Misplaced Pages

#528471

71-520: Aircraft manufacturing companies of European countries were invited to submit designs, from a short-list of 10 supersonic fighter designs two were chosen as the joint winners, the Hawker Siddeley P.1154 and Dassault Mirage IIIV . Disagreement over the balance between best performance aircraft and one which would benefit the aircraft industry more meant that neither type entered service. Subsonic fighter-bomber designs were also submitted to fulfil

142-467: A Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) action, merging it with two neighboring military bases, McGuire Air Force Base and Fort Dix , it established Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst , New Jersey, the nation's only tri-service installation. Each installation's major support services such as MWR , Legal , medical/dental-clinic , and exchange-services roles transitioned over to either Air Force or joint operation. However, both Lakehurst (and also Fort Dix,

213-514: A VTOL strike-fighter led to widespread industry participation. Hawker felt the P.1150 did not meet the requirements, so it was enlarged to become P.1150/3, and then renamed P.1154. This Mach 2-capable aircraft was the technical winner of the eleven submissions for NBMR-3, with the Dassault Mirage IIIV selected as a second design. Political infighting between the two groups and their various supporters, along with continual changing of

284-684: A bright yellow painted chain, marks the spot where the gondola of the Hindenburg hit the ground. Lakehurst conducts the unique mission of supporting and developing the Aircraft Launch and Recovery Equipment and Support Equipment for naval aviation. Since the 1950s, aviation boatswain's mates have been trained at Lakehurst to operate catapults and arresting systems on aircraft carriers using rail guided jet donkeys pushing dead loads at 200 knots tested carrier arresting gear cables and tailhooks . The Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System and

355-495: A horizontal distance of 500 ft (150 m). The Fiat (now Aeritalia) G.222 was only adopted by Italy but is still in service, the Dornier Do 31 reached flight testing status but did not enter service. The new aircraft types required advanced lift jet engines with high thrust-to-weight ratios , development programmes for new powerplants employing vectored thrust or vertically mounted pure lift engines ran concurrently with

426-401: A new generation of combat aircraft that would be capable of supersonic speeds. Unfortunately, despite repeated attempts to revive the program, the in-development Hawker P.1121 fighter would ultimately be left unfinished, principally due to a lack of a political support for development following the release of the 1957 Defence White Paper by Minister of Defence Duncan Sandys . Recognising

497-448: A project to produce a suitable VTOL engine; this engine combined major elements of their Olympus and Orpheus jet engines to produce a directable fan jet . The projected fan jet harnessed rotatable cold jets which were positioned on either side of the compressor along with rotatable 'hot' jets which was directed via a bifurcated tailpipe. With a suitable engine already being developed, Camm and his team at HSA proceeded to develop

568-402: A separate control tower and pavement-mounted catapults and arresting gear for testing aircraft-carrier suitability of new naval aircraft and new flight-deck systems – is located approximately a mile to the northwest. Lakehurst is home to Naval Air Warfare Center (NAWC) Aircraft Division, Lakehurst , which is the largest command on the field, followed by Fleet Logistics Squadron 64 , operating

639-404: A supersonic V/STOL strike fighter with a combat radius of 460 kilometres (250 nmi). Cruise speed was to be Mach 0.92, with a dash speed of Mach 1.5. The aircraft, with a 910-kilogram (2,000 lb) payload, had to be able to clear a 15-metre (50 ft) obstacle following a 150-metre (500 ft) takeoff roll. Victory in this competition was viewed being of a high importance at

710-573: A supersonic VTOL aircraft. These aircraft all used a multiple engines configuration like the Mirage IIIV, and not the single vectored thrust turbofan of the likes of the BS.100 and Pegasus which went on to great success in the Harrier. Wood described the overall situation as: "From start to finish the P.1154 programme was a story of delay, ministerial interference and indecision... the P.1150 would now be

781-536: A supersonic derivative of the P.1127 under the guidance of Ralph Hooper. This would result in a new design, designated P.1150 , which was 50% larger than the preceding P.1127; it was proposed that a new performance-enhancing feature be adopted in the form of the plenum chamber burning (PCB) – similar to an afterburner, but acting only on the bypass air that discharged through the front nozzles. The P.1150 proposal broadly resembled its P.1127 predecessor despite major changes being made, including its revised fuselage,

SECTION 10

#1732791493529

852-577: A test range for ammunition being manufactured for the Imperial Russian Army in 1916. It was then acquired by the United States Army as Camp Kendrick during World War I . The United States Navy purchased the property in 1921 for use as an airship station and renamed it Naval Air Station Lakehurst ( NAS Lakehurst ). The United States Navy 's lighter-than-air program was conducted at Lakehurst from its inception through

923-589: A twin- Spey design was considered, then rejected. Following the Labour government 's coming to power the project was cancelled in 1965. The Royal Navy would acquire the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II , while the RAF continued to foster development of the P.1127 (RAF), leading to the successful Harrier family. During the late 1950s, Hawker Siddeley Aviation (HSA) was keen to develop

994-518: Is an amalgamation of its location and the last name of Commander Louis H. Maxfield, who lost his life when the R-38/USN ZR-2 airship crashed during flight on 24 August 1921 near Hull , England. When it was consolidated with McGuire Air Force Base and Fort Dix in October 2009, it became the naval component of JB MDL — a United States Air Force – controlled installation  — and

1065-684: Is the United States Navy element representing USN and USMC entities for the Department of the Navy–specific asset and resources at Joint Base McGuire–Dix–Lakehurst (JB MDL), and administrative control over Naval personnel who are assigned to units that are assigned to the base. When the United States Department of Defense announced that Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst (NAES Lakehurst) would be affected by

1136-593: Is the naval component of Joint Base McGuire–Dix–Lakehurst (JB MDL), a United States Air Force -managed joint base . The airfield is approximately 25 mi (40 km) east-southeast of Trenton in Manchester Township and Jackson Township in Ocean County, New Jersey , United States. It is primarily the home to Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division Lakehurst , although the airfield supports several other flying and non-flying units as well. Its name

1207-905: The Advanced Arresting Gear system that will replace the existing steam catapults and the Mk-7 arresting gear are being developed and tested at Lakehurst at full-scale shipboard representative test facilities here. The former NAS Lakehurst also hosted the U.S. Navy's first helicopter squadrons, HU-1 (later HC-1) and HU-2 (later HC-2); the "A" and "C" enlisted training schools for the Aerographer's Mate (AG), Aviation Boatswain Mate (AB, ABE, ABF, ABH), and Parachute Rigger / Aircrew Survival Equipmentman (PR) ratings until their transfer to other Naval Air Technical Training Centers; and an Overhaul & Repair (O&R) facility for fixed-wing aircraft,

1278-598: The Navy Reserve Force's C-130T Hercules . In addition, the field is host to several CNATTU schools, the New Jersey Army National Guard 's aviation unit, as well as other tenant organisations from Ocean County , the state of New Jersey, United States Air Force , New Jersey Air National Guard , United States Public Health Service and the United States Department of Justice . Naval Support Activity Lakehurst ( NSA Lakehurst )

1349-549: The 1930s. NAS Lakehurst was the center of airship development in the United States and housed three of the U.S. Navy's four rigid airships , (ZR-1) Shenandoah , (ZR-3) Los Angeles , and (ZRS-4) Akron . A number of the airship hangars built to berth these ships still survive. Hangar One , in which the Shenandoah was built, held the record for the largest "single room" in the world. According to an article in

1420-636: The 1950s, the system was adapted for the Lockheed F-104G Starfighter with test launches being carried out in the US and Germany. This concept was not part of NBMR-3 but was an alternative solution to the problem of dispersed field operations. SATS (Short Airfield for Tactical Support) was a related test programme where F-104G aircraft were catapult launched from short land strips and recovered using arrestor gear, test launches were carried out at Lakehurst and Lechfeld in 1966. Neither system

1491-550: The American General Dynamics F-111 multirole program, and had sought to duplicate this development concept for the P.1154. Despite a stated Navy preference for a swing-wing fighter, the services agreed that the aircraft would be completely common, with the exception of different radar systems. However, upon requests by various electronics manufacturers to the Ministry of Aviation to be issued with

SECTION 20

#1732791493529

1562-517: The BS100 had been selected as the powerplant to be used on the P.1154. At this point, the program was envisioned to involve the ordering of a total of 600 aircraft, 400 for the RAF and 200 for the Royal Navy. However, as HSA carried out further work on the detailed design phase of the programme, it was becoming clear that opinions on the internal equipment for the aircraft varied substantially between

1633-571: The German Focke-Wulf aircraft company to collaborate on a joint study that looked into the issue of equipping the P.1150 with two additional lift engines. However, in October 1961, West Germany elected to entirely withdraw from the programme. This was a blow directly felt not only by HSA and the development team, but by the British Air Ministry, who had been also seeking to collaborate with its West German counterparts on

1704-515: The January, 1925 issue of National Geographic , the airship hangar "could house three Woolworth Buildings lying side by side." The base also housed many Navy non-rigid airships, otherwise knowns as "blimps," in several squadrons before, during, and after World War II . This included the U.S. Navy's ZPG-3W (EZ-1C), which was deactivated in September 1962. In 2006, after a 44-year hiatus,

1775-415: The Ministry of Aviation was concerned with the project's progress, and noted that the effort to combine a strike aircraft and a fighter in a single aircraft, and trying to fit that same airframe to both of the services, was "unsound". By October 1963, according to Wood, the situation had become critical and some officials were beginning to examine alternative options, such as conventional fighter aircraft in

1846-551: The NBMR-3 requirement, HSA focused all its attention onto working upon this joint requirement. The services sought different characteristics in their aircraft – the RAF desired a single-seat fighter with secondary intercept capability, while the Fleet Air Arm (FAA) sought a two-seat interceptor capable of secondary low-level strike capability. Accordingly, HSA's submission involved the development of two distinct variants of

1917-565: The P.1154 design to NATO via the Ministry of Aviation . NBMR.3 also attracted ten other contenders, among which was P.1154's principal competitor, the Dassault Mirage IIIV . The Mirage IIIV was supported by British Aircraft Corporation (BAC), and also had the favour of several members of the Air Staff. In May 1962, the P.1154 emerged as the winner in the competition for the NBMR.3. While

1988-462: The P.1154 was judged to be technically superior, the Mirage acquired a greater level of political palatability due to the co-operative development and production aspects proposed for the programme, which spread work across a number of member nations. Protracted political maneuvering by firms and national governments alike was deployed in attempts to secure their respective project's selection. The P.1154

2059-773: The Pegasus engine, the British government were not forthcoming with funding. While HSA chose to go ahead with the P.1127 as a private venture, the Air Staff disagreed heavily over what requirements should be set out for a future RAF VTOL aircraft; some officers, such as the Chief of the Air Staff Sir Thomas Pike , advocated simplicity while others, such as the RAF operational requirements division, sought various performance demands of such an aircraft, particularly

2130-491: The Royal Navy criticised the proposal, which had a tandem undercarriage layout incompatible with catapult operations ; consequently, a tricycle undercarriage design was investigated and accepted as practical. The aircraft would have been armed with the Red Top missile. In November 1962, Rolls-Royce offered a PCB-equipped vectored thrust twin- Spey design as an alternative to the BS100. This alternative engine arrangement

2201-593: The TSR-2 programme, the RAF was satisfied to abandon the P.1154. On 2 February 1965, it was announced that the P.1154 had been terminated on the grounds of cost. At the time of cancellation, at least three prototypes had reached various stages of construction. Following the cancellation, the RAF adopted the F-4 Phantom II (as ordered by the RN) instead; however, the government also issued a contract for continued work on

NBMR-3 - Misplaced Pages Continue

2272-516: The U.S. Navy resumed airship operations at Lakehurst with the MZ-3 . The installation was the site of the LZ 129 Hindenburg disaster on 6 May 1937. Despite the notoriety and well-documented nature of this incident, today there is a simple memorial that denotes the location of the crash at then–NAS Lakehurst in the field behind the large airship hangars on base. A ground marker, painted black, and rimmed by

2343-539: The UK the P.1154 had still found support for meeting the RAF needs and construction was under way on the prototype airframes when the newly elected government cancelled it in 1964 (along with other aircraft projects) on cost grounds. NBMR-3b was the criteria for subsonic V/STOL fighter-bomber aircraft designs, the document was published in December 1961. In February 1962 the committee amended NBMR-3a (supersonic aircraft) to add

2414-622: The VTOL aircraft. Meanwhile, further studies served to confirm fears the P.1150 would be too small to meet customer specifications, so Camm initiated work on an enlarged derivative design. In conjunction with HSA's redesign, Bristol worked to enlarge the original PCB engine and raise the exhaust heat to increase thrust to 146.8 kN (30,000 lbf). It could have theoretically reach speeds of up to Mach 1.7–2. The new, larger aircraft design soon emerged, initially designated P.1150/3 , then redesignated P.1154 . In January 1962, HSA submitted

2485-508: The adoption of a thinner wing, and an advanced version of the Pegasus engine. The Bristol Siddeley BS100 engine was equipped with a similar arrangement of four swivelling exhaust nozzles, the front nozzles of which were to be equipped with PCB. According to aviation author Derek Wood, the P.1150 was to have been capable of Mach 1.3 . In August 1961, NATO released an updated revision of its VTOL strike fighter requirement, NATO Basic Military Requirement 3 ( NBMR-3 ). Specifications called for

2556-520: The advisory committee concentrated on the subsonic fighter-bomber group and gave the VAK 191 designation to four types. The 'zero-length launch system' or 'zero-length take-off system' (ZLL, ZLTO, ZEL, or ZELL) was a system whereby jet fighters and attack aircraft were intended to be fitted with booster rockets and then mounted on mobile launch platforms , the booster rocket being jettisoned after launch. Zero length launch experiments had taken place in

2627-582: The aircraft designs. Engine types included the Bristol Siddeley BS.100 , Rolls-Royce Medway and Pegasus , Rolls-Royce/MAN Turbo RB153 / RB193 , Rolls-Royce RB.108 and the RB.162 . All of the NATO requirements had been withdrawn by April 1967. Research flight testing continued with the Dornier Do 31 until the project was cancelled in 1970, VAK 191B flight testing continued into the early 1970s until

2698-679: The aircraft were retired. The Fiat G.91 retired from German service in 1995 having been replaced by the Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet and the Lockheed F-104G retiring in 1991, replaced with the Panavia Tornado . Hawker Siddeley P.1154 The Hawker Siddeley P.1154 was a planned supersonic vertical/short take-off and landing (V/STOL) fighter aircraft designed by Hawker Siddeley Aviation (HSA). Development originally started under P.1150, which

2769-476: The aircraft. By that point, the Royal Navy was expressly criticising the choice of a V/STOL aircraft. By August 1963, HSA was openly expressing the view that the range of changes being made to the aircraft was damaging its potential for export sales. At the same time, the Navy stated that it regarded the P.1154 to be a second-rate interceptor, and the RAF openly decried the loss of strike performance. By October 1963,

2840-452: The capacity for supersonic flight. HSA was also interested in the prospects and feasibility of a more sophisticated development of the P.1127, knowing that a supersonic-capable VTOL aircraft would likely be more attractive to customers, there being a general perception at the time that supersonic aircraft held significantly more value than their subsonic counterparts. Consequently, on 13 April 1961, HSA decided to conduct preliminary work on

2911-518: The company's first VTOL aircraft, designated as the Hawker Siddeley P.1127 . The P.1127 was envisioned as a subsonic VTOL-capable strike aircraft, while also serving to demonstrate and prove the capabilities of the aircraft's basic configuration and to validate the performance of the Rolls-Royce Pegasus engine that powered it. While financial backing was issued by NATO 's Mutual Weapons Development Program to support development of

NBMR-3 - Misplaced Pages Continue

2982-468: The cost of significant ground erosion during operations. In December 1962, HSA dedicated its full effort to developing the RAF's single seat variant; Wood notes the starting point for which was broadly similar to the proposal submissions for NBMR-3. On 18 February 1963, Julian Amery , the Minister of Aviation , confirmed that the project study contract had been placed; on 25 March, Amery announced that

3053-417: The design being submitted to NATO, it was decided that the P.1154 would be developed with the requirements for use by both the RAF and the Royal Navy. In February 1962, the Royal Navy's Admiralty received the aircraft concept with great interest as the Royal Navy was in the process of seeking a new interceptor aircraft for use on their aircraft carriers at the time. By March 1962, the Ministry of Defence

3124-457: The early 1970s. Examples of aircraft types involved in the programme have been preserved and are on display in aviation museums . NBMR-3a was the selection criteria for new supersonic V/STOL fighter aircraft designs. A NATO advisory committee met in July 1960 and subsequently published an outline document for the requirement, by July 1961 detailed aircraft specifications had been agreed and a letter

3195-484: The fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft at remote sites. The Fiat G.222 and Dornier Do 31 were the only designs to fly from a revised requirement (NBMR-22), the Dornier being used for test purposes only. Engine development for new powerplants ran alongside the aircraft projects. The requirements were withdrawn in 1967, aircraft prototypes that had been built were used for experimental purposes until they were retired in

3266-402: The forerunner of the former Naval Air Rework Facilities and Naval Aviation Depots (NADEPs) now known as Fleet Readiness Centers (FRCs). Today the base is used for various Naval Aviation development programs. Lakehurst Maxfield's main airfield has two 5,002 ft (1,525 m) runways under its own control tower, while a separate 13,000 ft (4,000 m) test runway (12/30) – equipped with

3337-436: The form of the McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II . By November 1963, the RAF reportedly still found the P.1154 to be a suitable platform, while the Royal Navy appeared to be considering the F-4 Phantom II as being a better fit for its needs. In response, HSA elected to focus its efforts on the RAF version. In late 1963, dissatisfied with the progress of the 'bi-service' model, the government examined three alternative options for

3408-432: The ideal aircraft for the new generation through-deck cruisers " Data from The British Fighter since 1912 General characteristics Performance Armament Related development Aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst Lakehurst Maxfield Field , formerly known as Naval Air Engineering Station Lakehurst ( NAES Lakehurst ),

3479-438: The need to promptly commence work on another development program, HSA's chief aircraft designer Sir Sydney Camm , who had been in regular discussions with Sir Stanley Hooker of Bristol Aero Engines , decided that the company should investigate the prospects of developing and manufacturing a viable combat-capable vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) fighter aircraft. Bristol Aero Engines and Hooker had already been working on

3550-465: The original subsonic P.1127 (RAF), which led to the Harrier ; this name had originally been reserved for the P.1154 should it have entered service. In retrospect, aviation author Tony Buttler considered the cancellation of the aircraft to be justified, noting the time-consuming and expensive failures of attempts by other nations (such as Soviet/Russia's Yak-41 and West Germany's EWR VJ 101 ) at

3621-509: The other (the "V-01") is preserved and still on display at the Musée de l'air et de l'espace (Air & Space Museum) near Paris. The P.1154 had been judged to be technically superior, but the Mirage had greater potential for cooperative development and production being spread across the member nations. The French government withdrew over the selection of the P.1154 over the Dassault design. In

SECTION 50

#1732791493529

3692-558: The performance of other aircraft, including the F-4 Phantom II. The P.1154 ultimately became a victim of the incoming Labour government , led by Harold Wilson . In November 1964, Wilson's government informed the Air Staff to prepare to cancel two of three specific ongoing development projects, these being the P.1154, the BAC TSR-2 strike aircraft, and the Hawker Siddeley HS.681 V/STOL transport aircraft; in order to save

3763-582: The programme: to proceed with an RAF-orientated P.1154 while the Naval version would be delayed, pursue the development of a full dual-service P.1154 model with only limited differences between the services, or the complete termination of the program with the service's requirements to be re-appraised. In November 1963, the Sunday Telegraph publicly announced that the bi-service P.1154 had been aborted. Wood attributes Thorneycroft's ambition to reconcile

3834-620: The requirement for Lockheed F-104G replacement with no change to the criteria and NBMR-3b for a Fiat G.91 replacement with a reduced load carrying ability (1,000 lb (450 kg)) and reduced combat radius of 180  nautical miles (330 km). Of these aircraft types only prototypes of the VJ 101 and VAK 191B were built and flown, they did not enter service. Examples of both types are on display in German aviation museums . By August 1962 it became clear that design projects were not progressing,

3905-419: The requirements for the electronics fit, no response was ever issued; this lack of leadership proved disruptive to the overall programme. As a consequence of the diverging requirements of the RAF and Royal Navy, the aircraft's development had started to stumble. As a result of modifications towards meeting the naval requirements having been performed, by July 1963, weight gain had become a considerable issue for

3976-409: The requirements of the two services into the one model and insistence on this vision as having "put the whole project in jeopardy". Around this point, the Royal Navy expressed their open preference for the F-4 Phantom II and soon Thorneycroft conceded that the service would get this aircraft instead, and that development of the P.1154 would continue to meet the RAF's requirement. On 26 February 1964, it

4047-416: The same P.1154 aircraft, each aimed towards a particular service and its stated requirements. Although financially and politically committed to a joint requirement with the Royal Navy, the RAF's single-seat design took precedence over the two-seat version of the Royal Navy. However, RAF P.1154s would have to accommodate the Navy's large airborne intercept (AI) radar. When HSA submitted the design on 8 August,

4118-563: The second part of the requirement, of 11 designs four were short-listed with the VFW VAK 191B being declared the winner. This aircraft was built and flown but did not enter service. A contemporary alternative to new aircraft type procurement was the novel idea of rocket launching existing fighter aircraft types from ramps and recovering the aircraft on short strips using arrestor gear. A related requirement, NBMR-4, detailed specifications for transport aircraft with similar performance to support

4189-460: The strategic environment, led to neither project progressing into production. Meanwhile, Hawker Siddeley considered modifying the airframe for a joint specification for an aircraft by the RAF and Royal Navy. Between 1961 and 1965 the two services harmonised their specifications to preserve design commonality. However, the RAF's desired configuration was to take precedence over that of the Royal Navy's. A number of proposals were submitted; at one stage,

4260-544: The third component of the installation) kept several service-specific support services for their personnel. With the disestablishment of NAES Lakehurst as a separate activity from JB MDL, NSA Lakehurst became the official sponsor for these activities. The person who is the Commanding Officer, NSA Lakehurst is also the primary Deputy Commander of JB MDL, and reports to Commander, Naval Region Mid-Atlantic (CNRMA) for all administrative and logistical concerns, and to

4331-407: The time as it was seem as being potentially "the first real NATO combat aircraft". However, due to changes made to the requirement, the P.1150 was considered undersized and thus unsatisfactory, which led to a desire for a redesign. Wood views the decision not to persist with the original P.1150 design a "serious setback...it would have provided a first class basic type". HSA formed an agreement with

SECTION 60

#1732791493529

4402-579: The two services. The difficulty of handling the divergent requirements was compounded when, in May 1963, shortly following on from the official issuing of Specification OR356/AW406, the option of having two distinct aircraft was rejected; the Secretary of State for Defence , Peter Thorneycroft , had insisted upon the development of a single common aircraft to meet the requirements of both services. According to Wood, Thorneycroft's decision had been influenced by

4473-519: Was adopted due to complexity, logistics difficulties and a change in NATO strategy. NBMR-4 was a closely related requirement for V/STOL transport aircraft designs intended to support the fighter and fighter-bomber aircraft at dispersed operating bases. NBMR-22 was a revised specification reducing the range requirement to 500 km. Specification NBMR-4 called for a transport aircraft able to carry 12,000 lb (5,440 kg) at over 200 knots (370 km/h) and climbing to 50 ft (15 m) in

4544-523: Was announced in the House of Commons by the Conservative government that a development contract had been placed for the P.1154, equipped with the BS100 engine, as an RAF strike aircraft. At the same time, it was announced that the Naval requirement would instead be met by Spey-engined Phantoms. Wood stated that this decision was "the beginning of the end for the 1154 as the original operation requirement

4615-402: Was essentially a larger and faster version of the basic layout and technology being developed by the smaller subsonic Hawker Siddeley P.1127/Kestrel . A key difference of this design was the addition of plenum chamber burning , essentially an afterburner -like arrangement in the thrusters used during hover, greatly increasing their thrust. The release of NATO Basic Military Requirement 3 for

4686-412: Was for joint-service use". In the aftermath of the government announcement, HSA persisted with work on the P.1154. By September 1964, the first full-scale mock-up meeting had been conducted. On 30 October 1964, a milestone in the development programme was attained when the first run of a BS100 engine was performed; around the same time, HSA received favourable reports that the P.1154 was competitive with

4757-461: Was openly interested in the potential for the P.1154 being adopted as a replacement for both the RAF's fleet of Hawker Hunters and the Royal Navy's de Havilland Sea Vixens . Accordingly, in April 1962, a first draft of a new joint Naval/Air Staff requirement was issued in the form of Specification OR356/AW406 , to which HSA had submitted a response by June of that year. Following the cancellation of

4828-517: Was placed under the 87th Air Base Wing . However, as with all joint bases, the installation receives support services from the previous installation authorities. Thus, Lakehurst Field is also provided certain services from Naval Support Activity Lakehurst ( NSA Lakehurst ), whose commander also serves as one of two Base Deputy Commanders. Lakehurst field was the site of the Hindenburg disaster in 1937. Lakehurst Maxfield Field's history began as

4899-476: Was sent to 40 aircraft manufacturers. The selected aircraft types were intended to enter service between 1964 and 1967. Of these aircraft types the majority remained paper projects, the Dassault Balzac V served as an engine and systems testbed for two Mirage IIIV prototypes that were built and test flown in 1965, one aircraft (the second one, named "V-02") was lost in an accident (killing its pilot), but

4970-437: Was ultimately selected to meet NBMR-3, but this did not lead to orders being placed. The French government subsequently withdrew from participation once the Dassault design lost. NATO lacked any central budget, relying on individual member nations to actually procure military equipment, and the NBMR-3 selection went unheeded by all of these nations. Thus, in 1965, the whole project was terminated. On 6 December 1961, prior to

5041-443: Was widely seen as inferior, particularly due to the danger posed by asymmetric thrust output if a single engine failure occurred; however, Rolls-Royce claimed that their solution could be available sooner than the BS100 would be. In December 1962, Bristol performed the first successful run of a PCB-equipped Pegasus 2 engine. In order to perform a vertical takeoff, the use of PCB was necessitated; however, this feature would have come at

#528471