1/32 Bae Hawk in maintenance

[Victor K2]

Hi Steve, XX154 operated at R.A.E. LLanbedr for a good few years that I worked there (86 till 2003). I always believed that there was no prototype Hawk and that 154 came straight off the production line. It did have a few differences to most of the Hawks. XX156, 157, 158and 159 were next off the production line. There wasn't any 155 registered. Derek is right in that 154 was never upgraded to the 2010 modification and was used to further the in production modifications. It had a lot more wiring than other Hawks when they were assessing the fatigue values. Though the test equipment was removed, the wiring wasn't. This made access to certain components challenging. We had 157 160 and 161  there at various times. They were used as shepherds for the Meteor Drones ( U16 version ) and Jindiviks. Later on, when 154 went back to Boscombe (I think ) we had ex Greek Airforce ( ex Luftwaffe ) Alpha jets. 156 ended up as Gate guard here at Valley. 

I am pleased to have worked on the very first Hawk T Mk1 and that 42 years on I am still working (putting in an appearance)on the Hawk T Mk1.

The bacon slicers moved with the Tailplane and the guides forward and rear were fixed to the fuselage, but I bet you knew that

look forward to the next update.

[Derek B]

1 hour ago, Victor K2 said:

Hi Steve, XX154 operated at R.A.E. LLanbedr for a good few years that I worked there (86 till 2003). I always believed that there was no prototype Hawk and that 154 came straight off the production line. It did have a few differences to most of the Hawks. XX156, 157, 158and 159 were next off the production line. There wasn't any 155 registered. Derek is right in that 154 was never upgraded to the 2010 modification and was used to further the in production modifications. It had a lot more wiring than other Hawks when they were assessing the fatigue values. Though the test equipment was removed, the wiring wasn't. This made access to certain components challenging. We had 157 160 and 161  there at various times. They were used as shepherds for the Meteor Drones ( U16 version ) and Jindiviks. Later on, when 154 went back to Boscombe (I think ) we had ex Greek Airforce ( ex Luftwaffe ) Alpha jets. 156 ended up as Gate guard here at Valley. 

I am pleased to have worked on the very first Hawk T Mk1 and that 42 years on I am still working (putting in an appearance)on the Hawk T Mk1.

The bacon slicers moved with the Tailplane and the guides forward and rear were fixed to the fuselage, but I bet you knew that

look forward to the next update.

 

Hi Bob,

 

Yes, '154 was the 'De Facto' prototype for the series, as it was the first of the production aircraft to fly, even if is was effectively always a pre-production development aircraft.

 

I think that XX156 was a structural test airframe.

 

You have had a magnificent career Bob - thank you for 'keeping the faith'.

 

Cheers 

 

Derek 

[Derek B]

16 hours ago, SwissFighters said:

Hi Derek, 
That's really helpful to know as I have quite a comprehensive catalogue of pics of the Swiss M66 U-1251. What you describe as a hybrid fuselage probably accounts for the slight differences in shape I find when looking at the aft fuselage of this aircraft (including the bacon slicers!) compared to the Mk 1. In fact, I bought the Kinetik Hawk 100 with the plan to graft its rear end onto the Revell T.1A. I think that should provide a closer, if not totally correct representation of the Mk 66. I suppose the differences could also be because Revell failed to capture the proper lines in the first place.
Does that make sense?
Tony

 

Hi Tony,

 

I have done a comparison, and I think that it is entirely 'doable'!

 

I will post some images tomorrow evening.

 

Cheers

 

Derek 

[SwissFighters]

17 hours ago, Derek B said:

 

Hi Tony,

 

I never thought of that option! It could actually be a good idea (I will have to check out both kits). If the Kinetik kit fuselage is actually good for the 60 series Hawk aircraft fuselage, then this may be a good option. In fact, I would even go as far as considering back-dating the whole Kinetic Hawk 100 kit to a T.Mk.66 standard by only swapping the nose sections (and nose leg) and cockpit IP panels, as the Kinetic kit already has the correct seats for a Swiss aircraft (it shouldn't be too difficult to modify the wingtips and fin).

 

Cheers

 

Derek

Thanks Derek,
Yes, the graft could happen at a number of different points.
Thanks for considering and updating (I missed your later post).
Tony

Edited February 3 by SwissFighters

[Stevepd]

12 hours ago, Derek B said:

 

That's good to know Steve. They are all late (or high) production serial numbers, so they are all very likely standard Hawk T.Mk.1A standard aircraft, so you should be OK (externally) with any T.Mk.1A aircraft (just double check that none of them were ex-RAFAT aircraft before EPTS service, just in case any specific RAFAT mods are still evident on them).

 

Cheers

 

Derek

Thanks for replying Derek. In this case I know the 3 choices were brand new off the line to ETPS, where they stayed. 

[Derek B]

11 hours ago, SwissFighters said:

Thanks Derek,
Yes, the graft could happen at a number of different points.
Thanks for considering and updating (I missed your later post).
Tony

 

If Steve pd doesn't mind me hijacking his thread a little, I have done a very quick comparison between the Revell 1/32 Hawk T.Mk.1A kit and the Kinetic Hawk 100 (Mk.128/T.2/115) kit, just to see how they compared shape-wise and dimensionally. Here are the images:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think that it is possible to swap kit noses and nose legs, and either the whole cockpit section (or internals) and rework the Kinetic kit 100 series parts (wing tips, fin RAR, etc.) to produce an accurate 'short nosed' Hawk aircraft.

So, my conclusion is that it is probably possible to successfully cross-kit these two kits to produce an accurate Mk.66 aircraft (or even a T.Mk.1/1A model). I want to make an accurate Mk.51 aircraft in the future, so this may be the root that I shall adopt?

 

Regards

 

Derek

[Stevepd]

Lovely rivets on that rear end.

 

I can't believe I said that

[Stevepd]

Not done much over the last few days. My wife has gone away for a few dayswith work and left me with man flu. It's zapped my enthusiasm at the mo. I did this yesterday afternoon and stopped. I've added the strengthening strip along the top of the intake trunking. This was my 1mm width strip which I cut down to about 0.8mm and then placed one vertically and one horizontally. This gave me the "L" that I was after. I added the wider part at the rear and the additional 0late just on the curvature of the upper side of the intake. I scribed the second vent just in front of the APU exhaust. I've added the centre rib to the vents and thinned them down a fair bit. Lastly started on the bacon slicer area.

 

Thanks for sticking with me. And a thank you to everyone that has chipped in so far.

 

Steve.

[SwissFighters]

On 2/4/2025 at 6:52 AM, Derek B said:

 

I think that it is possible to swap kit noses and nose legs, and either the whole cockpit section (or internals) and rework the Kinetic kit 100 series parts (wing tips, fin RAR, etc.) to produce an accurate 'short nosed' Hawk aircraft.

So, my conclusion is that it is probably possible to successfully cross-kit these two kits to produce an accurate Mk.66 aircraft (or even a T.Mk.1/1A model). I want to make an accurate Mk.51 aircraft in the future, so this may be the root that I shall adopt?

 

Regards

 

Derek

I hadn't yet gone to such lengths to compare, Derek, so your photos really help. I agree that it should work, and am hopeful that my documentation of the Mk 66 is sufficient to help me incorporate the main characteristics. I'm eternally enthusiastic to start but can't see this getting underway for a while yet.
Thanks for sharing!
Tony
 

[SwissFighters]

Now back to Steve's build...!

[Stevepd]

29 minutes ago, SwissFighters said:

I hadn't yet gone to such lengths to compare, Derek, so your photos really help. I agree that it should work, and am hopeful that my documentation of the Mk 66 is sufficient to help me incorporate the main characteristics. I'm eternally enthusiastic to start but can't see this getting underway for a while yet.
Thanks for sharing!
Tony
 

Come on start it

[Stevepd]

Hi everyone. Not much to report in this one. I've done the bacon slicers on each side. I've had a good think on how to tackle this one with a failed attempt. So engaged the brain and came up with this. I copied the engraved one from the kit onto a piece of 10thou plasticard. This gave me the basic shape. But the upper profile is OK however the lower half needs the angles, see-saw(esk). Once I had the shape I was happy with I copied this onto some thick card. As you may see on reference photos it stands out as a substantial chunk. I glued this onto the kit which then mean I could add the fixed braces (fwd & aft) of the bacon slicer. I added these as vertical rectangle strips and then cut them down with a sharp scalpel to give me the shape. Note that these 2 braces are on the front panel line and against the rear exhaust fairing to fuselage join. The rear part on Revell's interpretation is way off (too short). Lastly I added 2 "L" peices of plasticard to the exposed runner that's just exposed to the flat upper edge of the slicer. I've also noted in references that the flat top edge is horizontal even though the tailplane is resting above the rigging marker. So when powered up and aligned with the marker, the rear of the bacon slicer maybe slightly up. Anyway a poor photo with arrows to the 5 parts that make this up. Lastly cutting out the slot to receive the tailplane.

 

 

Thanks for looking.

 

Steve.

Edited February 12 by Stevepd

[Stevepd]

Hi all. I've added the strengthening strips to the airbrake strakes. These are 1mm strips cut down to 0.5mm(ish) and one against the fuselage and the other butting up to it along the top of the strake. The 1:1 scale measured out at 2cm (0.46mm) for the upper and 1.5cm (0.46mm) for the lower strip. The gap at the rear of the strake to the end of the airbrake was 3in (2.38mm) and this is actually very close on the kit, so I left it. I've added the proud heat shroud to the GTS exhaust area. As you can see mine is straight down the center, when it is offset slightly to port. But I'd buttond it up prior to finding out. I've added the strengthening plates around the fuel dump. Also I offered up the kit fairing under the rudder which is the correct length, but now doesn't follow the profile now the Fred sutton rear end has been adjusted. I put yellow card to show the gap.

 

Right from the start I really wanted to display the tailplane actuator. Now you can imagine how much info there isn't out there. So, from the cutaway drawings and a side shot from the Hawk sales brochure, I've made this (below). I think it's a little agricultural but I think it's OK. I've taken off the heavy surround from the fairing, which will obviously be off the displayed aircraft. I've drilled out the solid bit of plastic at the bottom of the fin as I found a photo of the cutout. Does anyone have any info that could help me decide how much area to cut away under the rudder to fit the actuator. If not, I'll have to guess.

 

So 2 questions; - is there any formed structure inside the fillet under the rudder. Or is it hollow and it just screws down to the fuselage via the flange?.

 

How much material to remove to get the actuator in. Is it opened up past where the actuator housed?.

 

Thanks all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 15 by Stevepd

[Derek B]

3 hours ago, Stevepd said:

Hi all. I've added the strengthening strips to the airbrake strakes. These are 1mm strips cut down to 0.5mm(ish) and one against the fuselage and the other butting up to it along the top of the strake. The 1:1 scale measured out at 2cm (0.46mm) for the upper and 1.5cm (0.46mm) for the lower strip. The gap at the rear of the strake to the end of the airbrake was 3in (2.38mm) and this is actually very close on the kit, so I left it. I've added the proud heat shroud to the GTS exhaust area. As you can see mine is straight down the center, when it is offset slightly to port. But I'd buttond it up prior to finding out. I've added the strengthening plates around the fuel dump. Also I offered up the kit fairing under the rudder which is the correct length, but now doesn't follow the profile now the Fred sutton rear end has been adjusted. I put yellow card to show the gap.

 

Right from the start I really wanted to display the tailplane actuator. Now you can imagine how much info there isn't out there. So, from the cutaway drawings and a side shot from the Hawk sales brochure, I've made this (below). I think it's a little agricultural but I think it's OK. I've taken off the heavy surround from the fairing, which will obviously be off the displayed aircraft. I've drilled out the solid bit of plastic at the bottom of the fin as I found a photo of the cutout. Does anyone have any info that could help me decide how much area to cut away under the rudder to fit the actuator. If not, I'll have to guess.

 

So 2 questions; - is there any formed structure inside the fillet under the rudder. Or is it hollow and it just screws down to the fuselage via the flange?.

 

How much material to remove to get the actuator in. Is it opened up past where the actuator housed?.

 

Thanks all.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There isn't a lot out there online Steve. The trailing edge fin fairings are hollow fairing attached to the fuselage structure and fin (they allow rotation of the tailplane via the PCU actuator and drive lever bracket attached to the top of the tailplane).

 

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/hawkdm_2.htm

 

https://www.jetartaviation.co.uk/bae-astra-hawk-xx341

 

https://www.demobbed.org.uk/images.php?s=d&type=544

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derek

[Stevepd]

2 hours ago, Derek B said:

 

There isn't a lot out there online Steve. The trailing edge fin fairings are hollow fairing attached to the fuselage structure and fin (they allow rotation of the tailplane via the PCU actuator and drive lever bracket attached to the top of the tailplane).

 

http://www.clubhyper.com/reference/hawkdm_2.htm

 

https://www.jetartaviation.co.uk/bae-astra-hawk-xx341

 

https://www.demobbed.org.uk/images.php?s=d&type=544

 

 

Derek

Thanks for replying Derek. That's all useful info and more than I'd had previously. I did find that clubhyper site last night but zooming in it gets so pixilated, it's guess worthy. Think I've got enough to get by. I've clocked that small white vertical structure on the exhaust fairing join. Do you think that's on the newer rear end you mention earlier inthe build or on all of them. I note that it's present only in some, so may have been removed.....

 

Steve.