The Woracle

The Woracle's Last Post

2008-04-11T21:08:57Z

This is my last blog post for Flight, and I've realised I never introduced myself. I'm Graham Warwick. I was brought up in the Scottish Borders, on a hill farm, in a low-flying zone, where I learned to hate sheep, but love aeroplanes. I then studied aeronautical engineering at Southampton University, which was as far from Scotland (and sheep) as I could get. My first job was as a graduate engineer at Hawker Siddeley Aviation in Kingston, outside London. I learned a lot about designing and building aircraft, but an engineering career was not for me. My second job was as a reporter and editor for Flight International. That one lasted almost 30 years - very enjoyable years, working alongside some great people. The Woracle is the nickname given to me by my wife as a gentle (I think) jibe at the encyclopedic knowledge of aerospace I have accumulated over the years at Flight. Now I am moving on, and you will see my name appearing somewhere else. Thanks to all of you for reading Flight and visiting The Woracle. Till we meet again.... "Of course I know what I'm doing..." (Canadian Forces photo)

Warthog hyperbole - what was I smoking?

2008-04-10T18:55:37Z

"Lizard-skinned Warthogs flit through German valleys en route to a rendezvous with tree-hugging Cobras." Okay, that was definitely one of my more lurid feature intros. It was written in 1979, shortly after the Fairchild A-10, aka the Warthog, arrived in Europe. And in those days they carried the European 1, aka Lizard, colour scheme. But I'm not sure now where the Cobras came in... I wrote the feature after visiting the A-10s' forward operating base at Sembach, Germany. The trip involved a couple of days being driven around in a NATO car listening to news and music on the radio, in the course of which I discovered there is no German for "Kentucky Bluegrass" or, it would seem, "100 call girls". I wish I had understood the rest of what they were saying. ]]> Night/Adverse Weather A-10. This seemed a little counter-intuitive - take the simple A-10 and make it complicated and expensive - and as an effort to prolong the Warthog's production run it was ultimately unsuccessful. But the two-seater did have its own unique look. Later, in 1985, I went back to Fairchild to be briefed on the T-46 primary trainer, a sort of miniature A-10 chosen by the US Air Force to replace its T-37s. But Fairchild by then was a company in decline and the T-46 proved to be a poorly executed failure and was cancelled. Fairchild closed its doors not long after. But the A-10 lives on. Mike Badrocke's A-10 cutaway (Flight archives)

Confessions of a flight control freak

2008-04-09T23:14:56Z

Early in my career on Flight I developed a fascination with fly-by-wire and the possibilities it offered for advanced configurations and new modes of flying. I wrote in excrutiating detail about a series of advanced flight-control demonstrators with extra bits attached to "relax stability" and basically fool the plane into thinking it was way more manoeuvrable than it really was. They included MBB's F-104 Control Configured Vehicle, British Aerospace's Active Control Technology (ACT) Jaguar, and the USAF's Advanced Fighter Technology Integration (AFTI) F-16. Two that particularly caught my imagination were Rockwell's unmanned HiMAT and Grumman's forward swept wing X-29. ]]> 1979 - MBB F-104 CCV (1000aircraftphotos.com, Johan Visschedjik collection) 1980 - AFTI F-16 (NASA photo) 1980 - Rockwell HiMAT (NASA photo) 1981 - BAe ACT Jaguar (1000aircraftphotos.com, Johan Visschedjik collection)

Tigershark, Tigershark burning bright, but briefly

2008-04-08T23:24:09Z

It didn't have foreplanes, or thrust vectoring, but one of the most enjoyable aircraft I've seen on the airshow circuit was Northrop's F-20 Tigershark. I remember sitting in a traffic jam outside Le Bourget, watching the F-20 literally skid sideways above my head - powered by sheer marketing exuberance...or maybe desperation, as the Tigershark was that strangest of beasts - a private-venture export fighter. When I joined Flight in 1978, the F-5 was already viewed as a fighter from a previous generation (although the last one was not delivered until 1989!) That changed when Northrop announced the revamped F-5G, later redesignated as the more marketable F-20. It was definitely an F-5, but with distinctly modern touches: the shark nose, the reprofiled canopy, the muscular F404 engine. Red, white and whoo!]]> Frank Munger's F-5G cutaway (Flight archive)

Harrier fans still do it vertically

2008-04-07T23:21:45Z

While at Hawker Siddeley, in 1977, I worked my way into the Future Projects office. I arrived just as they were submitting a proposal for Air Staff Target 403, for an advanced STOVL fighter to replace the RAF’s Harriers and Jaguars. After I joined Flight, I returned to Hawkers to interview my ex-boss. I was recognised and waved through by security, only to meet a couple of former colleagues carrying a windtunnel model of the latest secret ASTOVL design down the stairs! (It was the P.1216, for secretprojects.co.uk afficionados). My post-Hawker honeymoon ended when I displeased Harrier chief designer John Fozard by saying the UK should join the US in developing the AV-8B Harrier II rather than pursuing the homegrown “Big Wing” Harrier. But I’m quite sure the AV-8B cemented the UK-US V/STOL relationship and paved the way for the Harrier’s eventual replacement, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. STO-ing in the rain (US Navy photo) ]]> Harrier II with its carbonfibre wing could actually lift a useful payload. I found myself at McDonnell Douglas in St Louis for the AV-8B roll-out, only to hear then US Marine Corps Commandant P X Kelly forcefully declare that the "A in AV-8B means Attack, and if it's going to say Marines on the side it had better do it properly!". That caused a few mutters of "steady on, old chap" among the Brits in the audience. While I lament the lack of Harrier curves in the shaped-by-stealth F-35B, I am looking forward to seeing all those doors open, fans rotate and nozzles swivel. But I don't think we'll see a Lightning II bow to the audience after its airshow. (Crown Copyright) Tim Hall's Harrier GR7 update of Frank Munger's AV-8B cutaway (Flight archives)

The ones I love to hate

2008-04-07T16:20:29Z

Confession time: I am prone to irrational, unjustifiable dislikes when it comes to aeroplanes. More often than not it is an aircraft about which more fuss was made than the aircraft was worth - in my opinion, I hasten to add. Usually that fuss was being made in the pages of Flight and getting in the way of what I wanted to write (3,000-word features on ring laser gyros, that sort of thing). Top of the list has to be the BAe 146, which must have appeared in the pages of Flight more frequently than any other aircraft over my 30 years. Why? Because it's British and because a former Flight editor had an obsession with the 146 and the Royal Family.... Rule Britannia! (Crown Copyright)]]> Flight. Other irrational dislikes? Concorde, because it was a momumental waste of money and because the Labour government chose to keep it and cancel the TSR2. But I did come to have a grudging respect for the beast when I realised the extent to which it kept British technology alive till the Tornado came along. And, just to upset everyone - remember, I did say irrational and unjustifiable - the Airbus A380. What is all the fuss about? It's just a big bus. Although I do rather like that wing...

Heinemann, his Hot Rod, and the fire alarm

2008-04-07T11:51:01Z

Ed Heinemann is a hero of mine. At Douglas, he designed some of my favourite aeroplanes: the A-1 Skyraider, A-3 Skywarrior, A-4 Skyhawk and F4D Skyray. I got the chance to interview Ed in 1979, when I was researching a feature to mark delivery of the last Skyhawk, an A-4M to the US Marine Corps. I interviewed Ed by phone from Flight’s office, then on Stamford Street in Central London. He was recovering from a stroke, but the interview was going extremely well, I thought, when the fire alarm went off at my end… Heinmann's Hot Rod (US Navy photo)]]> Flight archives)

The Woracle looks back

2008-04-04T23:05:51Z

Here's the thing, after almost 30 years I am departing Flight International for pastures new. I have seven days until The Woracle's last post. So how best to mark this momentous life change? With pictures, of course. You know The Woracle: a picture is worth 1,000 words delivered after deadline. And where best to begin than with the first aircraft I worked on as a rookie aeronautical engineer: the Hawker Siddeley (now BAE Systems) Hawk, the last aircraft to carry the hallmark, artfully curved, Hawker fin: Ahhh, Hawker (Crown Copyright - a Geoff Lee picture, I think) ]]> Flight was to visit RAF Brawdy in remotest Wales with photographer Tom Hamill to see the Royal Air Force's Hawks in action - alongside the Hawker Hunter, which was still in use back then as an aggressor aircraft. The Hawk could out-turn the Hunter, but if the fight went vertical the Hunter always won. And it was beautiful, where the Hawk is stylish. (Crown Copyright - Geoff again) I haven't quite forgiven British Aerospace for sticking the long nose on today's Hawk, or for closing Kingston and moving Hawk production to Brough. But they say if it looks right, it is right, and the Hawk's long reign as the premier advanced jet trainer has been well deserved. It was my privilege to begin my career in aerospace alongside the people who designed this lovely machine. John Marsden's Hawk T1 cutaway (Flight archives)

Know anything about repairing a Sea Harrier?

2008-04-03T15:46:09Z

Any fellow alumni of Hawker Siddeley Aviation in Kingston out there? I have a call for help from the man who owns the only private Sea Harrier. After an emergency vertical landing late last year, owner Art Nalls (nallsaviation.com) is having some difficulties repairing the nose. He needs some help with rebuilding the radome ring and wants to know more about the alloy used for the nose skin as it is resisting being worked back into shape. Art's Shar is an ex-Royal Navy FA2, but is actually the second Sea Harrier built - XV439. I was working at Hawkers in Kingston when the first Sea Harrier FRS1 was assembled - I even worked in the sheet metal shop for a while. Produced a lovely aluminium fruit bowl using the English Wheel. But I think Art needs more than my rusty skills. Nose job needed (photo from 800nas.org.uk)

Whatever happens, USAF is determined F-22 will fly on

2008-04-02T22:10:34Z

Interesting what you find when you are looking for something else. Like what the US Air Force has in mind for the F-22, whether or not it gets more aircraft. Daniel Darnell, USAF deputy chief of staff air, space and information operations, plans and requirements, lays it out succinctly in recent testimony to Congress. Shutdown of the F-22 production line will begin in November as vendors early in the build process complete delivery of components for the 183 aircraft currently planned. The USAF expects to issue a shutdown RFP this summer, he says, and to incur $40m in shutdown costs in fiscal year 2009 (the budget now being debated). Darnell also puts a cost on keeping the line open: "If we want to keep the line open and deliver an additional F-22 lot, then the Air Force would require $595.6m in FY09 for advance procurement of 24 aircraft. In either case, we are at a critical crossroad: we must make a decision by November to avoid increased costs and a break in the production line before our suppliers begin to exit the market." Into the less than clear blue yonder (USAF photo) Even if it stops at 183 aircraft (the USAF wants 381), Darnell makes clear the Raptor will continue to evolve: "The Air Force has accepted 113 F-22A aircraft to date, out of a programmed delivery of 183. Most of these aircraft include the Increment 2 upgrade, which provides the ability to employ supersonic JDAM and enhances the intra-flight datalink to provide connectivity with additional F-22s. The F-22A fleet will be upgraded under the JROC-approved Increment 3 upgrade designed to enhance both air-to-air and precision ground-attack capability. "Raptors off the production line today are wired to accept the Increment 3.1 upgrade, which when equipped, upgrades the APG-77 AESA radar to enable synthetic-aperture radar ground-mapping capability and provides the ability to self-target JDAMs using onboard sensors, and allows F-22s to carry and employ eight small-diameter bombs (SDB). Increment 3.1 is funded and begins to field in FY2010. "Future F-22s will include the Increment 3.2 upgrade, which is funded and features the next generation datalink, improved SDB employment capability, improved targeting using multi-ship geolocation, automatic ground collision avoidance system and the capability to employ enhanced air-to-air weapons (AIM-120D and AIM-9X). Increment 3.2 should begin to field in FY13. "The Increment 3.3 upgrade is currently unfunded. It plans to include Mode 5/S, which is the next generation identification friend or foe and advanced air-traffic control transponder; radar auto search/auto detect, which gives automated target cueing using fourth-generation AESA radar; and a ground moving-target indicator and tracking capability."

April Fool, on me

2008-04-01T17:08:22Z

The previous post was obviously a hoax, but the joke backfired on me as I set the wrong release time! "Wake me up when its April 1st"

Sikorsky flies coaxial-rotor X2 in secret

2008-04-01T07:00:00Z

Sikorsky has flown its coaxial-rotor X2 Technology demonstrator, in secret. To keep the private-venture project out of the public eye, the company took the unusual step of flying the small helicopter indoors. But in a blow for Sikorsky security, clandestine video of the secret first flight has been posted on youtube. From the video, it's clear the initial flight was conducted in hover mode and the tail-mounted propeller, which is expected to push the X2 to speeds as high as 250kt, was not engaged. The helicopter, which has a pair of rigid contra-rotating rotors, lifts off quickly, but appears "twitchy" in the hover. Another potential problem is the noise, which one observer describes as "irritating as h*ll after a few seconds".

Embraer adds two - that makes four, or is it five?

2008-03-28T21:15:17Z

approved the launch of the MLJ medium-light and MSJ mid-size business jets. They are to enter service in 2012 (MSJ) and 2013 (MLJ). They come hard on the heels of the launches of Cessna's large-cabin Citation Columbus and Gulfstream's ultra-long-range G650. Bombardier has also unveiled, but not formally launched, the mid-size Learjet NXT. So it's a busy year so far for business aviation (four or five all-new jets, depending on how you look at it - and the Mitsubishi Regional Jet has also been launched, but that's not a bizjet). And there's at least a couple more new aircraft in the pipeline... ]]> The MLJ and MSJ are about 90% common, sharing the same cabin cross-section, wing, cockpit, engines, tail etc, but with different fuselage lengths. That's more common than Embraer's Phenom 100 and 300, which share cabin cross-sections and cockpits, but have different wings, tails and engines. That probably explains the $750m development cost for both aircraft (compared to $780m for the Columbus and around $1bn for the G650). Usually manufacturers launch a new aircraft then follow up later with a derivative, but Embraer seems to like doing things in pairs. Maybe because it's in a hurry to establish itself in the business jet market. The Phenom 100 will enter service this year and the 300 next year, joining the Legacy 600 and Lineage 1000. By the time the MLJ and MSJ are ready, it will have built a six-aircraft range in just a dozen years. And, if my arithmetic is right, there's room for a couple more...

Is the Hawker 4000 finally ready?

2008-03-27T22:57:05Z

press release about its achievements in its first year as a private company. Record sales, record backlog etc, etc. What's not included on the list is delivery of the super mid-size Hawker 4000. The official word is "soon", maybe with weeks, but I'm not holding my breath just yet. I was at Raytheon Aircraft for the rollout of the Hawker Horizon, as they were both called then, back in April 2001. I wrote about its certification in November 2006. But here I am in March 2008 still waiting for the first delivery to a customer. It's been an interesting journey. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great aircraft and worth the wait, but why so long? ]]> First it was a resource issue. After the Premier I, the Hawker 4000 was only the second all-new aircraft certificated by Raytheon (rather than Beechcraft or Hawker). And the Premier didn't go too smoothly. The pair share the same automated fibre-placement composite fuselage technology, but that seems to have been less of a hold-up than Raytheon's general lack of experience with FAA certification. The upshot was the Hawker 4000 breached the FAA's limit of 10 years between applying for a type certificate and getting one. The FAA insisted the aircraft's certification basis be brought up to date with the latest amendments, which required redesign of the fuel and hydraulic systems. This was a more onerous effort than the company envisaged, requiring an amended type certificate. But the last step, the do-over of function and reliability flight testing, is now complete, the reports are being written and Hawker Beechcraft is hoping for final certification and first deliveries of the Hawker 4000, well, "soon".

Picture of the day

2008-03-27T18:43:12Z

"Makes you want to rush out and buy a couple of hundred Skyraiders!" says my colleague Kieran Daly of this Embraer picture of a pair of purposeful Super Tucanos. I'm not sure Pratt & Whitney Canada's PT6A, even at 1,600shp, sounds quite the same as a Skyraider's Wright Cyclone, or a Sea Fury's Bristol Centaurus (a personal favourite), but of today's trainer/attack turboprops only Embraer's Super Tucano has that iconic look of a late-era propeller-powered fighter. And it gets used in anger.