Hawk XX154 To Be Preserved

Profile picture for user Wyvernfan

Member for

11 years 11 months

Posts: 5,805

To the Boscombe Down Aviation Collection at Old Sarum https://www.salisburyjournal.co.uk/news/17844823.iconic-jet-coming-boscombe-aviation-collection/
Original post

Member for

11 years 3 months

Posts: 147

What the article doesn’t say is that this is the Hawk prototype/1st production aircraft.
Profile picture for user KurtB

Member for

1 year 8 months

Posts: 161

Actually Pre Production. But yes it’s a significant airframe (despite, like all T1’s, having undergone Triggers broom updates).
Profile picture for user Wyvernfan

Member for

11 years 11 months

Posts: 5,805

Indeed it is, but as it’s the first it’s good to see it being preserved!
Profile picture for user Seafuryfan

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 2,431

Great news, well done to BDAC. Yes, I wonder if 154 was re-winged and re-fuselaged?
Profile picture for user Sabrejet

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 1,737

'Iconic' is fully justified here: I hope they return her to the original scheme. Subject of an early Matchbox 1/72 plastic kit too. Great news.
Profile picture for user bazv

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 5,811

Actually Pre Production. But yes it’s a significant airframe (despite, like all T1’s, having undergone Triggers broom updates).
Kurt - XX154 did not have any of the Mod999/Mod2010 updates,so she still has her original wing and fuselage (complete) and still has an original pre mod Tailplane (although not necessarily her original Tailplane as the Tailplanes used to get swopped around the Boscombe fleet as required to keep them flying).There are some fairly significant differences structurally (in both Fuselage and Mainplane) between 154 and the Production Hawk T1's so I think 'Prototype' is probably a more accurate discription,but I agree the 'official' designation was 'pre production'. rgds baz

Member for

10 years 4 months

Posts: 698

Will it be stored inside or out?
Profile picture for user Oxcart

Member for

11 years 10 months

Posts: 2,090

Always thought it was a handsome beast. Wonder if they'll ever be private ones flying one day.
Profile picture for user KurtB

Member for

1 year 8 months

Posts: 161

I don’t think there’d be much doubt oxcart. And Bazv, thank you for the insight. Those post mod tailplanes weighed loads more than the pre mod version. Loved working on (and flying in) the Hawk.
Profile picture for user bazv

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 5,811

I don’t think there’d be much doubt oxcart. And Bazv, thank you for the insight. Those post mod tailplanes weighed loads more than the pre mod version. Loved working on (and flying in) the Hawk.
Yes Kurt - the post mod 1310 ? 1320? Tailplanes (I am not very good at remembering mod numbers LOL) were very much beefed up,as was the design of the post mod 999 wing,the low mod standard of the ETPS Hawks gave us loads of extra visual/RVA inspections (RVA = remote visual aids.AKA 'Shuftiscopes') in the wings,T/P's and fuselages.154 was always more demanding/interesting during routine/planned maintenance due to the many build standard 'differencies' and scheduled servicing on 154 often took much longer than on standard Hawks,although we did gradually update the A/C over the years whenever possible.Even the Flaps were original and they were of some 'interim' mod standard which made some servicing inspections interesting. Fleets often have anomalies - the 2 RAFCAM/AvMedFlight Hawks still have their original (pre mod 2010) Fuselages but have Mod999 Wings and also post mod T/P's.
Profile picture for user Wyvernfan

Member for

11 years 11 months

Posts: 5,805

If ever someone needs a Hawk expert Baz, you’re the man :)

Member for

11 years 9 months

Posts: 1,527

Yes Kurt - the post mod 1310 ? 1320? Tailplanes (I am not very good at remembering mod numbers LOL) were very much beefed up,as was the design of the post mod 999 wing,the low mod standard of the ETPS Hawks gave us loads of extra visual/RVA inspections (RVA = remote visual aids.AKA 'Shuftiscopes') in the wings,T/P's and fuselages.154 was always more demanding/interesting during routine/planned maintenance due to the many build standard 'differencies' and scheduled servicing on 154 often took much longer than on standard Hawks,although we did gradually update the A/C over the years whenever possible.Even the Flaps were original and they were of some 'interim' mod standard which made some servicing inspections interesting. Fleets often have anomalies - the 2 RAFCAM/AvMedFlight Hawks still have their original (pre mod 2010) Fuselages but have Mod999 Wings and also post mod T/P's.
For some reason as I read that I started to hum the Johnny Cash song, ‘one piece at a time’
Profile picture for user Sabrejet

Member for

9 years 7 months

Posts: 1,737

So did it arrive? EDIT: after following the link I see it did!
Profile picture for user Seafuryfan

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 2,431

I think it would be best to leave the aircraft exactly as she is. The present mod state, combined with Baz’s expert knowledge, tells it’s own story. In my opinion, the most historic British aircraft of modern times (apart from perhaps Bravo November).
Profile picture for user bazv

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 5,811

If ever someone needs a Hawk expert Baz, you’re the man :)
Why thank you young man :) I started on them when they were brand spanking new in the weapons training role at Brawdy,I had previously been working on Canberra B2's + T4's so the Hawks seemed like ultra modern little dinky toys,the diddy little mainwheels were certainly much easier to lift than Canberra wheels.When I was promoted to 'Mr' I worked on most Hawks up to Mk65,in 2010 I even did a Hawk T2 course to facilitate some trials work - some interesting and some very dull LOL.In the meantime I had tried to escape to other A/C types on our eclectic fleet but never managed more than a couple of months before being magnetted back to 'Awks,although they were lovely little jets - working on any one type for long periods can get tedious. I certainly would not count myself as an 'expert' - I never worked on the main training fleet and I did work on quite a few other types over the years so mine was not continuous Hawk experience.
Profile picture for user bazv

Member for

14 years 8 months

Posts: 5,811

Sorry for not returning to this thread earlier - we have been a little busy lately LOL For anybody visiting the Boscombe Down Aviation Collection and planning to look round 154 - here is a list of some of the fairly easy to see 'differences' between 154 and the production standard Hawks (so any airframe after XX163),there are many more variations/differences but I now live 430 miles north of there so not so easy to visit and remind myself. If you look closely at the Wing leading edges at the correct angle and lighting - you can see the slight 'indentation' of where the various Wing Fence and Stall Warning strips (toblerones) were trial fitted for flight testing,including the original Inboard mounted Wing Fences and the Triple Wing Fences as used on the export/combat wing for the Mk60 series onwards. The Wing lower rear skins (ie just in front of the Flaps) are 'loose' and can 'Float' up and down a fair amount,production aircraft had rigidly mounted skins. Under the port and stbd wingtips there are small Lozenge shaped panels with holes in the centre,these were used to mount small explosive charges ('Bonkers') for use during Flutter Testing. The Landing Gear 'D' doors were dissimilar in that one side had an original and very weak looking 'D' Door - whereas the other side was a production standard Door. Under the Fuselage 'Spine' Panels - the upper centre fuselage/Bag Tank Bay Roof just forward of the GTS Bay (Gas Turbine Starter Bay) had a very different structure/looked totally different to prod Hawks. The Landing Light was originally a 'Sealed Beam Unit' (like me - not very bright ;) ) which was eventually replaced by a Halogen unit,154 was probably used for the 'Trial Installation' of the new light and it was totally different to any other Hawk AFAIK,the mounting was 90 deg 'out' and the damn thing used to 'Blow' with monotonous regularity (much more often than our other A/C). No External 'Pull Down' Step for cockpit entry (had never been fitted),so the younger/fitter groundcrew would jump up on to the wing to gain access to the cockpits,older guys would have to use steps LOL. Up in the 'Hell Hole' (Panel 121c) and mounted on the rear of Frame 11 one of the 3 control levers (rudder I believe) was shorter than standard and would not line up with the rigging fixture - so one had to 'eyeball' the rigging hole line up during rigging checks. The Flaps were original and of course originally had the full span 'Flap Vane' - later in the flight test programme the Flap Vane was shortened by removing one section of the vane,from memory both Flaps had external skin plates/doublers and looked quite different to the other A/C Flaps,they had ended up as some Interim Modification Standard which was just acceptable to pass later visual inspections/mod standard audits. Edit - Also the internal structure was never finished (painted) to production standards,so for example when we were working in the Engine Bay - no matter how much cleaning/painting we did - the bay always looked tatty.

Member for

13 years 11 months

Posts: 2,806

This thread is a great example of why this forum will be so useful for historians. When the RAF museum first placed airframes on display they had little interest in showing the history of a particular aircraft , choosing a generic description of the type on a placard. Thanks to publications like British Museum Aircraft and then the on line RAF museum descriptions we are better served. But getting info about recent museum aircraft is important because we now see contributions from people who actually worked on them..priceless.