Handley Page Hare

HP.34 Hare
Role Two-seat day bomber
National origin United Kingdom
Manufacturer Handley Page
First flight 1928
Retired 1937
Number built 1

The Handley Page HP.34 Hare was a British two-seat high-altitude day bomber designed and built at Cricklewood by Handley Page. It was designed by Harold Boultbee to meet the requirements of Air Ministry Specification 23/25 for a replacement for the Hawker Horsley in the day bomber role,[1] competing against the Blackburn Beagle, Hawker Harrier, Gloster Goring and Westland Witch. The Hare was a conventional biplane, with single-bay unequal-span staggered wings, of mixed wood and metal construction (although the specification required that any production aircraft be of all-metal construction). It had a crew of two with the pilot in an open cockpit aft of the wing with a gunner/bomb aimer behind him.

Only one aircraft was built, with the serial J8622. It was first flown on 24 February 1928, powered by a Gnome-Rhône Jupiter as the planned Jupiter VIII was unavailable.[2] Testing showed that the aircraft had poor handling and was prone to vibration, and it was modified with a 2 ft (0.61 m) longer fuselage and a revised tail, which improved handling. It was decided to modify the aircraft so that it could meet the requirements of Specification 24/25 to replace the Horsley in its other role as a shore-based torpedo bomber.[3]

The Hare was unsuccessful in meeting both competitions, with the day bomber competition being abandoned in favour of purchasing the more advanced Hawker Hart built to Specification 12/36, while the torpedo bomber requirement was met by the Vickers Vildebeest.[4] It remained in use with the Royal Air Force as a trials aircraft until 1932. It was then sold for a proposed long-distance flight by J.N. Addinsell and registered G-ACEL. The Hare was flown to London Air Park, Hanworth in 1933 where it was redoped and painted in civilian colours. It never flew again and was scrapped in 1937.[5]

  1. ^ Mason 1994, p.195-196.
  2. ^ Barnes 1976, p.269.
  3. ^ Barnes 1976, p.270.
  4. ^ Mason 1994, p.196.
  5. ^ Jackson 1973, p.343.