An Unmanly Guide to Pilotless Aircraft: Top 13 Unmanned aircraft

During the War, actor Hedy Lamarr was the co-inventor of frequency hopping. A technology that would later make WiFi and global positioning systems possible. Her innovation had a huge impact on remotely piloted aircraft. There is some controversy about who invented frequency-hopping, the inventor Tesla was involved in initial research.

The sky of the 21st Century is abuzz with soulless flying machines, but let’s not hate on them. As Stephen Caulfield shows us, what they lack in poetry they make up for in ingenuity.

  1. de Havilland Queen Bee
Never in the field of human conflict has a leader so wanted a morning whisky

de Havilland’s infuriating decision to start a name with a lowercase letter long predated Hip-Hop’s preoccupation with tricksy spelling, and has condemned aviation historians to artfully deploy a variety of odd sentence constructions to avoid starting sentences with a ‘d’. Still they did do some pioneering work on remotely piloted aeroplanes.

The Queen Bee was a development of the DH-82A Tiger Moth primary trainer. A cheap-and-cheerful approach to training anti-aircraft artillery forces it utilised existing technology in a proven airframe. Catapult launched, this drone was flown within line of sight by a ground operator. It could land and be reused or get blown to matchsticks as the moment required. There was a twin-float version for fleet gunners to work with, too. You can see one of these early disposables at the de Havilland Aircraft Museum if the world is open the time you read this.

The same length as a piloted Tiger Moth.

  1. Raduga KS-1 Komet
OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

Cruise missiles are aircraft and munitions, pre-programmed suicide robots (though a pessimist could argue that we all are) . You couldn’t really do a lot with them after pushing the launch button. At least not before the advent of the computer chip and digital satellite communications. The Komet is here with the Snark representing a long line of cruise missiles beginning with the Fiesler Fi-103, also known as the V-1 or Doodblebug. Built with the wings, tail assembly and powerplant of a MiG-15, the Komet appears to have had similar performance metrics. This crude weapon helped make the brinksmanship of the 1962 Cuban missile crisis even more dangerous.

The same length as a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15.

  1. Northrop SM-62 Snark

According to the writer Kurt Vonnegut, a ‘snarf’ is someone with a particular fetish the author of this article has asked us not to detail (you can find it here though). Perhaps this is why Snarf from the Thundercats was so named. A Snark, on the other hand, is “an imaginary animal (used typically with reference to a task or goal that is elusive or impossible to achieve).”

Big and dumb. That is pretty much history’s verdict on an expensive, problem-plagued machine designed to deliver atomic weapons of ridiculous power. Take the notorious test firing of a single Snark in 1959 from Cape Canaveral. It was supposed to perform a return trip via a point near Puerto Rico. The Snark in question began drifting to starboard not long after takeoff. Umpteen course correction signals were tried. Then self-destruct codes were sent as the Snark streaked off across the Caribbean. Armed fighters scrambled. Too late. Best guesses (and some moderately credible wreckage found in the 1980s) indicate Snark 53-8172 had a Brazilian beach vacation on its bucket list.

The same length as a Vickers Wellington Mk. IC.

  1. IAI Heron/Super Heron

Thanks to a suite of sensors and data links the Heron trades in information. It is also built for those with patience. A Heron can spend over fifty hours in the air. As drone systems proliferate the Heron has found a ready export market. These particular machines are operated by several European nations, mid-level powers like Australia and Canada, and emerging powers including Turkey, India and Brazil. Nobody in this unbalanced, overheated world seems to be free of the need for this type of machine now. From combat missions to border patrol and resource monitoring it seems just a matter of who can afford what model. Like the other post-9/11 machines here the Heron emphasises lower operating costs than crewed jet fighters and large patrol aircraft.

The same length as two McDonnell XF-85 Goblins

  1. QB- & QF- series target drone conversions

The Pentagon is unmatched for the sheer diversity and number of aircraft it has employed over the years. What to do with aging, obsolescent ones? Transfer to reserve units or client state air forces are options. Longer term storage, parts donation and scrapping also happens. The most exciting use for aging warbirds is as raw material for a multi-decade target conversion program. You could stock a respectable museum with the type list blown to pieces over the sea and the desert ranges to keep America’s fighter pilots and weapon designers on form. Read it and weep (or at least enjoy the videos): F6F Hellcat, QB-17 Flying Fortress, QF-9 Cougar, QT-33 Shooting Star, QB-47 Stratojet, QF-86 Sabre, QF-100 Super Sabre, QF-102 and PQM-102 Delta Dagger, QF-104 Starfighter, QF-106 Delta Dart, QF-4 Phantom II, QF-16 Fighting Falcon.

Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. part of the famous American Kennedy family, was killed when the BQ-8 (a B-24 converted to a remote control flying bomb) aircraft he was piloting accidentally exploded over East Suffolk, England.

The same length as before conversion.

  1. General Atomics MQ-1 Predator & MQ-9 Reaper

If the United States seems to dominate this list it is perhaps because America, well, looks to dominate the world. Dominion doesn’t come cheap, mind you. Overlapping strategic commitments and endless warfare in Eurasia and Africa drive the cost, complexity and variety of weapon systems the world’s only superpower throws at its problems. Drones are not immune to this process of ratcheting up costs. Long endurance missions in the face of very little meaningful opposition typify the working day of these platforms. With their economical turbine (MQ-9) and piston-engine (MQ-1) powerplants and straight glider-like wings they orbit relentlessly above contested places all over the globe. The Reaper is a bigger improved version of the Predator with a much larger warload and greater endurance.

One has a ‘Y’ shaped tail and the other a ‘^’ though I can’t recall which is which. Neither are related to the Planet Satellite.

Enormous amounts of data stream to and from these machines justifying decisions to unleash precision-guided munitions. Just wait until the world’s large, urban police departments get their hands on such things, let alone terrorists.

The same length as a Lockheed P-38 Lightning.

  1. Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk

Whatever our cares about the ethics of drone warfare, the drones really are here to stay. Coming of age in the era of US president Barack Obama the Global Hawk is the Rolls-Royce of asymmetrical, endless warfare. It’s a high-endurance, subsonic platform for all kinds of sensors. In a complicated, post-9/11 world in which a single superpower operates globally this is what you get. A contrast to the Aerosonde I in size and the Snark in brains? Yes.

MiG-21bis

The same length as a Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21bis

  1. AAI Aerosonde I The first unmanned aerial vehicle to fly across the Atlantic. Not bad for such a little thing. ‘Standing’ in aviation history beside Alcock and Brown’s lumbering Vickers Vimy. An Aerosonde I weighs about thirty pounds when loaded for takeoff. Its powerplant is a one-and-three-quarter horsepower, single-cylinder unit sourced from the radio-controlled model airplane industry. The Aerosonde I was designed in the late 1990s in Australia as a civilian weather data gathering platform. It flies directly into typhoons and hurricanes all the time.

The same length as Kate Moss lying on a sofa.

  1. Ryan Model 147/AQM-34 Firebee

The Firebees are an entire family of unmanned aerial vehicles. They have gone everywhere and done everything drones can. Fast jets with rockets and then missiles needed realistic targets to spar with, hence the Firebee. Reconnaissance and electronic warfare grew ever more important as the Cold War ground on and the Firebees were found fit for more active jobs than just getting shot down by their own side for practice. These machines made a remarkable evolutionary journey becoming more sophisticated and capable. Communist China even copied the Firebee. Firebees saw wide-ranging action during the Vietnam war. Little of this is widely remembered now but Firebees flew decoy missions, did photo reconnaissance work and dropped guided munitions for years in that unhappy conflict. Firebee crews could sometimes get beyweem forty to sixty successful missions from a single example.

The same length as a Cessna 140.

We sell fantastic high quality aviation-themed gifts here

  1. Grumman X-47B

The stealthy X-47B was the first unmanned combat aerial vehicle to land on an aircraft carrier. Trials found the X-47B compatible with operations on the big USN fleet carriers including catapult launches and arrested landings. The X-47B has a wingspan of just over sixty feet and is turbofan-powered. It offers strong hints as to the future of military aviation, naval or otherwise. While it doesn’t appear the world’s largest and richest war makers are fully ready for unmanned warplanes it must be impossible for them to ignore the success of programmes like this one. Some of the gains made by the sleek X-47B are apparently being rolled into an air-to-air refuelling drone project.

The same length as a Grumman TBF Avenger.

  1. Kratos XQ-58A Valkyrie

With a dynamic appearance and name befitting an evil alien overlord, the Kratos XQ-58A Valkyrie is a secretive USAF sixth generation drone project. Generally comparable to the EADS Barracuda and Sukhoi Su-70, the Valkyrie is a technology demonstrator engineered for stealth and utilising very powerful digital systems. Touted for the Valkyrie is a ”wingman” role. This would involve a sortie with a manned aircraft that could also carry the Valkyrie aloft initially. The drone would then break toward a higher risk objective, sparing the manned controller aircraft the dangers of the ‘hot zone’ . Such a servant would also have a protective role to play if its master came under attack. The Valkyrie is one entrant in the Pentagon’s Skyborg program of attritable (damn right spellcheck will underline that) and affordable unmanned warplanes. Watch this space.

Times are hard so we understand if you can’t afford to support this site. But if you can, please donate here to keep this site going. You can really help. Even the cost of a pint a month can do wonders!

The same length as a Westland Lysander Mk.III.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here.

  1. Radioplane OQ- & TDD- series

We owe the first mass production, pure pilotless designs to Reginald Denny. Denny was an ex-pat English actor and Royal Flying Corps veteran. Between gigs in Los Angeles one sunny day he was distracted by a buzzing sound. Denny discovered the noise was the thimble engine on a neighbourhood boy’s toy plane.

Denny was also a champion amateur boxer

Denny’s vision of industrial scale remote control aircraft stemmed from that encounter and would prove very successful. Over 15,000 Radioplanes were built between 1939 and the early 1950s. In a connection back to the world of acting Denny’s firm was Marilyn Monroe’s employer during California’s great wartime aviation boom. Further infusing Hollywood glamour to those days is the fact that actor Hedy Lamarr separately advanced unpiloted flying. During the war, Lamarr was the co-inventor of frequency hopping. A technology that would later make WiFi and global positioning systems possible.

The same length as a Stits SA-2A Sky Baby (OQ-2).

  1. SF Express FH-98

A hundred years of pilotlessness takes us full circle from the Queen Bee to another biplane. The FH-98 is a cargo drone version of the Shijiazhuang Y-5B agricultural aircraft. Another edition of the eternal Antonov An-2. Industry giant SF Express is China’s number two freight and courier services firm. They deftly chose the Y-5B platform for its reliability, short field performance and the fact it can haul a ton and a half of cargo. Brained up with the latest tech for unpiloted errands the FH-98 made its first deliveries of perishable foodstuffs in the summer of 2020. Cargo service to island locations and between agricultural sites and large cities is envisioned.

Here’s a new thing! An exclusive Hush-Kit newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. Hot aviation gossip, opinion, warplane technology updates, madcap history and other insights from the world of aviation by @Hush_Kit Sign up here

The same length as a Fairey Albacore.

Flying & Fighting in Mirage IV: Interview with French nuclear bomber pilot

Weighing in at 33 and a half tons, capable of rocket-assisted take-offs, with a top speed of Mach 2.2 — and the ability to deliver a nuclear holocaust — few aircraft were as exciting as the Mirage IV strategic bomber. Combining hideous lethality with graceful lines, this Cold War warrior served France from 1964 to 2005. We spoke to former Mirage IV pilot Jean Copponnex to find out more.

“During a low-altitude bombing mission, an engine failure forced me to give the order to abandon the plane while we were at ultra-low over the sea and scorching along at 600 knots!”

What were your first impressions of the Mirage IV?

The largest armed warplane in the French Air Force, the plane could not be more impressive! Twice the size of the Mirage III, with an internal fuel capacity allowing for more than two hours of autonomy, the possibility of flying at Mach 2 for several tens of minutes and refuelling in flight. This plane was really revolutionary for a Mirage III pilot.

“Rare, unofficial confrontations with real fighters have shown that the Mirage IV probably would have been a formidable fighter.”

What was the best thing about it?

THIS STORY HAS BEEN MOVED TO OUR LOVELY NEW SUBSTACK, READ THE WHOLE STORY HERE

New X-plane Aurora CRANE announced for DARPA: Our analysis

Hush-Kit has asked me to write an analysis piece about a new programme which has just been announced by Aurora Flight Sciences. The plan is to develop a novel configuration which uses active flow control (AFC) to provide a flight control system for the demonstrator, without using moving control surfaces. The project is under contract to the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency, DARPA, as part of their Control of Revolutionary Aircraft with Novel Effectors (CRANE) effort.


The technology is of interest as part of the technology path towards extremely low-observable aircraft. Moving control surfaces cannot be incorporated in the design of such aircraft without the introduction of gaps, edges, actuators and support structures, all of which can introduce discontinuities, edges and gaps, increasing the signature, even when the air vehicle is flying straight and level, and control effectors are not being used. The deflection of control surfaces required to manoeuvre stealthy air vehicles can be quite large, and can generate undesirable and detectable radar returns.

F-35 showing extreme elevon deflection, Avalon Air Show 2019


The first phase (Phase 0) will examine mission applications in which AFC technologies would be useful, and the programme will then go on to develop, in Phase 1, a design for an X-plane demonstrator exploiting AFC, and presumably able to demonstrate the benefits of such a technology in relevant mission scenarios, informed by the Phase 0 studies.
The exemplar used in the Aurora press release to illustrate the concept is a wind tunnel model of a joined wing concept, with blended body and a diamond planform. The model has no vertical fin, and no conventional control surfaces are visible.

Attractions of joined wing concepts (according to my 1977 MPhil thesis on the topic) include an inherently strong structure with both forward and aft swept lifting surfaces which, being joined at the tips, results in low structure weight for a given stiffness Other advantages include a wide range of centre of gravity; predictable behaviour at the stall; and low rolling inertia.


A range of active flow control technologies might be used, including circulation control exploiting the Coanda effect, or by the use of air jets or suction to manipulate the boundary layer. The Coanda effect has been described by its inventor, Henri Coanda, as “the tendency of a jet of fluid emerging from an orifice to follow an adjacent flat or curved surface and to entrain fluid from the surroundings so that a region of lower pressure develops”.


This technique has been investigated (by Dr R V (Ron) Smith, among others), and shown to be capable of generating large, and controllable, forces which might be used for control and lift augmentation purposes. The diagram below shows the flow around an aerofoil with an air blowing system providing very high lift. The principle has been successfully applied in the development of the MD900 helicopter, where the tail boom is used as a Coanda device, replacing the tail rotor.

Diagram of flow around an Aerofoil with Coanda-effect flap. Source: Flight Handbook edited by Bill Gunston (1962 edition)



In its objective, the Aurora demonstrator, has much in common with the BAE Systems and Cranfield University Demon UAV, which has demonstrated controlled flight without the use of conventional moving control surfaces. The Demon was developed as a demonstrator for the flapless air vehicle integrated industrial research (FLAVIIR) programme. It was used successfully in 2010 in a flight demonstration in which its conventional flight control surfaces were disabled, and control was maintained using a combination of Coanda flow control and a thrust-vectoring nozzle.
The Demon uses a diamond-shaped wing planform, but unlike the Aurora wind tunnel model, hr Demon has a one-piece wing, rather than having joined front and rear wing components.

While BAE have pointed to potential civilian applications for the circulation control systems embodied in Demon, it seems clear to me that the driving interest behind both the DARPA/Aurora and BAE programmes is the reduction in signature of future combat aircraft.

Times are hard so we understand if you can’t afford to support this site. But if you can, please donate here to keep this site going. You can really help. Even the cost of a pint a month can do wonders!


It is no coincidence that almost all schematic illustrations of future Gen 6 fighters have no vertical tail fins. The technologies being investigated in the CRANE and FLAVIIR programmes are clearly an enabling step to the development of ELO aircraft.

Cue sound clip – Roll Over Beethoven by the ELO. 

-–– Jim Smith

I hope my answers will satisfy you and thank you for your interest in our world of “Chasse B …”,
dedicated methods and reserved for insiders.
Jean Copponnex

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here.

The greatest aircraft of the IAF, part 2: Hawker Hurricane by K S Nair

Credit: IAF

The Hawker Hurricane was, quite simply, the numerically most significant aircraft type flown on operations by the Indian Air Force (IAF) during the Second World War. Eight of the nine IAF squadrons which saw action during WW2 flew it for extended periods on operations. By mid-1942, when the Indian Air Force first got their hands on the Hurricane (or their feet on its rudder pedals), it was certainly not representative of the most modern aircraft that the Allied air arms were operating, even for the Burma Front. But it was still a massively important weapon system for the Empire and its allies. And the period when the IAF operated it was an important marker in the development of the Indian Air Force. Almost all Hurricanes operated by the IAF were second-hand or third-hand machines which had been previously used in England, Malta, or by the Desert Air Force, the tactical force that supported the North African campaign. The approach of equipping IAF units with aircraft types that were being discarded by regular RAF units was, by design or chance, to remain a standard until late 1945. It was entirely in line with long-standing Indian Army policy, of equipping Indian sepoys with older models of muskets, and later of rifles, which British units were discarding. Indian fighter-reconnaissance and fighter-bomber units were equipped, and took on the Imperial Japanese Army Air Force, with Hawker Hurricanes, at the same time that RAF units with the same tasks were receiving the far more prestigious Supermarine Spitfires. Undoubtedly there were some rational arguments for this policy. Prioritising the most modern equipment for the units most likely to confront the most modern adversaries, realistic assessment of the abilities of colonial units to make best use of the equipment, and constraints on training: these arguments all have some validity. But IAF crews, fresh from operating Westland Lysanders during the First Burma campaign, were quite pleased to be promoted to Hurricanes. By contemporary accounts they put enormous effort into keeping the aircraft in as good condition as possible in the circumstances. And their mastery of the machine prepared them for the Spitfires and Tempests they would soon be operating. The Hurricane, for all its production and operational history, never quite measured up to the Spitfire in mythology; but in difficult environments such as North Africa and the China-Burma-India theatre, it proved to be more robust and able to withstand extreme heat, dust and cold, than most other aircraft of its class. Its older materials and construction methods meant that it was easy and quick to produce, and simple to repair in the field. The wide-set main undercarriage legs made it easy to land and stable to taxi even on rough fields. It was flown in Yugoslavia, South Africa and the Sudan even before the Battle of Britain, demonstrating its ability to perform in extremely varied environments. Burma and India were in fact the last theatre in which Hurricanes were used in significant numbers as first-line fighters. The Hurricane served in virtually all Indian Air Force combat roles with distinction – fighter, bomber, ground-attack, reconnaissance, and army co-operation among them. Something like twenty of the two dozen-odd DFCs received by IAF personnel, including to such icons as later Marshal of the IAF Arjan Singh, went to Hurricane pilots. Because of its robustness and simplicity it was also used for numerous other applications – combined operations, despatch delivery, meteorological reconnaissance, radar calibration. It was also used in India for roles for which it was never intended – including anti-malarial and crop-protection spraying. It served with the IAF for only about four years. By 1946, immediately after the War’s end, there were so many surplus late-mark Spitfires available in theatre that Hurricane units were able to convert to the Spitfire, or in some cases to the Tempest quite soon after the end of the War. But its status, as the most widely-flown IAF combat aircraft of the Second World War, goes well beyond the years it served. It should be remembered as an IAF classic.

K S Nair is the author of two books and over 70 articles on the Indian Air Force and other developing country air arms.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here.

Saying goodbye to the British Airways’ Boeing 747 with pilot Lyndsay McGregor (with incredible photos from Rich Cooper)

Rich Cooper/COAP

One moody day in October the ‘Queen of the Skies’ landed for the final time. We spoke to 747 pilot Lyndsay McGregor about the aircraft and her feelings on saying goodbye to this majestic machine.

Which three words best describe the 747? Iconic, majestic, recognisable.

Best and worst things about the aircraft? Best: It’s versatility. Freight, people, military, civil, telescopes, laser beams and space shuttles all in and out of a normal size airport.

Credit: Lyndsay McGregor

Worst: Fuel efficiency and environmental impact. In its day it was amazing but today’s big twins show the 747 is past its prime.

Unlike the 380, the 747 has huge cargo capacity which can make for some really interesting ‘passengers’. As well as the standard dog and cat, it’s been know to transport F1 race cars, horses, exotic animals and tons of bees!

Rich Cooper/COAP

How would you rate it in the following categories:

Ease of flying

7/10. The 747 in comparison to the newer fly-by-wire jets is conventional and requires more ‘piloting’. Controlling the speed with the thrust levers, manual trimming and a large control wheel is not much different to flying a 707 back in the 1950s.

Credit: Lyndsay McGregor

Passenger comfort

6/10. Despite its low cabin altitude, the 747’s air conditioning system don’t compare favourably to modern systems. After long flights the dry atmosphere can make you feel dehydrated. Most 747’s cabins are beginning to show their age and the design of the overhead lockers tend to close the cabin in. But, the 747 is still the private airliner of choice for the rich and famous with plenty of room for your banqueting table, comms suite and lazy boy chairs!

Ease of landing 9/10. The large wing means the 747 is forgiving when it comes to landing. Once in ground effect, get it just right and it will reward you with the smoothest of landings. In strong crosswinds you need to bring your ‘A’ game as even after touching down you have to ‘fly the wing’ as you decelerate to avoid scraping a low-hanging outer engine.

Reliability. 10/10 Joe Sutter, the 747’s designer wanted the Jumbo to be the safest jet in the sky. He engineered systems that were both highly reliable and had plenty of back-up. This redundancy means that failure after failure can occur without compromising the integrity of the flight.

Credit: Lyndsay McGregor

Pilot comfort 10/10 The flight deck is smaller than it’s big twin sisters, it’s noisy as we fly so quickly, and well designed with a few nice touches such as cup holders, foot warmers and an ensuite! I was going to give it 7/10 with 1 point lost for no tray table, another for non electrical seat adjustment and another for temperature control on a hot day, but you can look down on every other jet at the airport and so that alone gets full marks!

Aesthetics

Rich Cooper/COAP

10/10. Recognisable from any direction, the 747 pulls off the trick of being huge and beautiful. In plan form those 37.5 degrees of sweep give it a retro look.

Cockpit displays

7/10. The round dial ‘Classics’ were a marvel; some had mechanical vertical tape engine instruments. The -400 has CRT displays with double the display area of the 767 but they are a few generations behind the technology in the 787s and 350s.

Bill Withers used to fit 747 toilets for Boeing

Agility

Rich Cooper/COAP

7/10 I wouldn’t say the 747 is particularly agile, I would compare her to a cruise liner rather than a speed boat. That said, when flying her, she is very responsive especially in roll – and turns with such elegance.

Climb rate

10/10. With four Rb211 engines punching out 56,000lbs of thrust per engine its climb rate can be awesome.

Top speed

Rich Cooper/COAP

9/10 Due to its swept wing, the 747 can comfortably achieve cruising speeds in the region of Mach .85. It’s great racing other jets home across the Atlantic and winning!

Tell me something I don’t know about the 747:

Bill Withers used to fit 747 toilets for Boeing or; Nobody thought that the 747 would be a success or; A 747 was fitted with a super high-powered laser as the YAL-1 to shoot down nuclear missiles in flight.

We sell fantastic high quality aviation-themed gifts here

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is screenshot-2020-11-17-at-18.09.00.png

What is the biggest myth about the 747?

Rich Cooper/COAP

That you have to be big and manly to fly such a large aircraft

How did you feel about its final BA flight, what was it like?

Her final flight felt like the end of an era and I was disappointed due to the weather on the day, she didn’t get the send-off she deserved. Whilst sad, it’s a reminder of how aviation is a progressive industry with newer technology and more efficient jets. I felt very proud to have been a part of her legacy and doubt that few airliners will hold the title of ‘Queen of the Skies’.

What was your first flight at the controls like?

Rich Cooper/COAP @coaphoto on Twitter @richcooperuk on Insta

It was such a rush and I couldn’t decide if I was excited, nervous or a mixture of the two! I had never flown a Boeing before let alone the 747 and I will never forget the rumble of the four RB211 engines spool up as we took off on our way to Cape Town. It felt like all the hard work, commitment and sacrifices made through my career had built up to that one moment

Which aircraft will you return to after maternity leave, and how do you feel about the prospect?

Rich Cooper/COAP

I am excited and looking forward to returning to work. Whilst I am kept (very) busy during the day, it will be good to have some sort of structure and normality back to my routine. My hope is to return to the A350 or 787 as I enjoy the lifestyle and operational complexities of long haul operations. Whatever type I fly I know it will come as a shock to the system when I have to engage my brain again and start learning!

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here

Do you have personal preference for Boeings or Airbuses, if so why?

Rich Cooper/COAP

I started my career on the Airbus and spent the first 7 years on the A320 family, so its the jet I feel the most comfortable and at home with. That said, I have enjoyed the Boeing as it feels like a ‘real aircraft’ to fly and I find the manuals and Quick Reference Handbook easier to navigate. When people ask, it’s much cooler to say you fly the Boeing 747, but the Airbus does have a tray table, which makes it a tough call. All things considered, Boeing wins the day

3 reasons why a 747 is better than an A380

Looks. The 747 looks majestic in the sky. When you see her turn it’s with such poise and elegance and the A380, well, you don’t quite get the same vibe.

Convenience. The 747 is nicknamed the ‘ensuite fleet’ as the flightdeck has its own toilet and bunks. You can access all of the home comforts without leaving the fight deck.

Cargo. Unlike the 380, the 747 has huge cargo capacity which can make for some really interesting ‘passengers’. As well as the standard dog and cat, it’s been know to transport F1 race cars, horses, exotic animals and tons of bees!

How would you summarise the BA career of the 747 and its historical importance?

BA really spans the full life of the 747, from joint launch customer of the -100 (as BOAC), to Combis, to launching the -400 in 1989, to losing one to mortar fire in the invasion of Kuwait, to being the largest operator of the 747 for most of its operational life. There were even 747-8Fs in BA colours operated by GSS. For years the 747 was the workhorse of the airline, giving BA its famous ‘billion dollar route’.

Farewell to the ‘Queen of the Skies’ Rich Cooper/COAP @coaphoto on Twitter @richcooperuk on Insta

The greatest aircraft of the Indian Air Force, Part 1: The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 by KS Nair

In the first of our celebrations of the most significant aircraft of the Indian Air Force we’ll look at the MiG-21. Fast, agile and extremely manoeuvrable, this Soviet ‘pocket rocket’ has served for almost 80% of India’s history as an independent nation.

“I once flew a DACT mission against two MiG-29s, I didn’t engage them in a turning fight. I kept my fight vertical and got two kills.” -–– Group Captain MJA Vinod (full interview here)

The Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21 was first inducted into the Indian Air Force (IAF) in 1963. That was fifty-seven years ago, and the induction was of six aircraft. In the nearly six decades since then, the IAF has flown something approaching nine hundred examples of the type. And three-quarters of that number were built in India. On that basis alone, it is one of the most important Indian warplanes. The acquisition was transformational for the IAF, and in some ways beyond the IAF, for India. For a sense of where the transformation began, for the first ten years after Independence, India had genuine financial incentives to source imports from the UK. Hence the acquisitions of Tempests, Vampires, Hunters and Gnats. By the late 1950s India was seeing value in diversifying its sources of weaponry. Hence that initial batch of six Soviet MiG-21s. The MiG-21 was the first major non-Western weapon system India ever acquired. It was a huge change, going far beyond the language of the manuals. The Soviets had completely different design philosophies and combat doctrines, so completely different maintenance and operational practices.

In what would have been a case study in the private sector, the IAF made a conscious decision to acquire the technology – but to not adopt the procedures and tactics. The IAF planned from the start to use MiG-21s the way Western air forces use their interceptors; in independent squadrons, mobile between bases operating other types as well. This was different from Soviet / Warsaw Pact practice, of operating in regiments, about two or three times the size of a squadron, and generally operating one regiment of a single type from a base. Simplifying somewhat, this was also substantially the way the Luftwaffe had operated in WW2 – their deployable unit was the Gruppe, not the Staffel.

Here’s a new thing! An exclusive Hush-Kit newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. Hot aviation gossip, opinion, warplane technology updates, madcap history and other insights from the world of aviation by @Hush_Kit Sign up here

Support Hush-Kit with our high quality aviation themed merchandise here

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is screenshot-2020-11-18-at-14.18.18.png

The IAF used the MiG-21, and other Soviet hardware later, in ways their designers had never intended. The Soviets, planning for massive continent-wide land battles, built and deployed the MiG-21, as they did most of their military kit, in vast numbers, intending to stockpile them at different locations throughout Central Europe. They were essentially disposable assets, to be abandoned after a short cycle of intense operations. Operating life in war would have been measured in days, or at most weeks. India needed different ancillary equipment, maintenance schedules, and much else.

Save the Hush-Kit blog. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations keep this going. Thank you. 

When she procured the MiG-21, initially largely as a response to Pakistan’s acquisition of F-104 Starfighters, they were considered high-value assets, to be husbanded and carefully used primarily against those Starfighters. This use imposed different maintenance needs, quite different from the Soviet. The IAF developed maintenance processes, schedules for replacing parts, spares inventory requirements, geared in ways the Soviets had never planned for. In the acid test, the MiG-21 met Indian expectations in combat. In Indian hands it outfought some Western types, including USAF F-15s during one of the first exercises with them. The unique ways the IAF operated the MiG-21 were a product of unique times and circumstances.

Many of them have now changed, and the IAF is able, and recognised for its ability, to mix and match technologies from different sources. This makes for less than optimal fleet management and inventory constraints, certainly – but it does say something about Indian ingenuity and jugaad. Some difficulties notwithstanding, particularly during the disruption of spares supplies in the 1990s, a new generation of Indian aviators still fly the MiG-21. They include some of the first few Indian women combat pilots. At a time when more modern types are in the news, we might remember that India has used MiG-21s on a scale that even their designers didn’t think of.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR K S Nair has written two books, most recently The Forgotten Few, and about 70 articles on the Indian Air Force and military issues in developing countries. His next book, to be published by HarperCollins in 2021, will cover the 1971 war between India and Pakistan, during which the MiG-21 came into its own.

The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here.

In the cockpit with real Topgun instructor: Dave ‘Bio’ Baranek takes us for a brief history of fighter cockpits, F-106 to F-35

Super Hornet cockpit

Flying twice as fast as an AR15 round and capable of pulling G forces that leave pilots with the same painful lack of mobility as if they weighed an actual ton, a fighter aircraft asks a lot of its pilot.

Fighting and surviving in such a hostile environment requires lightning-fast assimilation and response to a mass of information. Not only this, but today most fighters are multi-role and are tasked with destroying both air and surface targets. This is possible thanks to the wonder of the modern cockpit. We asked former Topgun instructor and F-14 Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) Dave ‘Bio’ Baranek to give us the lowdown. Let’s slam the canopy shut and take a flight through 65 years of cockpit design.

“Sixty-five years seems like a long time, but the F-106 Delta Dart with which I start could be a threat today if still operational. And its near-contemporary, the F-4 Phantom, is still in service with five countries.

I was a Topgun instructor and an F-14 RIO, but for this article I’ll move into the front seat and look at instrumentation and controls. This is not an exhaustive survey, but a look at representative types that I selected. I’ll address the earliest version of each type because later developments had more to do with technical advancements than the state of aircraft design. Imagine a Spitfire Mk 24 with a podded radar, helmet mounted cueing system, and ASRAAM – with the controls and displays to support it all – and you get the idea.

“ICS check.” “Loud and clear.” “Okay, let’s get going.”

F-106A Delta Dart (first flight: 1956). I chose the F-106 to start because it is a memorable aircraft design of the 1950s. As a latter century series aircraft, I will argue it was part of the beginning of modern fighters. The Delta Dart was called a development of the F-102, but is significantly improved. In fact, the F-102 cockpit looks like something out of a hobbyist’s basement, while the -106 looks like a fairly modern fighter/interceptor, at least before the dawn of glass cockpits. The tape instruments add a modern touch, and the fact that it’s single-engine allows the panel to be less cluttered than dual engine types. I’ve read that the procedure to select weapons was “cumbersome” and would be difficult to accomplish under combat conditions. Such realisations were sweeping the aviation industry and led to modern HOTAS cockpits.

As a teenager I met a pilot who flew F-106s in the Florida Air National Guard, based in my hometown, and he arranged for me to fly their simulator during one of my visits to watch them fly. I was pretty excited, and to my surprise discovered that I was able to avoid crashing – with a lot of coaching from the simulator control console. The moving map display in front of the control stick was cool, it seemed futuristic in the 1970s. 

F-4B front cockpit

F-4B and F-4C Phantom II (first flights: 1961, 1963, respectively). I selected early Phantoms to help form a baseline, and the pilot instrument panel is similar to the F-106 in level of complexity. With a back-seater to handle the radar, the F-4 didn’t need a two-headed stick like the F-106. One element that doesn’t show up in the cockpit photos is the relatively poor outside visibility of both of these early aircraft; it just wasn’t a priority. But at least the F-4 pilot had a head up display (HUD), while the F-106 pilot had a large radar scope in front of his face. The Phantom HUD was likely deemed essential to its strike-fighter role.

F-14A Tomcat (first flight: 1970)

As a former Tomcat RIO I did not spend much time in the front seat, only a few sessions in simulators, and to keep the playing field level I am basing these comments on cockpit photos. I like the arrangement of critical flight instruments in an upper tier, with engine instruments and a situation display below them. The stick and throttle have numerous switches and buttons supporting HOTAS. The forward control panel looks relatively simple compared to the contemporary F-15A (which I am not evaluating), which can be at least partly attributed to the Tomcat having a rear cockpit for armament control switches and other controls. (F-15A first flight: 1972) The F-14A pilot’s primary tactical display was a repeat of the RIO’s TID, so crew coordination was important.  The F-14A HUD was helpful in some situations but most pilots decided it wasn’t that good: when it displayed all info it was cluttered and not what a pilot really wanted, and in the declutter mode it didn’t display very much. This was finally fixed in the F-14D, which got an improved HUD. The large canopy provided excellent visibility, which was one of many lessons from Vietnam air combat incorporated into the F-14.

Support Hush-Kit with our high quality aviation themed merchandise here

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is screenshot-2020-11-18-at-14.18.18.png
This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is hk3.jpg

F-16A Fighting Falcon (1974)

A relatively uncluttered cockpit for a multi-role fighter, can be attributed to factors such as single-engine, limited air-to-air radar in the A-model, and emphasis on the HUD, as well as good design, of course. The monochrome tactical display is low and centred, with primary flight instruments immediately above. Cockpit visibility was outstanding due to the lack of a canopy windscreen bow and high-mounted seat. The side-mounted control stick pioneered in the F-16 has become familiar on other modern fighters and some commercial aircraft.

Su-27 ‘Flanker B’ (1977)

Approximately similar to the F-14 and Tornado in terms of visual complexity, with a major difference: no video screen in the centre. Some images show a video screen to the right side of the control panel. Lack of a tactical overview display seems to me a reduction in situational awareness, even if the pilot is using a helmet-mounted display (the early Flanker pilot had a rudimentary helmet cueing system rather than a display). Equipped with the now-standard HUD and HOTAS. The high seating position and bubble canopy provide excellent visibility. The cockpit looks less cluttered than the MiG-29, which also had first flight in 1977, probably because the bigger size provides more real estate for displays and controls.

Here’s a new thing! An exclusive Hush-Kit newsletter delivered straight to your inbox. Hot aviation gossip, opinion, warplane technology updates, madcap history and other insights from the world of aviation by @Hush_Kit Sign up here

Tornado F3 (ADV; first flight: 1979). This is another pilot cockpit that benefits from being able to shift some controls and switches to the back seat. The F3 instrument panel is uncluttered, and features two medium-size video screens (I’ve seen smaller), one directly in front of the pilot. HOTAS – check … HUD – check, with extra points for wide angle … and of course there’s the wingsweep controller. The more I look at it, the more I like the neat and well-organised layout. One reason is the gauges are one of three sizes; in many American fighter cockpits each instrument seems to have a unique size. Tornado is probably one of the best cockpits before “glass” took over and gave us MFDs. Tornado also has a generous canopy, although it doesn’t have the 360-degree view of other fighters.

Save the Hush-Kit blog. If you’ve enjoyed an article you can donate here. Your donations keep this going. Thank you. 

Reader, from this point forward, please assume a HUD and HOTAS. They are now as standard as the wheel-shaped landing gear handle on the left side, as common as black and yellow stripes in a fighter cockpit. In addition, the remaining aircraft have multi-function displays instead of analogue instruments.

Rafale (first flight of Rafale C: 1991). Hard to believe it has been around 30 years since its first flight! The cockpit still looks modern and uncluttered. This is possibly due to the control stick being on the right side instead of central. The throttle has display image controls, ensuring a strong finish in the battle for who has the most HOTAS buttons. The wide-angle HUD, bigger than on previous aircraft, has to be a welcome development for almost any mission. The central screen is a ‘Head Level Display’ in Dassault terminology: larger than the side screens, which improves the pilot’s view of the image from a targeting pod. A large display was something F-14 RIOs enjoyed when viewing LANTIRN on our Tactical Information Display (TID or Programmable TID) compared to other fighter displays of the mid-1990s. The Rafale’s HLD is also focused at a greater distance than the screen’s actual distance from the pilot, which allows the pilot’s eye to remain focused at near infinity whether looking through the HUD or at the HLD, instead of changing focus between infinity and 1 metre. This may not sound significant, but it’s something I learned when I studied HUDs as a college student; a fine point that is very important.

Typhoon (first flight: 1994). To my eye, the Typhoon cockpit doesn’t look as sleek as the Rafale’s, because Typhoon has more controls and the MFDs look more familiar. Typhoon is more spacious, although I must admit Rafale appears adequate. Like the Rafale, the Typhoon also has a wide-angle HUD. These two aircraft are frequently compared, with this Hush-Kit article an excellent example but they have different purposes and strengths. The Typhoon’s multiple MFDs and pilot-tailorable displays look like a great way to display huge volumes of information very effectively. Like Rafale, Typhoon has a voice input system. I know these things are tested extensively before being fielded, so I’ll hope it works well, but based on current voice controls I am suspicious. Typhoon also has the benefit of a mature helmet display/cueing system, something only just entering the Rafale community (for at least one export customer).

An F/A-18 Super Hornet pilot assigned to the “Rampagers” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 83 waves from the cockpit at Naval Air Station Oceana after a regularly scheduled deployment in support of maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts in U.S. 5th and 6th Fleet areas of operations. c. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Mark Thomas Mahmod)

F/A-18E Super Hornet (first flight: 1995). For the purposes of this overview, the Super Hornet cockpit appears similar to the Typhoon – modern and well-organized – with some notable exceptions. First, the Super Hornet doesn’t have a wide-angle HUD. I like the glare shields protruding from the top of the SH panel.

BF-02; Flight 126; LtCol Frederick Schenk; LtCol Scheck performing a STO and VL from the USS Wasp.

F-35 Lightning II (first flight: 2006). The biggest attention-grabber in this cockpit is the single large screen, with touch controls so extensive we see relatively few switches and controls elsewhere in the cockpit. The originator of the big screen was Gene Adam and he was at Macs in St Louis. He was predicting big picture flat screens in aircraft way back when a TV was the size of a camping rucksack.

The biggest attention-grabber is the side-stick location – yet another is the lack of a HUD – replaced by the pilot’s helmet-mounted display (HMD). The F-35 is establishing a new standard for fighter cockpits, with a similar large single display planned for the Gripen NG and Super Hornet Block III upgrade. The designed integration of the large display and the HMD will give F-35 pilots a very high level of situational awareness on any mission. I will complete this review by relating a candid discussion I had with unnamed F-35 pilots, who knew my service background. I felt they would have unloaded if they had any complaints. Instead, they smiled and said the new jet was – “Incredible,” with a big smile. Or maybe it was, “Awesome.”

Before leaving, let me offer a thought, something any aviator can tell you. If you look at these images and think the cockpits look complex, it’s because you don’t have experience in that type. The first time I saw the rear cockpit of an F-14, with dozens of panels and controls, I was stunned. But after completing my training and then flying more frequently (I averaged 39 hours a month my first few months in a fleet squadron in 1981), I realised I was reaching for switches and adjusting controls almost subconsciously. Training will be the key for pilots to employ these cockpits, no matter the design features or flaws.”

Former Topgun instructor and F-14 Radar Intercept Officer (RIO) Dave ‘Bio’ Baranek has a new book out: ‘Tomcat RIO’. It tells the story of his return to the F-14 community after his tour as a Topgun instructor, as well as his eventual command of an F-14 squadron. It includes some of his best stories and unexpected challenges. It is available now in hardcover and e-book versions, and includes more than 50 of his amazing photographs. Here is his website.

Article idea suggested by book pledge supporter Greg Cruz. The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes will feature the finest cuts from Hush-Kit along with exclusive new articles, explosive photography and gorgeous bespoke illustrations. Order The Hush-Kit Book of Warplanes here.

170829-N-NQ487-234 ATLANTIC OCEAN (Aug. 29, 2017) Lt. Neil Armstrong waits in the cockpit of an F/A-18E Super Hornet assigned to the “Knighthawks” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VAW) 211 during flight operations aboard the aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75). Harry S. Truman has successfully completed flight deck certifications and is underway preparing for a tailored ship’s training availability and final evaluation problem. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist Seaman Kaysee Lohmann/Released)