Imagine if we ever built it
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,761
Received 2,742 Likes
on
1,168 Posts
Imagine if we ever built it
Larger than a Herc and a true forunner the the A400 C17 design, but on one version it had 4 pegasus engines for VTOL / STOL, have been reading about it this week.
Fascinating and would probably have been a good selller..
https://apostlesofmercy.tumblr.com/p...lso-designated
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thr...81-hs-681.306/
Fascinating and would probably have been a good selller..
https://apostlesofmercy.tumblr.com/p...lso-designated
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thr...81-hs-681.306/
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,599
Received 277 Likes
on
153 Posts
I imagine it might have been rather interesting if an engine failed in the hover...
I remember having a similar conversation on here with the late great John Farley about sticking a couple of Pegasus' on a Bae 146.
Getting regulatory approval for an engine failure was prohibitive.
Getting regulatory approval for an engine failure was prohibitive.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,599
Received 277 Likes
on
153 Posts
I think I read that John was quite dismissive of the HS681, TSR-2 and Rotordyne - would that he was still with us to comment...
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,599
Received 277 Likes
on
153 Posts
Looking at that image again reminds me that there was a plan to build a jet Belfast with Starlifter wings.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Strange that it was ditched at the same time as the C130 purchase.
AW681 with VTOL lift pods...
Air Enthusiast 2006-04
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Hoofddorp The Netherlands
Age: 70
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Cambridge, UK
Age: 45
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Project Cancelled by Derek Wood has a whole chapter on this. It's an excellent read, and a fantastic insight into post-war British defence procurement, and how countless opportunities were lost - the Hawker P.1081/1083 for one...
The HS.681 was to use RR Medway engines, not Bristol Pegasus engines, at least initially. These engines would have some means of altering the direction of the jet exhaust, to improve the short-field capabilities (STOL, not quite VTOL) of the type, but for patent (or copyright) reasons this was called 'thrust deflection' and not 'thrust vectoring'.
When the project was on the verge of cancellation, an 11th-hour attempt to save the project involved the airframe from the HS.681 and the wings and engines from the HS.801 Nimrod, the project being named the HS.802. The Wilson government went with the C-130K instead.
There was also a project to mate the fuselage of the Shorts Belfast with the wings and engines of the C-141, the project being the SC. 4/50.
The HS.681 was to use RR Medway engines, not Bristol Pegasus engines, at least initially. These engines would have some means of altering the direction of the jet exhaust, to improve the short-field capabilities (STOL, not quite VTOL) of the type, but for patent (or copyright) reasons this was called 'thrust deflection' and not 'thrust vectoring'.
When the project was on the verge of cancellation, an 11th-hour attempt to save the project involved the airframe from the HS.681 and the wings and engines from the HS.801 Nimrod, the project being named the HS.802. The Wilson government went with the C-130K instead.
There was also a project to mate the fuselage of the Shorts Belfast with the wings and engines of the C-141, the project being the SC. 4/50.
"Strange that it was ditched at the same time as the C130 purchase."
Not really - it was expensive, there were doubts it would work and that it made much sense even at the time - but the RAF still needed a decent tactical freighter - so they did the obvious, cancelled a possible white elephant, and bought a tried and tested design that they knew worked and which has more than proven its worth since
Not really - it was expensive, there were doubts it would work and that it made much sense even at the time - but the RAF still needed a decent tactical freighter - so they did the obvious, cancelled a possible white elephant, and bought a tried and tested design that they knew worked and which has more than proven its worth since
A few years laters, the USAF wanted a C130 replacement and the YC15 prototype was built (2 aircraft). Looking very similar in configuration to the '681, it demonstrated excellent STOL operations at Farnborough in 1976, then the USAF apparently decided the best thing to replace the C130 was another C130 so the YC15 never made it into production, instead the plans were dusted off and enlarged when the C17 was produced.
Waiting for the AW681 to be developed was the reason that the HP Hastings remained in service as long as it did. As soon as the axe fell on the 681 so negotiations began to replace the Hastings fleet with the Lockheed C-130 began. HMG wanted to cram in as many UK systems into it as possible, thus driving down the US$ costs and generating more UK jobs. They began with wanting to replace the Allison T56's with RR Tyne turboprops. That was politely declined but, by shoehorning in copious UK navigation electronics as well as an autopilot (that took one look at the US looming and went into an immediate sulk), PM Harold Wilson was able to declare to the HoC that half the cost of the 60 strong fleet was in pounds Sterling. Rustling of order papers, prolonged rustling of order papers, etc, etc....
By 1968 most of the Hastings fleet had been distributed to various RAF airfields for fire practice, as the Hercules C Mk1's flew in to replace them.
By 1968 most of the Hastings fleet had been distributed to various RAF airfields for fire practice, as the Hercules C Mk1's flew in to replace them.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Starring at an Airfield Near you
Posts: 371
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Oh, I thought it was 60 a/c for £66M? Maybe it was 66 a/c for £60M? Even more of a billy bargain if so!
The holy grail back then had been for a VTOL capability for all types, because the R/W's would be gone by day 2. Shorts offered a flying platform for the TSR2 so that it too could be operated from a NATO STANAG clearing. Whatever the customer wants....
The holy grail back then had been for a VTOL capability for all types, because the R/W's would be gone by day 2. Shorts offered a flying platform for the TSR2 so that it too could be operated from a NATO STANAG clearing. Whatever the customer wants....
The AW.681 and P.1154 were cancelled in February 1964, with the intention announced to order 'anglicised' versions of the C-130 and the Phantom in their place. TSR.2 was cancelled in April 1965. An earlier proposal had been for BAC and Lockheed to produce a Rolls-Royce Tyne-engined Hercules with boundary layer control under the designation BAC.222. This would have been a most interesting aircraft.
March's Aeroplane Magazine had a couple of articles abut the 'big three', as it called them. The AW.681's role was seen in the early 1960s to airlift expeditionary forces to colonial outposts and deliver them into unprepared airstrips, while also carrying construction equipment to extend and improve the facilities. Separate VTOL and STOL variants, which ended up being quite different, were planned, but the former was abandoned long before final cancellation. The decision to concentrate on Europe meant that it did not fit too well into the way NATO expected a future war to go, and the STOL capability was seen as irrelevant. I like to think that had they just gone for an ordinary freighter without all the STOL or VTOL gubbins it may well have survived and ended up as an alternative to the C-130 in the export market. The size was very similar and without the STOL mods the payload would have been similar as well.
March's Aeroplane Magazine had a couple of articles abut the 'big three', as it called them. The AW.681's role was seen in the early 1960s to airlift expeditionary forces to colonial outposts and deliver them into unprepared airstrips, while also carrying construction equipment to extend and improve the facilities. Separate VTOL and STOL variants, which ended up being quite different, were planned, but the former was abandoned long before final cancellation. The decision to concentrate on Europe meant that it did not fit too well into the way NATO expected a future war to go, and the STOL capability was seen as irrelevant. I like to think that had they just gone for an ordinary freighter without all the STOL or VTOL gubbins it may well have survived and ended up as an alternative to the C-130 in the export market. The size was very similar and without the STOL mods the payload would have been similar as well.
