BAE Systems Hawk Replacement?

[GeeRam]

Originally Posted by chevvron

Or as I said, when the hard runway is ready, first flight from Yeovil to land at Yeovilton like they did with the VC10s Brooklands to Wisley and Brough to Warton for the last Hawks..

And the short hop from Salmesbury to Warton for the Lightnings IIRC.

Is the hard runway a certainty though?

[chevvron]

The 873m hard runway at Yeovil would be adaequate for takeoffs; I'm sure Brough was about the same length.

[Bob Viking]

Chevvron

Maybe with a ludicrously strong headwind.

Modern operations (for single engine jets) tend to call for the the ability to stop before the end of the runway from Vrotate. Brake chutes and barriers help and I accept that a single take off is better than routine ops. However, a runway of less than 900 metres is not going to be an attractive prospect for anyone who has to sign off on the risk of takeoffs from such a runway in this day and age.

BV

[teeonefixer]

Originally Posted by chevvron

The 873m hard runway at Yeovil would be adaequate for takeoffs; I'm sure Brough was about the same length.

According to Wiki, the main runway was 1054m. The final Hawk flights (new build or TMk.2 on airframe Mods) took off away from the offices towards the fishing ponds

[DuncanDoenitz]

Tow them to Yeovilton? Buccaneers were built at Brough and towed to HoSM.

[pr00ne]

Originally Posted by chevvron

That's the place.
BAe had just built a new production facility there (built 10 Hawks there so I'm told) and closed it again soon after. Doug Arnold bought it when he sold Blackbushe in '84 and I competed there in '85 for drag racing.

Bitteswell was a BAe facility that closed in 1983. The airfield was sold to Doug Arnold but he had shut up shop by 1987 and the airfield site was redeveloped into the huge Magna Park. It was the old Armstrong Whitworth, then Hawker Siddeley maintenance and repair organisation and dealt with Vulcan, Shackleton, Buccaneer and Hawk. BAe never built a production line for anything there as it was never a manufacturing unit under BAe, just MRO. It was closed as part of a BAe rationalisation that also saw Hurn and Bracebridge Heath close. The Hawk confusion probably arises from the fact that it prepped and delivered the Red Arrows Hawks. When BAe, in another bout of rationalisation, closed Dunsfold and Kingston the Hawk production line moved north, initially to Warton and then to Brough with the new build Hawks doing a one time take off from the short runway at Brough to Holme on Spalding Moor, but when BAe also closed that they went to Warton.

[CAEBr]

Originally Posted by pr00ne

When BAe, in another bout of rationalisation, closed Dunsfold and Kingston the Hawk production line moved north, initially to Warton and then to Brough with the new build Hawks doing a one time take off from the short runway at Brough to Holme on Spalding Moor, but when BAe also closed that they went to Warton.

The first Hawks built at Brough, as opposed to a series of components, were the RoKAF Mk67s. They were transported by road to Warton for flight test. This carried on through all of the Mk100 and 200 production, until, due to work levels at Warton, permission was obtained to fly the completed jets from Brough. A new final assembly line and flight shed was completed and the jets made a single flight from Brough to Warton for paint, flight test and final delivery. This covered the remainder of the Mk132 Indian aircraft first batch (before switching to production in India) and the RAF T2 aircraft from number 3 onwards).
No Hawk ever flew to HoSM from Brough which had been shut by then anyway. Subsequent aircraft, RSAF Mk165, RAFO Mk166, QAF Mk167 all reverted to completion at Brough, with road transportation to Warton for first flight.

[typerated]

Remember being at Brough when the Swiss QA team started rejecting airframes for workmanship... owch

[SLXOwft]

Originally Posted by DuncanDoenitz

Tow them to Yeovilton? Buccaneers were built at Brough and towed to HoSM.

Are you suggesting folding wings and an arrestor hook as part of the UK trainer spec?

[Minnie Burner]

Hawks from Bitteswell

Originally Posted by pr00ne

Bitteswell was a BAe facility that closed in 1983. The airfield was sold to Doug Arnold but he had shut up shop by 1987 and the airfield site was redeveloped into the huge Magna Park. It was the old Armstrong Whitworth, then Hawker Siddeley maintenance and repair organisation and dealt with Vulcan, Shackleton, Buccaneer and Hawk. BAe never built a production line for anything there as it was never a manufacturing unit under BAe, just MRO. It was closed as part of a BAe rationalisation that also saw Hurn and Bracebridge Heath close. The Hawk confusion probably arises from the fact that it prepped and delivered the Red Arrows Hawks. When BAe, in another bout of rationalisation, closed Dunsfold and Kingston the Hawk production line moved north, initially to Warton and then to Brough with the new build Hawks doing a one time take off from the short runway at Brough to Holme on Spalding Moor, but when BAe also closed that they went to Warton.

1. Oct 81, picked up XX 346 & 348 from Bitteswell. Took them to Chiv. Brand new.
2. Get building NOW at Yeovil. Final assembly at VLN.
3. Buy nothing American.

[DuckDodgers]

Originally Posted by Minnie Burner

1. Oct 81, picked up XX 346 & 348 from Bitteswell. Took them to Chiv. Brand new.
2. Get building NOW at Yeovil. Final assembly at VLN.
3. Buy nothing American.

Yeah, I’m sure using a MOD establishment as a FACO wouldn’t raise any challenges. Buy nothing American, better find a replacement for the F124 motor then……

[BBadanov]

Originally Posted by typerated

Remember being at Brough when the Swiss QA team started rejecting airframes for workmanship... owch

Again, showing the cottage industry that British aircraft manufacture became.

[BEagle]

But is the M-346, as a twin-engined aircraft, really suitable either for the RAFAT or as a replacement for the Hawk trainer?

[Davef68]

Originally Posted by BEagle

But is the M-346, as a twin-engined aircraft, really suitable either for the RAFAT or as a replacement for the Hawk trainer?

The French have used the Alpha Jet in that role for decades

[typerated]

Originally Posted by BBadanov

Again, showing the cottage industry that British aircraft manufacture became.

They struggled finding tradesmen - especially skilled riveters is I remember correctly.

[longer ron]

Originally Posted by typerated

Remember being at Brough when the Swiss QA team started rejecting airframes for workmanship... owch

The Swiss were pissed off at BAe for shifting final Hawk production away from Dunsfold to other sites - we had a great relationship with the Swiss going back to Hunter days.
We had done a fly off against 2 x Alpha Jets at Emmen AFB in the spring of 1986 and the Swiss team were not aware at that time that the Hawk final assembly was going to be moved northwards - the Hawk move must have come as a real shock to them.
I started at Dunsfold in 1984 and we were Kingston/Brough division for final assembly of Hawk/Harrier - production fuselage manufacture for Hawk/Harrier was at Kingston,Wing Manufacture was at (B)rough,Canopy from Hamble (+ tailplane ?? - T/P insp stamps have become a bit hazy over time) -
Inspection stamps were - Hawker (Kingston/Dunsfold) was HA,Brough was BGA (Blackburn General Aircraft).
Looking at some pictures online - it is indeed possible there might have been a small Hawk final assembly line at Bitteswell to help with Hawk T1 production in the late 70's/early 80's - we did end up with a few ex Bitteswell strange guys at Dunsfold

[chevvron]

I can remember Doves (GARBE was one of them) going from Dunsfold to Bitteswell then on to Brough (or possbly HoSM) for a short period; don't know when; normally they just did Dunsfold - Brough/HoSM and return.
I'm sure a new building was erected at Bitteswell on the northern end of the airfield separate from where the 'normal' Argosies/Victors were serviced in 3 x T2s which were south of the airfield across a road. They had a controller named Merril there who was ex Boscombe Down.
I drag raced at Bitteswell twice in 1985 after Doug bought the airfield and I'm sure I saw a building of some sort at the northern end of the runway where I turned off it after making a run but I only glanced at it briefly as I drove back round the eastern taxiway (which had a pronounced 'dip' and corner in it) to the paddock which was on one of the shorter runways; we used the main runway for actual racing.

[teeonefixer]

Originally Posted by BBadanov

Again, showing the cottage industry that British aircraft manufacture became.

You've touched a raw nerve there!
My Father-in-Law was an inspector and closely involved with the first Swiss airframes. The management wanted to keep the customer at bay, but he took their rep through all his inspection records, drawings and components and got everything Swiss-stamped - he was in trouble for that!
Part of the problem at Brough was successive run-downs and build-ups. Lots of people left in the Buccaneer days when SA batch 2 was cancelled and various other HSA projects (Hawk/Harrier/Trident/146/SkyShadow pod etc.) came and went, with Phantom as a constant. But "workmanship" can be pointed at any organisation in my experience, as I've heard horror stories from all other places I have been involved with.
In addition to Pr00nes comment, Kingston had already passed all Hawk DA, production and testing to Brough well before they closed (I spent the winter of 86 going back and forth with a copy of the stressing calcs!). They were just managing all the Harrier workload. Similarly, Dunsfold had problems with staffing levels, although the regular guys I met were good blokes.

[walbut]

Around 1990 Hawk production was reorganised and instead of sub-assemblies being built at Brough and Kingston with final assembly and flight test at Dunsfold, almost all sub-assemblies were built at Brough with final assembly and flight test at Warton. The 100 and 200 series aircraft were still to a degree in development but also in production at the same time, hence lots of changes and rework. We were building a wide range of aircraft marques, rebuys of Mk 51 and 60 for Finland and Zimbabwe, Mk 67 for Korea, Mk 102 for Abu Dhabi, 103 and 203 for Oman and 108 and 208 for Malaysia. Major changes were made to the production management structure as a result of the 'Warton takeover' and lots of shop level supervisors took over areas they were unfamiliar with. The original Kingston philosophy which seemed to have accepted a lot of 'fettling' by skilled craftsmen did not lend itself to what was now happening. I was based at Brough in Flight Systems but spent a lot of time at Warton in the early 90's doing production support. I did not have any experience of dealing with the Swiss but the Finns were absolute masters at finding fault in the build standard of their aircraft. They had an absolutely ace inspector on site, aided by a UK AQD inspector contracted to the Finnish Air Force who happened to be an ex 'Broughie' They could be a real pain in the arse but I admired their thoroughness and professionalism and we are still friends today. Eighty hour weeks were common, being called in to assist re-rigging and testing nosewheel steering on the Mk 67 in the middle of the night was a pain but it was one of the most interesting and satisfying periods of my career and I learned a lot about dealing with customers when carrying out acceptance testing with the Finnish, Korean and Abu Dhabi reps.

[Lyneham Lad]

UK Preparing Groundwork For Hawk T2 Replacement Contest

In Aviation Week.

LONDON–The UK defense ministry is progressing with plans to launch a contest to find a replacement for the BAE Systems Hawk T2 advanced jet trainer.

The competition’s launch has been held back by delays to the publication of the government’s Defense Investment Plan (DIP). But the defense ministry has stood up a program team that is now preparing a strategic outline business case, Minister for Defense Readiness and Industry Luke Pollard said in a Dec. 20 letter to the Parliamentary Select Committee. It was made public on Jan. 20. Preparation of the outline business case is assessing future options and defining a full requirement, he wrote.

“The Ministry of Defense is aware of several potential platform solutions to replace Hawk T2 and all industry engagement will continue to be conducted in accordance with Government Procurement Policy,” Pollard’s letter says.

Click the link for remainder of article.