Talk:Hawker Nimrod

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / British / European

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force

Naval Air Squadrons

Article appears to omit that the aircraft entered service with the Fleet Air Arm of the Royal Air Force and strictly speaking 801 squadron NAS etc were actually 801 Squadron RAF at the time? MilborneOne (talk) 20:39, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed:done. Hope the Squadron refs now read OK. Done a bit of editing though it could do with more.TSRL (talk) 23:03, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which it now has. Be interesting to have a ref for the 8 Danish built Nimrods, as Mason (1961) says there is no evidence of their construction. Could also do with numbers of each FAA type built (book of serials?) or converted: Mason disagrees with himself and with Thetford. Mason says 54 Mk I and 27 Mk II on p. 399, but 33 Mk II on p.187. Thetford says 42 Mk I and 36 Mk II. Also don't know if Portuguese aircraft specially built or EGF ex FAA. Could do with c/ns, really.TSRL (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

S1577 to S1588 (12) Nimrod I
S1594 (1) Nimrod 1 (not confirmed)
S1614 to S1639 (26) Nimrod I
K2823 to K2841 (19) Nimrod I - K2823 became II prototype and K2840 also converted
K2909 to K2914 (6) Nimrod II
K3654 to K3662 (9) Nimrod II
K4620 to K4629 (10) Nimrod II
K5056 to K5058 (3) Nimrod II

Not added them up yet! MilborneOne (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've compared your list with Mason's (1961, p.399):

S1577 to S1588 (12) Nimrod I - agrees, including prototype
S1594 (1) Nimrod 1 (not confirmed) - no mention
S1614 to S1639 (26) Nimrod I - has only S1614 to S1637 (24)
K2823 to K2841 (19) Nimrod I - K2823 became II prototype and K2840 also converted -agrees
K2909 to K2914 (6) Nimrod II - agrees
K3654 to K3662 (9) Nimrod II - agrees
K4620 to K4629 (10) Nimrod II - agrees
K5056 to K5058 (3) Nimrod II - no mention, instead lists K2925-6 (Thetford, though, says K5058 was last Nimrod)

So RAF production (not including prototype S1577 and ignoring conversions) Nim I 56 (Mason 54), Nim II 28 (27). Plus possibly 4 exports (Denmark, Portugal, Japan) and maybe 8 Danish built.TSRL (talk) 09:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Robertson serials has K2925 and 2926 as Vickers Vildebeests, note K5056-K5058 are described as "replacement order", either crashed aircraft or three that had been diverted to other customers, no evidence! MilborneOne (talk) 17:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A listing in Air-Britain Aeromilitaria 1980 No. 4 of all the "S" serials doesnt mention S1594 but does confirm the other two batches in the "S" series. It has prototype S1577 with the AAEE and S1578 first with the MAEE then the RAE, all the other "S"s have operators but some fates are missing. MilborneOne (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So if we go with Robertson (he's the expert) and just for now exclude S1594, there were 57 Nim Is and 28 Nim IIs that had RAF serials. Mason agrees that the first two, S1577/8 were used for testing and development and that K2823 was used by Hawker to test the swept wing of the Mk II. K2824 stayed at Brooklands for comparative tests with K2823. Does Robertson agree with the implication that 53 Nim Is were in Squadron use? It's a lot more than Mason lists, but he says nothing about the first batch.

Of the Mk IIs, he notes the 3 stainless framed K2909-11 as being at Felixstowe 1934-5 for salt water corrosion trials, but did they also serve? Incidentally, the 2 Nim II/Vildebeestes were originally, he says, to have been stainless but built as standard Mk IIs.TSRL (talk) 20:28, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now I've got a copy of Robertson I see he does just serials, types and marks. Really want the equivalent of Sturtivant & Page for the interwar years; still, Robertson is a useful addition to the shelves.TSRL (talk) 18:22, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Refs

It would be good to simplify the reference list by having only one Mason, and that the more recent one. So if someone has the 1991 ed, maybe he/she could put in the page numbers of the Nimrod article and of the relevant part of the "Individual aircraft" section at the back.TSRL (talk) 22:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]