T1. and having had to use one in a JP I was glad they did !
I too, remember climbing to 30 k plus at night over London, and, frankly, marvelling at the view.
Dont think we can be too critical of the Meteor T7, much of the asymmetric traning was, by todays training standards, b. dangerous.
Am currently reading Tony Doyle's 'Flying at the Edge...' in which he gives detailed explanations of Meteor 7, asymmetric training and the perils therein. 
I had the 'Phantom Dive' demonstrated to me when I had a couple of gash rides in T7s at Oakington. I was told to slow it down to 170 knots with the airbrakes, stabilise it and then lower the undercarriage without retracting the airbrakes. I wasn't fast enough to catch the yaw roll and dive (asymmetric lowering of undercarriage) and I recovered about 2,000 ft. lower. After that I didn't want to know about the single engine performance.
There was nothing wrong with the Vampires control tower. The Throttle, HP and LP cocks were logical as was the airbrake lever. One was advised to look down at the co-located flap and undercarriage lever but one was fitted with a flat handle and the other with a wheel on the end.
One of the ones from Oakington was, maybe still is, open cockpit at Duxford. I trotted up the ladder and stepped in as normal and it didn't seem that small to me. It was 'pally' in the cockpit but those giants with long legs were sent off to the Meteor flight where they could use their legs to climb out.
There was nothing wrong with the Vampires control tower. The Throttle, HP and LP cocks were logical as was the airbrake lever. One was advised to look down at the co-located flap and undercarriage lever but one was fitted with a flat handle and the other with a wheel on the end.
One of the ones from Oakington was, maybe still is, open cockpit at Duxford. I trotted up the ladder and stepped in as normal and it didn't seem that small to me. It was 'pally' in the cockpit but those giants with long legs were sent off to the Meteor flight where they could use their legs to climb out.
Looxury ! You should try the MiG 21......I once had the dubious "pleasure" of a trip in the rear seat of the trainer ; was glad to get feet back on mother earth . Nice touch was the periscope to help the instructor out in landings .
I was an assistant in ATC at Valley in the 80s, and I asked a Duty pilot in the VCR one day, if he had flown the Gnat..he said yes, and I asked him which was better, Gnat or Hawk?
he smiled and said " the Gnat was a handful...but it sorted the men from the boys! if you could fly the Gnat well, you could fly anything! The Hawk, on the other hand, is a lovely aeroplane, but its too good...very reliable, and the duration is fantastic...so when a student gets his wings, and goes on to TWU, he thinks he is a hot shot pilot...then comes the OCU, and he is immediately faced with all sorts of unserviceabilities, frightening corners of the flight envelope, and drilled in keeping his eye on the fuel gauge!!"
he smiled and said " the Gnat was a handful...but it sorted the men from the boys! if you could fly the Gnat well, you could fly anything! The Hawk, on the other hand, is a lovely aeroplane, but its too good...very reliable, and the duration is fantastic...so when a student gets his wings, and goes on to TWU, he thinks he is a hot shot pilot...then comes the OCU, and he is immediately faced with all sorts of unserviceabilities, frightening corners of the flight envelope, and drilled in keeping his eye on the fuel gauge!!"
I realise that this is a bit more thread drift...but, anyone flown the Alpha Jet? I realise it’s a two smoker, but I’ve heard from those who have had a go...it eats my beloved T1.
Thoughts and informed opinions folks.
Thoughts and informed opinions folks.
I flew the Gnat as a student in 1967. A delightful aircraft to fly - until you got an emergency, either for real or (more likely) instructor induced. Then you had to get the emergency drills exactly right, or it became a real handful. It soon sorted out those who could cope from those that couldn't. The Hawk (which I also flew later on in the '80s) was much more forgiving and docile, so in order to assess the students' capabilities more thoroughly, they were put under greater pressure by increasing the workload in the cockpit on many of the later sorties of the course.
