best machine the RAF never had

[typerated]

In a similar vein to : If you could reintroduce into service an upgraded new build of a proven design.

My vote would go for 'best machine the RAF never had' goes to the Viggen.

In the early 70s we could have been buying Viggens in the place of:
Harriers, Jaguars, and perhaps some F4s, while replacing Lightnings.

Looks good in RAF markings I think


http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee65/Scorchi0/Profiles/Viggen/RAF_90s.jpg


http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d30/Jackson001/What%20If%20Models/Viggen3.jpg

[orca]

F-15E. Not many nuts you can't crack with those things.

[teeteringhead]

From the rotary POV:

CH-53 :(

Blackhawk :{

[Not_a_boffin]

F14D with all the development bits, F15E performance, but flexible.

[Old-Duffer]

TTH,

Two good 'picks'.

I shall be up close and personal (I hope) with a CH53 in Germany next month but didn't Wastelands acquire and register a Blackhawk some years ago and wasn't that supposed to have been evaluated for use by the Brits?

A couple of years ago, I saw one of a pair of Mi17s which were in this country to train crews for an 'allied air force'. It looked like an overgrown Whirlwind but was said to be reliable, very functional (agricultural was also used to describe it) good to operate, carried shed loads of kit over a good distance and relatively easy to maintain. Perhaps, therefore, Mi17s instead of - dare I say - Wessex?

O-D

[sisemen]

This is the main candidate

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQAdbFp2OwsnMgsJT4oUqzJm4BXhj8_UaWZs5nKpTm gsdu8QOCi_w

[airborne_artist]

From the rotary POV:

CH-53 http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/sowee.gif

Blackhawk http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/boohoo.gif

HH53H, in particular. :E

[teeteringhead]

didn't Wastelands acquire and register a Blackhawk some years ago .. indeed they did O-D.

Even better, it was fitted with RR engines rather than GE (the RTM 322, as fitted to Merlin - but only 2! ;)). And of course with anticipators a la mighty Wessex, droop was virtually eliminated. :eek: (technical term, plank drivers!)

S-55 + RR engine = Whirlwind

S-58 + RR engines = Wessex

S-61 + RR engines = Sea King

Three excellent helos in their time - so whatever happened to:

S-70 + RR engines = ??????? hence :{

[BEagle]

I agree with typerated - the Viggen would have been superb in RAF service.

I also made a model of one in RAF markings about 40-45 years ago!

But the true answer is as sisemen suggests - the superlative murdered-by-Mountbottom TSR2.

[Torque Tonight]

New build Hawker Hunter, modern engine, off-the-shelf digital cockpit. Ideal low cost solution for the asymmetric engagements we specialize in these days. Using 100 million buck, latest generation, multi-role jets to put holes in mud walls is not cost effective in my mind.

[Postman Plod]

Interesting point - I wonder how much it would cost to new-build a hunter with modern engine and glass cockpit? Would it be relatively cheap as you would probably expect, or have prices inflated so much that it wouldn't be cheap at all in modern terms?

[typerated]

I think a modern day cheap and cheerful Hunter is called a Gripen.

If we had bought them we might have a frontline Sqn strength in double figures!

[ShyTorque]

From the rotary POV:
CH-53
Blackhawk

Seconded!

The Blackhawk was considered in the early 1980s as a replacement for Puma and Wessex. With the RTM engines (demo'd at Farnborough) it would have been a fantastic aircraft and made life much more straightforward.

[P6 Driver]

P3 Orion.

(And we might get them anyway, one day!)

[tornadoken]

tth: why no WS.70? This is complicated so pay attention at the back.
After Falklands UK settled on: retain Puma, add Chinook, buy Merlin. An RAF medium lift transport was mooted and a Lynx derivative, WG30 was schemed. Euro-folk in 1985 were scheming NH90 and Westland joined in, 9/85... precisely as BAe signed Saudi alYamamah (to be:1), which was to include some rotorcraft. But WAL was in parlous financial straits.

(To be) Eurocopter and (UTC) Sikorsky saw WAL as entree to some of the Saudi/BAe. chopperwork, so put up:
- the European Option: full share in NH90 and in antiarmour Agusta TONAL: please wangle current Aerospatiale/Bolkow types into Saudi;
- the US Option: UTC offered licenced WS.70+RTM322...not for RAF, but to a perceived Requirement for 100 for Saudi+Iraq.

After Mrs.Thatcher's Cabinet was shaken by the Westland Affair, in 4/86 UTC(Sikorsky)+FIAT(Agusta) bought 29.9% of WAL, who left the 2 Euro-projects. A prototype WS.70 flew and was pitched to Saudi...but that prospect lapsed in the whirl of embargo and worse surrounding the Iraq/Iran War. Iraq took a bunch of Bolkow Bo.105s; Saudi took 21 US-built H-60. In 1993 UTC's WAL equity passed to GKN. RAF gently built up the Chinook fleet and waited just as patiently for Merlin as France and Germany did for NH90. US-built H-60 was sold to everybody+dog.

[Bannock]

MRA 4 - taking cover!

[teeteringhead]

Thank you tornadoken. Not entirely sure I get the picture, but roughly translated for simple driver airframe = shafted by politicians and big business!

WG30 - wasn't that the one we finished up paying India to buy from us!!!!

[SunderlandMatt]

How about the Apache?

[Like This - Do That]

Them's fight'n words, Matt ....

[Jamieone]

Rafale? ;)

[Big Bear]

SU-30MKI

Bear

[sandiego89]

F-117, RAF had several exchange pilots, but never bought them- would have been a good fit in the early 1990's for first days of war operations.

[rjtjrt]

F-111K

........

[Milo Minderbinder]

If we'd bought the SR A/1 and then continued the technology we wouldn't need the carriers, just a mothership / tanker

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6pl1aMVnZyY&feature=player_embedded

[El_Presidente]

Old-Duffer:

A couple of years ago, I saw one of a pair of Mi17s which were in this country to train crews for an 'allied air force'. It looked like an overgrown Whirlwind but was said to be reliable, very functional (agricultural was also used to describe it) good to operate, carried shed loads of kit over a good distance and relatively easy to maintain. Perhaps, therefore, Mi17s instead of - dare I say - Wessex?

Flown in as SLF...very agricultural...SHF would be right at home.

:E

Chuffing impressive payload and hot/high performance if I recall...

[deltahotel]

Martin Baker - Martin-Baker MB5 (http://www.martin-baker.com/Sub-Navigation/History/Martn-Baker-MB5.aspx)

[L J R]

The PVR Button on JPA

[recce_FAC]

FA-18E/F Although it may not be too late.

[Dr Jekyll]

Can we extend the scope to include aircraft the FAA should have had?

[Old-Duffer]

Yeh, let's do Fleet Air Arm - I'm always up for a laugh.

It was the RN that turned down the Belvedere because it kept dumping a gallon of AVPIN on the deck when it started up - great bunch of jessicas!!!

O-D

[6f1]

Old-Duffer if you knew anything about carrier aviation you would not be making these inane comments so do us all a favour and go back into your CRAB shell.

[tonker]

TSR2(no Tornado), F14(even less Tornados), Aurora

[dat581]

FAA, CVA01. Not an aircraft but was defiantly needed.

Hat coat.... :E

[Ricorigs]

I'm going left field with this...

Mi28N Havoc?

Mi 24 Hind?
Digitised of course and alot cheaper than the Agusta Westland efforts.

However if not,
US Marine 412, IR/EO camera plus crew served or pilot operated door mounted weapons and rocket pods. The COIN dream.

As for those plank wing ladies of leisure...

I second the F15E, multi role capable about 20 yrs ago which I believe the Typhoon still can't do.

But if the Typhoon were ready how about..

Navalised Typhoon for the Fleet Air Arm?

[Ricorigs]

Sorry got another 2 left fielders..

A10? Perhaps one of the most perfect role constructed aircraft ever made.

Or ditch the tactical strike fighters and just buy B1 bombers instead.

You can put just about everything on those things. Slap in a radar or just a data link from an awacs and you could do BVR engagement for air to air nonsense.

Alternatively to win the war :E (assume we are with the Americans everywhere we go) you can pick and mix the bombs you drop.

Plus the pilots would get multi crew, multi engine, jet time on their logbook.

Everyone is happy!

[Melchett01]

The U-2.

Which we were offered when we first discussed getting rid of the PR9 many years ago, but in our infinite wisdom turned down and then ended up buying a derivative of the cameras anyway :D

[Milo Minderbinder]

How about...the Rotodyne...?

would that have been effective in military use?

[barnstormer1968]

A mixed force of Strike Eagles and the latest Hornet.
Surely a lot more flexible an potent than Typhoon and Tornado?

Of course there are possibly more obvious contenders.
The extra C17's needed to have a flexible and maintainable force.
Helicopters (who cares what) that are not falling apart and forty years old (think the replacement for the replacement for the Puma :E)
MPA aircraft, bearing in mind we are an island nation.
Proper recce aircraft
Brand new aircraft owned by the RAF and used as AT, and not second hand fleets with their own mini fleets.
Spares and engineers so we can use the aircraft we already have....But don't have because they need spares.
Anything sent to Marshalls, that seems to just stay there for ever.

[AGS Man]

Space Shuttle

[Tashengurt]

Rafale, apparently.

[threeputt]

AC 130 and that's an end to it.

3P:ok:

[Herod]

Maybe the time has come to rethink the Rotodyne concept, as mentioned above. Would have come in very handy back in '82.

[Halton Brat]

Never mind the Rotodyne, what about the Aerodyne?

HB

[Old-Duffer]

6F1,

Thank you for putting me back in my box but two things.

a. You will possibly have missed that any comment about the Belvedere and carriers was tongue in cheek given its size, the problems with its blades and fire risk with its vertical engines and magnesium alloy construction.

b. A CRAB I may have been in later years but a FISH-HEAD when first allowed into the great outdoors.

O-D

[tonker]

Messerschmitt Me 262 with British engines.

[cokecan]

it has to be F-15. had we gone for F-15 in the 70's we might actually have had some form of plausable AD capability for the last 2 decades of the Cold War.

imagine that...

[Rocket2]

Thin wing Buccaneer?

[Big Bear]

it has to be F-15. had we gone for F-15 in the 70's we might actually have had some form of plausable AD capability for the last 2 decades of the Cold War.



I guess as I'm not writing this in Russian, our AD capability was wholly sufficient during the Cold War.

Bear

[Geehovah]

It has to be F-15. had we gone for F-15 in the 70's we might actually have had some form of plausable AD capability for the last 2 decades of the Cold War.

imagine that... We had THE best AD aircraft in Europe from 69 to 81 in the shape of the F4 (with the advent of the F15A). Look down-shoot down capability when even the US only had a pulse equipped fighter. Had we gone for a US platform to replace the F4 we'd have stayed up there but the F3, bless it, wasn't the right platform.

For me, HMS in the Tornado F3, a Buccaneer with decent avionics or a Lightning with 4 missiles. All would have been totally different jets.

[typerated]

PC-9?
KC-135?
Any 4th generation fighter after the F4 and before Typhoon

[Lima Juliet]

...And to reinforce Geehovah's point, the F3 wasn't really ready by the end of the Cold War having been in service about 3 years when the wall came down...

The F4 did a very fine job in the AD role up to that point.

[Thelma Viaduct]

F-16J would have done the job.

[WhiteOvies]

MH-53 would have been a huge capability for the CHF as a SK 4 replacement, although none of our decks were stressed for anything that heavy.

Blackhawk as a Merlin 3 alternative may be cheaper, sooner but IMHO not better.

Sukhoi 25 Frogfoot as a Jaguar replacement for CAS?

B1 as a replacement for Vulcan?

[ex-fast-jets]

Sukhoi 25 Frogfoot as a Jaguar replacement for CAS?

Surely CAS needs a Learjet or Gulfstream, not a Frogfoot???

But back to thread..............

I used to dream of F-16s in RAF colours.

I still think the RAF would have done well with such a beast. A's in the 80s, turning to Block 25/30 Cs in the 90s, and Block 50/60s by the noughties. We could have gained over 30 years experience of operating them by now.

What would that aircraft have done for pilot retention??

Ideally based at Chivenor!!

Oh well!!

[cornish-stormrider]

I said it in the other thread - V8 muscle cars for Lineys........

in fact I will stand for parliament on this policy!

[NutLoose]

The RAF would have bought the CH 53 when they realised they could ditch half the rotorblades and saved money by using 3 rotors only :p

[dead_pan]

SF260 for training/coin

SR-71 for recon/fun

AMX for annoying Welsh farmers

F-16 for style

[phutbang]

The Bristol 188...'cos it sliver

[Bastardeux]

I still think the RAF would have done well with such a beast. A's in the 80s, turning to Block 25/30 Cs in the 90s, and Block 50/60s by the noughties. We could have gained over 30 years experience of operating them by now.

Agreed. Either that or an all F15E force, imagine the number of F15E squadrons we could have had flying by now, instead of bankrupting ourselves for 3 Typhoon squadrons. Still, at least BAE has dutifully provided us with an aircraft that is fully air-ground capable and has all of its problems ironed out at no extra expense, :mad: sake.

[BEagle]

The Bristol 188...

The thirst of the T188 was of neo-Oliver Reed level and made the Lightning seem positively frugal in comparison.

Mind you, the 250+KIAS VR in full blower must have looked dramatic! I spoke with a chap involved in the test programme recently and he said that the 20-25 min max flight duration barely gave them any worthwhile test results.

[Herod]

Fairy FD2, aka Dassault Mirage :*

[Doctor Cruces]

Bucc with TSR2 avionics.

[Rhino power]

F-15C/D and E in their repective roles...

-RP (aka Daz)

[orca]

A quick re-attack from post #2.

I can't remember his name but he was a single seat mate (possibly Jaguar) and OC of whatever the UAS flying out of St Athan was in 2001.

He and I, and some students who held him in very high regard, sank a few bottles of red (as one does) and came to the conclusion that the entire defence budget should be spent solely on F-15E and subs with sub launched TLAM.

Now, it has a few holes but by and large, for a small island nation I'm not sure we were far off the mark.

[glad rag]

^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^. but I'd also add that for top cover a pure AD variant of the Typhoon ,with all the bits and bobs that the RAF will never see [OK mods?] would be a great mix....:ok:

[Evalu8ter]

Given the nature of the wars we've been fighting for the majority of the last 15 years the A10 and AC130 are the stand-out omissions; remember the USAF has tried to kill the A10 in favour of more F16s for years and is only now, grudgingly, upgrading it. What is it about the Mach 2 muppetry that dominate the upper echelons in our forces?

On the subject of F16s, is there any truth to the rumour that Portillo offered to buy/lease a wing of F16s to replace the Coltishall wing in the early 90's and that it was hurridly killed by the Airships and BWoS as a threat to Typhoon?

And for purely emotive reasons, wouldn't it be wonderful to think of a Scampton wing equipped with B1s? They could be alongside the USAF at Diego Garcia delivering the good news as we speak....

[tornadoken]

herod: FD.2: Mirage. It's another we wuz robbed myth. I take it you allude to FD.2's Cazaux trials, 10/56 where that nice Marcel "copied" it. But Mirage III prototype was rolled out 2 days after FD.2 left. If AMD picked any brains they were German...but they didn't. ONÉRA (the French RAE) based a multi-role platform on a delta, and paid AMD to do it.

Late-1942 US offered licence-built Vickers B-29. We chose to attempt Vickers Windsor, and to buy (Abraham) Lincoln. Early-1948: US intending to pull all GIs out of W.Germany before Presidential Election, 11/48: everybody knew Truman would lose and isolationist Republicans would laager into Little America. Uncle Joe knew this too, so tried to take W.Germany painlessly, starting in Berlin, 24/6/48. He feared not Lincoln. He did fear Tu.4 Bull (aka B-29). If a Wing of Vickers 441 had then been sitting on Marham, he might not have caused the Airlift, so causing UK to define a Soviet Threat and start the build up of 1950s' Forces, thus the Cold War.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Had it not been assassinated at birth, it wouldn't have taken a lot of negotiation and investment to have had this;

http://www.avroarrow.org/images/newpics/Wilf/Intosun.jpg


Mind you, it would have gone down like a brick budgerigar with our bestest friend in the whole world.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

There again, Fighter Command got

http://www.wingweb.co.uk/wingweb/img/Gloster_Javelin_XH756_firestreak.jpg


but could have had


http://www.btinternet.com/~a.c.walton/navy/faa/sea-vix1.jpg

[Rory57]

http://img.flyteam.jp/img/photo/000/119/838/japan-maritime-self-defense-force-9904-ShinMaywa-US-2-119838_img_960_1881.jpg

The Sunderland II

[Cows getting bigger]

Oooooh, going back a bit

ME190
TSR2
F111

A bit closer to today

F15E
A10 - would have been rather useful in the last decade or so
AC130 - as above
P3 and variants
Osprey
A320/1 - far better than a 146

[jindabyne]

Based upon another active thread, it surely has to be a hectopleter :rolleyes:

[Willard Whyte]

If this thread is still going in 10 years?

F-35 A, B, C,...

[Willard Whyte]

The Bristol 188...'cos it sliver

If only the boffins had remembered to include a fuel tank in the design.

[Willard Whyte]

F-16J would have done the job.

The XL might have been better still.

http://www.f-16.net/attachments/f16xl_112.jpg

[chiglet]

When I was at RAF Buchan in 1963, I made a model of the Vickers Vanguard.... MR1. All I did was to add a radome and a MAD gear
Lockheed did [basically] the same with the L188 and got the P3 Orion.
What about the SR 188?

[Willard Whyte]

AVRO 730?

http://www.vectorsite.net/avvulcan_2_7.png

Avro 730 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_730)

[SASless]

This would have put the Lanc to shame!


http://www.aircraftresourcecenter.com/Gal5/4301-4400/gal4360_B-17_Keeton/01.jpg

[sumps]

The Bristol 188...'cos it sliver

If only the boffins had remembered to include a fuel tank in the design

I spoke to one of the boffins once who amongst other things said that it taught them how NOT to design an aircraft...and that it was a relief to move onto the BAC 221! (I believe that was blue :rolleyes:)

[fallmonk]

SASless ,,, is that real or has some one Cgi/ photo shopped it ?
Never saw a B-17 like that before !
Was it a one off prototype ?

Ps my thoughts are,

Fw190,
P51 (yes I know we had it originally as the A-10)

GD F111,
GD F16(personally would have loved it in XL form)
or as now being avocated for the carriers F18 !
A-10 (thunderbolt 2)
F15 E (let's face it even in the mud mover form it would out do most air to air traffic it would ever meet, and still be a better bomber than we have had in years)

[NutLoose]

Photoshopped FallMonk..

[ORAC]

http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/dangerroom/2010/12/XB-70-Valkyrie-04.jpg

[OafOrfUxAche]

I guess as I'm not writing this in Russian, our AD capability was wholly sufficient during the Cold War.


Are you able to tell us more about the large-scale attacks which the Commies mounted against us which our excellent AD capability bravely defeated in pitched battle? Presumably you agree that our current MPA capability is wholly sufficient on the grounds that there haven't been any strikes on the British Isles by Russian subs/shipping?

[ORAC]

They pretended they had an attacck capability and we pretended to defend against it.

It was only when the Ruskies believed Reagan's Star Wars bluff and bankrupted themselves actually trying to build a defence against it, rather than bluffing themselves, that the whole game fell apart....... :8

[teeteringhead]

It was only when the Ruskies believed Reagan's Star Wars bluff and bankrupted themselves actually trying to build a defence against it, rather than bluffing themselves, that the whole game fell apart....... :ok: ... I very nearly wrote my Staff College dissertation - as the Wall was coming down - analysing the Cold War in terms of the Russians playing chess and the Americans playing poker ......

And the poker players won .....

[ShyTorque]

And now we play Russian Roulette. But no-one really knows how many rounds are in the gun...

[SASless]

Nutloose.....you are one very pathetic Straight Man! (....in this usage meaning Comic duo's set up man for the punch line)

I could have had some great fun with that photo and a very detailed explanation of how even the US Army Air Corps failed to choose advanced designs much like the RAF.

[cornish-stormrider]

I canna believe Oi forgot the Valkyrie.

I loved it so much I built it twice...

Mach 3 + constant blowers, surfing it's own supersonic shockwave.
Thats Filth right there.

[oxenos]

http://i665.photobucket.com/albums/vv15/oxenos_photo/TMK11.jpg
Have a go with this one, SASless.

[Roadster280]

The solo-only version of the Chipmunk had a higher probability of crashing and wasting the investment in the aircraft. Cost saving measures were therefore applied, the most obvious of which was to delete the instructor's position.

[NutLoose]

:{






......

[BEagle]

oxenos, I think I'd prefer a slightly larger canopy situated further aft....

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/TMK11.jpg

[jindabyne]

I don't care, just please give me one! My first solo was in G-RAOF at Yeadon 1962, and I'd love to have this SS to play with in my dotage!

[oxenos]

BEAgle, if you sat further aft, the nose wheel would lift off the ground.

[Big Bear]

"Are you able to tell us more about the large-scale attacks which the Commies mounted against us which our excellent AD capability bravely defeated in pitched battle? Presumably you agree that our current MPA capability is wholly sufficient on the grounds that there haven't been any strikes on the British Isles by Russian subs/shipping?"

It's all a matter of deterrence and intent. There were no large-scale attacks by the Russians during the Cold War so, either what we had was a sufficient deterrent, or they no intent in mounting such attacks. Either way, my statement was correct - what we had was sufficient.

The current situation with MPA is different, we have no deterrent, but again, do they have the intent? Certainly not in the short term I would suggest. Therefore, whilst our lack of MPA needs to be addressed in order to provide a longer term solution, the current financial climate dictates that we have to invest our money to provide capabilities that counter a clear capability and intent from a hostile nation.

Bear

[barnstormer1968]

Big Bear
You are just trying to save billions of pounds here aren't you. Or, are you missing the importance of MPA?

With no MPA our sub surface fleet was instantly ready to be intercepted and scanned by anyone with any kind of sub........Thus removing our nuclear deterrent and cruise boats effectiveness at a stroke.

The are lots of unfriendly nations out there who would happily buy sound recordings of our subs, as well as having subs of their own to do something nasty if they wanted.

Not having effective MPA today means having no credible sub surface fleet in ten years time when we get involved with some despot or other.

[Big Bear]

Barnstormer, I recognise the importance of MPA, and I did say that it is a future capability that we should have. However, recognising that times are hard, and given the current and short - medium term threats, there may be more important capabilities to fund.

The shape of Future Force 2020 should be driving our capability requirements. Now if we could just get some clear guidance.........:ugh:

Bear

[tonker]

Times aren't hard. We are now spending in real terms, a quarter of a trillion pounds extra per year on benefits compared to 1997.

There's loooaaaads of money.

[JonnyT1978]

Forgive me as a mere history-graduate and aero-sexual but here are a few to my mind: First the almost-have-beens:

Saunders-Roe SR.177 - only conspiracy theory that it was scuppered for purchase by nefarious dealings by LM?

Phase 2 Vulcan - dealt a fatal blow by the death of Skybolt but still a formidable machine.

Lightning F6 with guns - lessons learned by now (or not)?

Now the wishful thinking:

Vought F-8 Crusader: Of the same vintage as the Scimitar and Sea Vixen but in a entirely different class

Vought A-7 Corsair II - A strike jet par excellence. Had bombing performance (thanks to CCIP) far in advance to the contemporary Phantom yet far less famed.

P.1216 Prototype - Who knows? It made it barely beyond the drawing board. But it looked good!

[JonnyT1978]

And total dream machine: F-14D "Bombcat" :*

[Ivan Rogov]

X-wings, no Airwolf or maybe Thunderbird 2, does it have to be real? :}

[Courtney Mil]

No, I don't think it does. Best idea yet! :ok:

[Kitbag]

If its fictional this might keep the fish heads happy:
http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20110428181828/ufoseries/images/thumb/9/97/SkyDiver_on_surface.jpg/500px-SkyDiver_on_surface.jpg

[Courtney Mil]

Tough enough to be run aground without damage.

[Milo Minderbinder]

well, if you're going down that route it has to be the Angels

http://www.keithmcneill.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/angel8.jpg


or the Wombat

http://www.keithmcneill.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/Wombat.jpg


both pix taken from Space Models Photography (http://www.keithmcneill.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/3c.html)

[orca]

So we agree, F-15E.

[mikip]

Any machine developed without interference from any government committee (a mere pipe dream I know!)

[ORAC]

Lightning F6 with guns - lessons learned by now (or not)? Errrrr. F02+2.

Standard F.6 configuration: Large ventral with 2 x Aden + 2 x Red Tops.

[Buster Hyman]

Sorry you missed out on the TSR2, but we got these instead...

http://www.ausairpower.net/DFA_71.png

Yeah Baby! :E

[Heathrow Harry]

.... eventually...........

[typerated]

some interesting what if's
https://www.mardona.org/gallery/d/25852-2/DSC_8755.JPG
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/7b/e7/53/7be753167ba6a61db6115a79d677e48e.jpg

https://i256.photobucket.com/albums/hh173/SPINNERS1961/WHAT%20IF%202010/WHAT%20IF%20ALBUM%20A/RAF%20STARFIGHTER%20F2.02_zpszsrtzna7.jpg

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airlinebuzz.com%2Fchickenwo rks%2Fimages%2FMirageIVK_UK69.jpg&hash=e2ae72647c3faaaed23db9a1c0dbfeb5

[Sloppy Link]

Apache AH-64D/E.

[Baldeep Inminj]

V22 Osprey...a really really fast helicopter.

Sort of.

[Martin the Martian]

I reckon the FAA could have made good use of the A-4 Skyhawk as a Sea Hawk replacement.

[seafury45]

If this discussion is open-ended and doesn't just include jets, I would have to go with the Martin-Baker M.B.5
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1084x478/martin_baker_m_b_5_prototype_7af819c69247dd79c9ba2e2da675c83 50b141931.jpg

[Bagheera S]

Concorde - It was briefly offered as a strategic reconnaissance platform. A squadron would have doubled the production run.

A320 RMPA - What an opportunity missed.

Saunders Roe Princess RMPA - Sub hunting with proper style. The Squadron Motto could be “Facre Adipiscing”

[Asturias56]

A squadron of U-2's in the early '60's - 70 years of life.

4 squadrons of B-52's - that 's the strike force sorted for 100 years..........

[Jackonicko]

Interesting point - I wonder how much it would cost to new-build a hunter with modern engine and glass cockpit? Would it be relatively cheap as you would probably expect, or have prices inflated so much that it wouldn't be cheap at all in modern terms?

Think you're describing the AMX!

[Four Turbo]

I was on a Canberra PR sqn in Germany early 60s. Low level all the way in and out the target because of Russian radars. Projected life two sorties?? A longer serving buddy reckoned that Mosquitos would have done the same job and lasted a lot longer. Would someone like to comment on this? Radar signature of a wooden aeroplane with two propellor engines? Anyway the idea was pooh-poohed at the time as too old fashioned.

[Finningley Boy]

F-104! Especially after seeing the Belgian Slivers in 1972 and the Dutch solos in the 1970s!

FB

[WB627]

Concorde - It was briefly offered as a strategy reconnaissance platform. A squadron would have doubled the production run.

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x347/sst1090_1_e784fe0bf01edb45d6fbd41ccfb949bd75faae83.jpg

Blue Steel anyone?

[LowObservable]

A million years ago in a galaxy far, far away, when Phoon was still "Eurofighter 2000" and in trouble at many levels, there was a plot to gap-fill A2A with recently modded and lightly used F-16A ADFs - to be followed by co-development of the delta-wing F-16 variant with the diverterless inlet and LO nozzle. It had gas for days and carried all weapons conformally or semi-conformally. BAE Systems were not happy bunnies, the USAF wanted to be all-stealth (how''s that working out for ya?), and the upper Pentagon levels saw it as a threat to the nascent JAST, later JSF. The avionics ended up in the Block 60.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/falcon_delta_d17aaa9cb7738a702f1f982baaca578e320b01e5.jpg

[safetypee]

Most of military aviation history would have been rewritten if the Avro Arrow had continued. Its potential was greater than Lightning, better than the Phantom, and a competitor for TSR2.

Given the basic aircraft, its developments and offshoots could easily have been 'the' aircraft which the RAF didn't have, nor many other airforces, but all wished that they did have the Arrow or its descendants.

[etudiant]

Most of military aviation history would have been rewritten if the Avro Arrow had continued. Its potential was greater than Lightning, better than the Phantom, and a competitor for TSR2.

Given the basic aircraft, its developments and offshoots could easily have been 'the' aircraft which the RAF didn't have, nor many other airforces, but all wished that they did have the Arrow or its descendants.

While the Arrow had a lot of potential, it really needed a more economical engine, better fire control and better armament to achieve the scope posited.
As developed, afaik it was roughly a MiG-25 equivalent, with a 400nm operating radius.

[skua]

Bucc with upgraded avionics, & ergonomic cockpit.

[Maxibon]

Always with the TSR2...... Am I alone in thinking that the TSR2 looked pretty awful?! Life without the Bucc and the F4 and the Jag and the Fin would have been pretty dull; albeit I'd have opted for F14D over the F3.

[Treble one]

Always with the TSR2...... Am I alone in thinking that the TSR2 looked pretty awful?! Life without the Bucc and the F4 and the Jag and the Fin would have been pretty dull; albeit I'd have opted for F14D over the F3.

No but i think we are in the minority with the TSR2.

[TBM-Legend]

F-111K....awesome piece of kit

[ORAC]

TSR2 awful? We just never got to see it warpaint.....


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x631/image_7bf7c047e1d0f0fed683a57c0c82b719c781ad72.jpeg

[dangermouse]

The best ever 'what if'. DM

[Maxibon]

I standby what I said! It's like a 'nearly-ran' for Gerry and Sylvia Anderson's Thunderbirds contenders. In all fairness, it's a post-modernist-end-of-the-V-Force styled machine that looks unvelievably dated and square (Jag/Fin dynamics accepted).

[ORAC]

I had a signed copy, it now hangs on my sister’s lounge wall.

She was a teacher and has no interest in aircraft. But my father was an aircraft electrical design engineer and worked on the generator system.

He gave a sigh of relief when it was cancelled. They were pushing the technology of the time to provide enough power fir all the electronics; and very week the avionics engineers were coming back and asking for more...

[Minnie Burner]

In a similar vein to : If you could reintroduce into service an upgraded new build of a proven design.

My vote would go for 'best machine the RAF never had' goes to the Viggen.

In the early 70s we could have been buying Viggens in the place of:
Harriers, Jaguars, and perhaps some F4s, while replacing Lightnings.

Looks good in RAF markings I think


http://i233.photobucket.com/albums/ee65/Scorchi0/Profiles/Viggen/RAF_90s.jpg


http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d30/Jackson001/What%20If%20Models/Viggen3.jpg
Every Jaguar, Lightning and F-4 should've been replaced by F/A-18s more than a generation ago.

[ATSA1]

...But a TSR2 Mk2 with next generation avionics could have been something!

a bit like the Jaguar after NAVWASS...

[ATSA1]

...and yes the JA37 Viggen was gorgeous too!

[NutLoose]

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/600x315/1a_bn_sf_updating_ufo_shado_interceptor_f28c5509bef67a3e2aa2 bc4238ed1ab28320890d.jpg


Must have had severe trim issues when he launched that..

[ORAC]

And raise you......

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/600x450/image_f89eb94d5632a1c0844204c612b2c53ae92824a7.jpeg

[Thrust Augmentation]

TSR2 awful? We just never got to see it warpaint.....


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x631/image_7bf7c047e1d0f0fed683a57c0c82b719c781ad72.jpeg

As mythical as the other green beast below the water (or the camo B-58)!

[Capt Pit Bull]

Oscar EW-58 Phallus, surely....

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Saunders Roe SR-177
Hawker P-1154
Hawker P-1216
BAC TSR-2
MiL Mi-24 Hind
Tupolev TU-95 Bear ASW & MR
F-14 Tomcat
AVRO 730
AVRO CANADA ARROW
EA-6 Prowler
Though not necessarily in that order, please
David

[typerated]

turning the idea around these would have been great exports:

https://www.modelblokez.org.au/bthpix/whatif/luftbucc.jpg





https://www.modelblokez.org.au/bthpix/whatif/usnbucc.jpg
not so much this??

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/JaXMq-B8hYZ0xTAFrHlHG3sSKJ9rwDCPWiYAi12jW7IjHzLN8aiWyAfFrzAMbq23ND slDzTtE42WvHJsWGaF6jXIE0-Tpg9vwtv1CCZeH2Qz2nfYtcIQN1drN7A_asQj0Kjh0vgYdDVXSYJTAg

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/proxy/xCAGSNBO5rTKSH72bI84eTtxXnbyx0uQAMKD3fpXhcF5v6SXvIQ97bw1YhN7 44pK4AfszxDorKltU1VVAc93UOcAvShC8b0t-5PARgfrgY-wTurZQC1Ywq7Uyg6Wa4hqsQHRmuAbSfM

https://wilkybarkid.files.wordpress.com/2016/10/jaguar-usang.png?w=840

[typerated]

A million years ago in a galaxy far, far away, when Phoon was still "Eurofighter 2000" and in trouble at many levels, there was a plot to gap-fill A2A with recently modded and lightly used F-16A ADFs - to be followed by co-development of the delta-wing F-16 variant with the diverterless inlet and LO nozzle. It had gas for days and carried all weapons conformally or semi-conformally. BAE Systems were not happy bunnies, the USAF wanted to be all-stealth (how''s that working out for ya?), and the upper Pentagon levels saw it as a threat to the nascent JAST, later JSF. The avionics ended up in the Block 60.

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/falcon_delta_d17aaa9cb7738a702f1f982baaca578e320b01e5.jpg

Was this Michael Portillo?

Never heard of that development of the F-16 - who was planning this?

I always thought the F-16E/XL was by far the best version - apart from sustained turn it was an order of magnitude better than the standard machine.
Think the USAF missed a big trick not making this the standard buy.

Was the delta a development of the XL?

[FantomZorbin]

F-111K....awesome piece of kit
Except for the escape mechanism I understand.

[Asturias56]

"turning the idea around these would have been great exports:"

I seem to remember that the USA had better aircraft, years earlier than any of the ones pictured........................

[RedhillPhil]

"turning the idea around these would have been great exports:"

I seem to remember that the USA had better aircraft, years earlier than any of the ones pictured........................

Didn't the USMC want the Buccaneer but Wilson blocked the export? I'm fairly sure that it was the same with the Marineflieger. I seem to recall that the Saffers got theirs because the deal was already done.
I may be wrong, I may be working on received wisdom.

[typerated]

"turning the idea around these would have been great exports:"

I seem to remember that the USA had better aircraft, years earlier than any of the ones pictured........................

Intruder - really?

Maybe as a weapon system but as an airframe not in a million years.

[Asturias56]

well.... the Intruder was proven in serious combat over 30 years - can't have been all that bad

but to some extent they were tasked with different missions - the A-6 was designed to fight & support another Korean War (and did in Vietnam) - the Buc was an anti-ship strike aircraft designed from the outset to drop small A weapons - the fact that they were later re-roled to land attack was really due to financial constraints

[Bob Viking]

So was the Tornado GR4 but you don’t often hear people saying what an amazing airframe it was.

For the record, before people get precious, I am a fan of the GR4 but we must all accept it was more a case of crews doing a great job to get the best out of the platform rather than it being a world beating airframe.

BV

[Wensleydale]

The Vauxhall Astra Estate with a Radio!

[LowObservable]

Was this Michael Portillo?

Never heard of that development of the F-16 - who was planning this?

I always thought the F-16E/XL was by far the best version - apart from sustained turn it was an order of magnitude better than the standard machine.
Think the USAF missed a big trick not making this the standard buy.

Was the delta a development of the XL?

It drew some inspiration from the XL but the wing was more F-22-like - the XL wing originated with SST research at NASA. Also, the XL program had ended with the selection of the F-15E for the Dual Role Fighter in 1984, and this later design originated around 1993.

[6f1]

P 1154 supersonic harrier.

[Asturias56]

Probably worse endurance than the P1.b

[pr00ne]

And they never managed to make PCB work, even when trying again in the 80's, so the P1154 is a non starter in anyone's book.

[Asturias56]

Didn't the USMC want the Buccaneer but Wilson blocked the export? I'm fairly sure that it was the same with the Marineflieger. I seem to recall that the Saffers got theirs because the deal was already done.
I may be wrong, I may be working on received wisdom.
Correct -

"Early in the Buccaneer programme, the US Navy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_Navy) had expressed mild interest in the aircraft, but quickly moved on to the development of its comparable Grumman A-6 Intruder (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grumman_A-6_Intruder). The West German Navy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_German_Navy) showed a greater interest, and considered replacing its Hawker Sea Hawks (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawker_Sea_Hawk) with the type, although it eventually decided on the Lockheed F-104G (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_F-104_Starfighter) for its maritime strike requirement, following the bribing of West German government officials in the Lockheed bribery scandals (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_bribery_scandals)."

[The AvgasDinosaur]

I really wish there was more of those ‘What might have been, artists’ on here.
Seriously I do.
David

[ORAC]

You mean like this..... ;)


https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x600/image_84abd1375760c7020cea1d5a66de3c1b8f065c7b.jpeg

[RAFEngO74to09]

For those of a certain boys toys age in the 1960s.

Fireball XL5 + Blue Steel !

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x500/f362_fireball_xl5_raf_b826e7bed172bb6ffafebcf209cecf15dbb5ba 1d.jpg

[RAFEngO74to09]

When TSR2 was cancelled, a Spey powered Mirage IVK was offered but the RAF preferred to go for the F-111K.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/900x336/image_a23b1dd48d3fb58f86919f314563d886069b4f28.png

[The AvgasDinosaur]

ORAC, RAFEngO74to09
Absolutely spot on target, Folks
Thank you, for your time and trouble
David

[RAFEngO74to09]

F-111K would have been great - especially if equipped with Pave Tack - the results during Op DESERT STORM speak for themselves + able to run fighters out of fuel at low level.

https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x381/image_755dd153e3399801e98352a76649e96cdcd1b4f3.png


Plus - if the F-111B had gone ahead for the USN, F-111B for North Sea AD instead of Tornado F3 and multi-role ASuW as well.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x540/image_05f9999151ba685526caddf8a50ae02a6a4cb126.png

[NutLoose]

Old-Duffer:



Flown in as SLF...very agricultural...SHF would be right at home.

:E

Chuffing impressive payload and hot/high performance if I recall...


also had a greater weapons fit available to it than the Mi- 24 Hind

[NutLoose]

You have all missed one that was available and could have been a worldbeater in the sales dept..

Handley Page Herald, already had been redesigned to incorporate a rear ramp, outclassed the Andover in performance on rough ground and didn't need the squatting gear to offload its cargo, sadly lost to us due to the great mans resistance in joining Waste of Space and Government policy because of that.

see

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/handley-page-hp-124-military-herald.4685/

[Herod]

Spot on, Nutty

[NutLoose]

https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/593x433/51_1_4f2fa51be573f9cb4cfd74f518da28d175c132d9.jpg
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/698x320/8_2_fcf429598049ea127201f50ebfbed88dfaccedef.jpg

[Cpt_Pugwash]

I really wish there was more of those ‘What might have been, artists’ on here.
Seriously I do.
David
You may have already found this...
What If Modellers Forum (https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php)

[Wensleydale]

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/888x464/mid_life_update_92c02e986ae55f21cf15991c0e60572e55dab4e4.jpg

[NutLoose]

I really wish there was more of those ‘What might have been, artists’ on here.
Seriously I do.
David
Why, what would you like to see?

[NutLoose]

Rotordyne.. What could have been

General characteristics

Crew: two
Capacity: 40-48 passengers
Length: 58 ft 8 in (17.88 m) of fuselage
Wingspan: 46 ft 6 in (14.17 m) fixed wings
Height: 22 ft 2 in (6.76 m) to top of rotor pylon
Wing area: 475 sq ft (44.1 m2) [47] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-Flight_p193-47)
Airfoil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airfoil): NACA 23015 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NACA_airfoil)[48] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-Selig-48)
Empty weight: 22,000 lb (9,979 kg)
Gross weight: 33,000 lb (14,969 kg)
Fuel capacity: 7,500 lb (3,402 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Napier Eland (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napier_Eland) N.El.7 turboprops (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turboprop), 2,800 shp (2,100 kW) each [49] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-Fairey_p407-49)
Powerplant: 4 × rotor tip jet , 1,000 lbf (4.4 kN) thrust each [50] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-LetLetLet-50)
Main rotor diameter: 90 ft 0 in (27.43 m)
Main rotor area: 6,362 sq ft (591.0 m2) Rotor aerofoil: NACA 0015
Blade tip speed: 720 ft/s (219 m/s)
Disc loading (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disc_loading): 6.14 lb/ft2 (30 kg/m2)
Propellers: 4-bladed, 13 ft (4.0 m) diameter

Performance

Maximum speed: 190.9 mph (307.2 km/h, 165.9 kn) speed record [51] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-Faireys_p419-51)
Cruise speed: 185 mph (298 km/h, 161 kn)
Range: 450 mi (720 km, 390 nmi)
Service ceiling: 13,000 ft (4,000 m)

The larger Rotodyne Z design could be developed to take 57 to 75 passengers which, when equipped with the Tyne engines (5,250 shp/3,910 kW), would have a projected cruising speed of 200 kn (370 km/h). It would be able to carry nearly 8 tons (7 tonnes) of freight; cargoes could have included some British Army (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Army) vehicles and even the intact fuselage of some fighter aircraft that would fit into its fuselage.[30] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-wood_122_124-30) It would have also been able to carry large cargoes externally as an aerial crane, including vehicles and whole aircraft. According to some of the later proposals, the Rotodyne Z would have had a gross weight of 58,500 lb, an extended rotor diameter of 109 ft, and a tapered (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wing_configuration#Chord_variation_along_span) wing with a span of 75 ft.[31] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne#cite_note-wood_124-31)




Comparison

Chinook

Crew: 3 (pilot, copilot, flight engineer or loadmaster)
Capacity:

33–55 troops or
24 stretchers and 3 attendants or
24,000 lb (10,886 kg) payload

Length: 98 ft (30 m) [150] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook#cite_note-Boeing_CH-47F-150)
Fuselage length: 52 ft (16 m)
Width: 12 ft 5 in (3.78 m) (fuselage)[150] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook#cite_note-Boeing_CH-47F-150)
Height: 18 ft 11 in (5.77 m)
Empty weight: 24,578 lb (11,148 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 50,000 lb (22,680 kg)
Powerplant: 2 × Lycoming T55-GA-714A (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lycoming_T55-GA-714A) turboshaft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turboshaft) engines, 4,733 shp (3,529 kW) each
Main rotor diameter: 2× 60 ft (18 m)
Main rotor area: 5,600 sq ft (520 m2)
Blade section: root: Boeing VR-7 ; tip: Boeing VR-8[151] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook#cite_note-Selig-151)

Performance

Maximum speed: 170 kn (200 mph, 310 km/h)
Cruise speed: 160 kn (180 mph, 300 km/h)
Range: 400 nmi (460 mi, 740 km)
Combat range: 200 nmi (230 mi, 370 km)
Ferry range: 1,216 nmi (1,399 mi, 2,252 km) [152] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_CH-47_Chinook#cite_note-152)
Service ceiling: 20,000 ft (6,100 m)
Rate of climb: 1,522 ft/min (7.73 m/s)
Disk loading: 9.5 lb/sq ft (46 kg/m2)
Power/mass (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power-to-weight_ratio): 0.28 hp/lb (0.46 kW/kg)

[Asturias56]

"Rotordyne.. What could have been"

And a nation of deaf people - one thing tho' it would have made selling Concorde easier............. :ok:

[Lomon]

HOTOL


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/286x177/image_8e6478ebad828c9db5a8fe356b84e8c7eeb4ff5f.png

[dogle]

NutLoose, thank you so much for making public the Rotodyne / Chinook comparison (one which I had considered privately in the wayback).
What an opportunity lost ... one of so many in that era.

[NutLoose]

"Rotordyne.. What could have been"

And a nation of deaf people - one thing tho' it would have made selling Concorde easier............. :ok:


The noise issue had been sorted apparently when it was canned. Imagine what we would have today with development.

[Buster Hyman]

CAC-15 Kangaroo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAC_CA-15)
Nor the RAAF for that matter...


https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1218x579/cac_ca_15_502df7dea25d49bc275ab3fd72c4c576d7befc03.jpg

[dagenham]

I
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x500/image_d344dc45b0221e1edd30ef4dfb2de797590a06f6.jpeg
I raise your fireball with thunderbird 2

[Asturias56]

The noise issue had been sorted apparently when it was canned. Imagine what we would have today with development.

I know some people at Fairey's - that's not what they say - there were "hopes" they could reduce the noise but development was stopped before they could really show it was acceptable..... and acceptable in the '60's is very very different from acceptable today - there were still a load of Caravelles flying around Europe then :bored:

[Asturias56]

I
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/960x500/image_d344dc45b0221e1edd30ef4dfb2de797590a06f6.jpeg
I raise your fireball with thunderbird 2


Very smart that............... but would it fit in a standard hangar???

[Mk 1]

Very smart that............... but would it fit in a standard hanger???

Hanger? Don't you mean standard tropical island?

[FantomZorbin]

I understand that a Rotodyne landed at Fairey's in what had been a coalyard adjacent to the factory in Hayes Middx … is this true?

[NutLoose]

I know some people at Fairey's - that's not what they say - there were "hopes" they could reduce the noise but development was stopped before they could really show it was acceptable..... and acceptable in the '60's is very very different from acceptable today - there were still a load of Caravelles flying around Europe then :bored:

but as said, old technology, for one engines today are a lot quieter than the almost straight turbojets of the period, nothing that cannot be fixed, and we are talking military, the likes of the Typhoon / Harrier sn't exactly quiet.

Ahhh the Caravelle, a Comet in disguise, ;). I take it you know why..

[wub]

Very smart that............... but would it fit in a standard hangar???
You keep your other aircraft inside this one

[SASless]

This would have been the Horse to ride......but alas the progress of the war against Germany killed the project as it did so many promising designs.

The end of the war saw the end of so many research projects.


https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.asp?aircraft_id=419

[Asturias56]

SAS - astonished they were still planning "Primary armament was to become an array of 6 x 12.7mm (.50 caliber) machine guns mounted in the wings (a reduction from the 8 x 12.7mm machine guns in the original P-47 Thunderbol)" so late in the war - almost all Erupean fighters had switched to a mix of MG's and Cannon by about 1941. MG's just didn't hack it

[ExAscoteer2]

The Browning .50 fired Armour Piercing Incendiary round and had a greater rate of fire than any cannon. Hence the Americans sticking with it.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Slightly off-topic, but this looks good, an S-3 viking of the Scottish Airforce, based at Stornoway. :-)

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/800x600/whifviking_3d31571be3fc01eaf8f9239a97c1b8603b626c8d.jpg

[typerated]

SAS - astonished they were still planning "Primary armament was to become an array of 6 x 12.7mm (.50 caliber) machine guns mounted in the wings (a reduction from the 8 x 12.7mm machine guns in the original P-47 Thunderbol)" so late in the war - almost all Erupean fighters had switched to a mix of MG's and Cannon by about 1941. MG's just didn't hack it

I think you will find you have picked up the wrong end of the stick - history does not support your thinking.

fighter v fighter 50 cal was an order of magnitude better than canon - not only rate of fire or the amount of lead heading to the target but also the speed of the bullet!
Slow firing, slow velocity cannon with a few 303's that are ineffectual were poor weapons trying to cover the inadequacies of each other in an air/air fight.

You will find the reduction down to 6 50cals had been done in a lot of P-47s operationally. Enough hitting power with 6 - better to have more performance.

[Darren_P]

It also greatly simplified manufacturing & logistics that the 50cal was the standard aircraft offensive & defensive armament as well as plenty of land & sea based applications.

[Cpt_Pugwash]

This one is back on topic , Blackburn B.87 Barghest F(AW).3; “WZ507/A” of the Royal Air Force 19 Squadron; based at RAF Leconfield summer 1959.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/barghest_05194fb4d4738c9ec6471ecb82f036279aedd425.jpg

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/barghest2_9a00ff9bca03ef46ff54f88fc4a25dc94a5d2199.jpg

[NutLoose]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/29th_Infantry_Division_(United_States)

29th infantry might have something to say re the Scottish roundel

[possel]

I understand that a Rotodyne landed at Fairey's in what had been a coalyard adjacent to the factory in Hayes Middx … is this true? If it did, it was THE Rotodyne, as they only completed one (XE521).

It did go to Belgium and France (and back to Heathrow) in 1959, and there are photos of it over the docks in East London in the same year, so it could easily have gone to Hayes as well.

[GeeRam]

If it did, it was THE Rotodyne, as they only completed one (XE521).

It did go to Belgium and France (and back to Heathrow) in 1959, and there are photos of it over the docks in East London in the same year, so it could easily have gone to Hayes as well.

I don't recall there being ever being any 'coal yard' adjacent to the old Fairey works at Hayes?

By the 60's the factory was pretty much surrounded by housing.

[Tashengurt]

This one is back on topic , Blackburn B.87 Barghest F(AW).3; “WZ507/A” of the Royal Air Force 19 Squadron; based at RAF Leconfield summer 1959.


https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/barghest_05194fb4d4738c9ec6471ecb82f036279aedd425.jpg

https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/640x480/barghest2_9a00ff9bca03ef46ff54f88fc4a25dc94a5d2199.jpg

Looks like the b*stard child of a Buccaneer, Javelin and Voodoo.
If my dog was that ugly I'd shave it's arse and make it walk backwards!

[The AvgasDinosaur]

Why, what would you like to see?
SR-177, TU-95 Avro 730 or any others of my list above.
David

[etudiant]

SR-177, TU-95 Avro 730 or any others of my list above.
David
If the Tu-95 is fair game, surely the MiG-25 would have been equally appropriate, for high performance air defense.
Massive radar, oodles of missiles and reasonable fuel; a real warplane.

[dagenham]

???

http://www.clavework-graphics.co.uk/aircraft/fantasy_8/F726_MiG_21_Red_Arrows.jpg

[SWBKCB]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/29th_Infantry_Division_(United_States)

29th infantry might have something to say re the Scottish roundel

Scottish Air Force might have something to say about the Navy titles!

[typerated]

Every Jaguar, Lightning and F-4 should've been replaced by F/A-18s more than a generation ago.

https://live.staticflickr.com/8695/17463332122_2162eacd52_b.jpg

[typerated]

These would have done a job.

Way ahead of its time - think F-16XL


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48842680177_f210e5fb06_b.jpg

[dagenham]

[QUOTE=typerated;10713468]These would have done a job.

Way ahead of its time - think F-16XL


https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48842680177_f210e5fb06_b.jpgCough draken cough cough ok boomer 😂

[RAFEngO74to09]

I was in MOD 1989 to 1994 in a couple of posts seeing circulation papers when the RAF was offered the F-15E at a preferential price to extend production for a lot less than Harrier GR5 was costing at the time. Given that the main raison d'etre for Harrier GR5 and later models - forward field operations in Germany - had gone by then, there is no doubt in my mind which the better bang for the buck would have been in the long term.

The sheer combination of performance and weapon load carrying ability - both in weight and variety terms - of the F-15E is unsurpassed in any fighter even today.

Whether the RAF would ever have been able to avail itself of all the offered upgrades - both to the aircraft and in terms of weapons options - over the last 25 years is another matter.

However, had the F-15E been procured, both the Jaguar and the Harrier could have been binned earlier than they were, with significant savings in support costs - one fleet instead of two - and there would have been a lot less messing around with fleet-within-fleet issues to get an acceptable theatre entry standard for the deployed operations that followed.

F-15Es bought in the mid-1990s would most probably still be on the RAF's front line now.

Taking things a step further - although it's unlikely to happen in the UK - for any small air arm looking to expand it's capability exponentially in a relatively short timescale - and or to augment its relatively small buy of F-35s - the F-15EX offers a lot of capability for the money.

Even the USAF - with its ongoing ageing fighter fleet recapitalization issue - is just beginning to realize this.

This is an interesting article on the F-15EX debate going on in the USA - with plenty of pictures of F-15E weapon load combinations, details of F-15EX upgrades, and descriptions of various capabilities that have emerged over the years and others that could be developed in the future.

https://warontherocks.com/2019/06/f-15ex-the-strategic-blind-spot-in-the-air-forces-fighter-debate/

[vascodegama]

Why not go the whole hog and replace the Tornado (both marks ) with F15E. There would of course be the small issue of not having a compatible tanker. Just as well we thought about that with Voyager!

[ORAC]

Why not go the whole hog and replace the Tornado (both marks ) with F15E. Hmmm, because we haven’t got any left in service?

[vascodegama]

Hmmm, because we haven’t got any left in service?

Read the original point and you will see that the point was being made in the past tense (as the whole thread was intended) !

[TBM-Legend]

???

http://www.clavework-graphics.co.uk/aircraft/fantasy_8/F726_MiG_21_Red_Arrows.jpg


I must say that the Mig 21U looks quite the picture....

The RAF should have bought B-52's by the way...

[etudiant]

I must say that the Mig 21U looks quite the picture....

The RAF should have bought B-52's by the way...

The preferred MiG aircraft would have been the MiG-25, better legs, better radar and better armament. I wonder whether it was ever offered during the Yeltsin era?

[BEagle]

I was in MOD 1989 to 1994 in a couple of posts seeing circulation papers when the RAF was offered the F-15E at a preferential price to extend production for a lot less than Harrier GR5 was costing at the time. Given that the main raison d'etre for Harrier GR5 and later models - forward field operations in Germany - had gone by then, there is no doubt in my mind which the better bang for the buck would have been in the long term.

That would have made 't Bungling Baron Waste O'Space spit his dummy!

Back in the early '80s, the RAF acquired the F-4J for 74 Sqn. Allegedly there was astonished amazement over at North Island and Miramar: "Those old things which were bouncing around in carriers in the South China Sea before being retired to the desert? Surely you mean the F-14?" But no, the old jets were salvaged from the desert, given a quick repaint and flown over to the UK on 5 separate Tiger Trail trips... Which was great for the VC10K tanker crews; back then the pods hadn't been cleared for JP-4, so after uploading USN fuel at Miramar, we came back via civil airports rather than USAF bases.

The RAF should have bought B-52's by the way...

Good grief no! We should have persisted with Vulcan + Skybolt as the deterrent until TSR-2 was ready and let the fish heads carry on with their global cockers P warfare!

[Minnie Burner]

The non fantasy "what happened was" posts on this thread are simply too depressing.

[typerated]

Maybe not for the RAF but the AAC would have got some use out of these.

Maybe might have meant Lynx was still born?

https://live.staticflickr.com/896/40612283644_59c3b59370_b.jpg

[Mil-26Man]

The preferred MiG aircraft would have been the MiG-25, better legs, better radar and better armament. I wonder whether it was ever offered during the Yeltsin era?

Offered to who? The RAF? Why on earth would the Russians have considered offering the MiG-25 to the UK, and why would the RAF have considered buying an already 30-year old design at the time Yeltsin came into power that was intended for one purpose - to bring down the SR-71 - for which it had already proven itself to be wholly inadequate and which was a mission the RAF clearly had no need of? So many questions...

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Always thought that when the Cousins prematurely retired these in 1969/70:

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/438x398/b_58_8fe0a82d869c2e3eb7b1a8c6785f59170084ffaa.png

They could have chucked 'em in our direction. If the Vulcan was considered operationally viable from 1970 to 1982 then, presumably, the B-58 would have been equally - if not more, so.

[Asturias56]

I must say that the Mig 21U looks quite the picture....

The RAF should have bought B-52's by the way...


looks fabulous!!

[Asturias56]

Always thought that when the Cousins prematurely retired these in 1969/70:

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/438x398/b_58_8fe0a82d869c2e3eb7b1a8c6785f59170084ffaa.png

They could have chucked 'em in our direction. If the Vulcan was considered operationally viable from 1970 to 1982 then, presumably, the B-58 would have been equally - if not more, so.

Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support

[RedhillPhil]

Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support
​
​​​​​I was going to say that there was a reason that the cousins got shot of these maintenance-heavy fuel drinkers but you beat me to it.

[Asturias56]

From Wiki:-Through FY (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiscal_year) 1961, the total cost of the B-58 program was $3 billion ($20 billion in 2018 dollars).=10.8333px A highly complex aircraft, it also required considerable maintenance, much of which required specialized equipment and ground personnel. For comparison, the average maintenance cost per flying hour for the B-47 was $361, for the B-52 it was $1,025 and for the B-58 it was $1,440. The B-58 cost three times as much to operate as the B-52.=10.8333px

The cost of maintaining and operating the two operational B-58 wings (39 aircraft per wing) equaled that of six wings of B-52s (only 15 aircraft per wing). Because of the support costs of six wings vs only two wings, the actual cost per aircraft of the B-52s were $1.42 million per year vs $1.21 million per year for the B-58 (This figure included special detailed maintenance for the nose landing gear, which retracted in a complex fashion to avoid the center payload).

Compounding these exorbitant costs, the B-58 had a high accident rate: 26 B-58 aircraft were lost in accidents, 22.4% of total production, more than half of the losses occurred during flight tests. The SAC senior leadership had been doubtful about the aircraft type from the beginning, although its crews eventually became enthusiastic about the aircraft. General Curtis LeMay (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_LeMay) was never satisfied with the bomber, and after a flight in one declared that it was too small, far too expensive to maintain in combat readiness and required an excessive number of aerial refuelings (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerial_refueling) to complete a mission.] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convair_B-58_Hustler#cite_note-45) Although the high altitude ferry range of the B-58 was better than that of the B-47's, the lack of forward basing resulted in a requirement for more KC-135 tanker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_KC-135_Stratotanker) support.

[Mil-26Man]

Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support

But enough about the Vulcan, what about the B-58?

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

"Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support"

Operational capability always comes at a price; un-refuelled range - not much less than a Vulcan following the same (Hi-Lo-Lo-Hi) profile - therefore no more limited in capability when operating from a Western European base and only very dependent on tanker support when operating in the SAC regime from USA bases. And at least it would have been tanker compatible (albeit from cooperative USAFE assets), whereas the Vulcan (in the timeframe under discussion) wasn't AAR current/capable. (moreover, all the crew had escape facilities!!!!)

[Asturias56]

After Skybolt was cancelled the UK had Polaris - they sure as hell weren't in the market for a new supersonic bomber............ we forget the Vulcan requirement dated back to January 1947.............

[Buster Hyman]

Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support

Nah
, it had that massive Auxiliary fuel tank underneath...oh wait...

[Asturias56]

I always wondered what it would be like to have one of those "mission Pods" land in a populated area..................

[pr00ne]

Asturia56,

Isn't that what they were designed to do?

Only someone else's populated area.

[nipva]

Wasn't the almost impossible handling with the loss of an outboard engine, especially in reheat, also a reason for its premature demise? Just looking at it shows a palpable assymmetric handling issue.

[Asturias56]

Wasn't the almost impossible handling with the loss of an outboard engine, especially in reheat, also a reason for its premature demise? Just looking at it shows a palpable assymmetric handling issue.


I understand they lost at least 2 when that happened - awful snap and disintegration

[Mk 1]

B-58 trivia - at the aircraft's top speed, its tail defensive cannon's rounds actually had a 'tailwind'. Edit - nope not correct - aircraft forward speed 590m/s. Rounds travelling at 1030m/s.

[Ascend Charlie]

The B-58 was definitely NOT built to last - my 1959 vintage 18" plastic model, which had a pod which ejected forward, courtesy of a spring, had a habit of ejecting the spring as well, which eventually was unable to be found. And I can vouch for the nosewheel problems too, it fell off after about 6 months.

My model of the Canberra was much better, and carried a barrage of marbles internally, dropped by a little bomb-bay trapdoor.

[ORAC]

https://b58facts.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/b-58-facts-yaw-damper/

[Asturias56]

IIRC someone asked the F-111 main test pilot if it could be landed with the wings still at full sweep.

he said - "sure just the same as landing a B-58..." :eek:

[Asturias56]

https://b58facts.wordpress.com/2017/09/21/b-58-facts-yaw-damper/

Interesting ORAC - when they say 12 degree yaw is "untenable" it tells us all we need to know. A very hot ship, a very fast ship but not a safe ship..............

[etudiant]

Interesting ORAC - when they say 12 degree yaw is "untenable" it tells us all we need to know. A very hot ship, a very fast ship but not a safe ship..............

Untenable at Mach 2, sounds reasonable to me.

[West Coast]

Hellishly expensive to operate, limited range and very dependent on tanker support


Most importantly, the belief that high altitude/high speed made it invulnerable to Soviet missiles was shattered.

[Asturias56]

Back on thread I always thought the Corsair II would have been a decent buy

[Thud_and_Blunder]

Re the Corsair II, ISTR that the SLUF had the same (NAVWAS?) system as our Jag's, but with the originally spec'd gyro platform, rather than the cheap-and-nasty low cost option we were obliged to buy (along with rubbish, but by jingo British rubbish (remember the Alberts?)) PTR170 comms. Whereas our pilots became very well practised at heads-down, low-level reboots of the entire nav-attack system (those that survived the procedure, anyway...) it was a rare-ish event with the A7. Perhaps someone with actual knowledge can put me right - my memory was never the best.

[sycamore]

T & B, think `Gums` will be along to let you know....

[RAFEngO74to09]

The A-7D would have been more capable than the Jaguar for the Dual Capable strike / attack role in RAFG. Bigger conventional weapon load with more options off-the-shelf (Shrike, Walleye, HARM, Maverick), M61A1 20mm rotary cannon, TFR and could have carried up to 4 x B-61 nuclear weapons under dual key arrangements - continuing the USAF security arrangements that were already in place for the Phantom FGR2 with the B43/B57.

The Jaguar order could have been left at the original number for advanced flying training and then TWU.
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/780x508/image_22e73e8a1987911de7c32078a6f1e15ab730abe5.png

From this source: http://www.aircraftinformation.info/art_A7.htm

"As the Air Force began issuing requirements for their version of the Corsair II, it became obvious that a new designation was needed to reflect the 20-plus changes made to the airframe. The designation A-7D was thus assigned. Most significant among the new changes was the fitting of a new, more powerful engine. More thrust was wanted for the A-7D, but the TF-30 couldn't deliver. As an afterburning variant of the TF-30 would take too long to develop, the Air Force selected the British Rolls-Royce RB162-256 Spey turbofan instead. It was licence-built in the US by Allison as the TF41-A-1 and developed 6 460 kg (14 250 lb) of thrust, which was 1 300 kg (2 900 lb) more than the TF30. A-7Ds also had a revised avionics suite and their two Mk 12 cannons deleted. These were replaced by a M61A-1 Vulcan 20 mm six-barrel cannon firing at a selectable rate of 4 000 or 6 000 rounds per minute with a maximum rate of fire of 6 600 rounds per minute. It was mounted in the port side of the fuselage and provided with 1 000 rounds of ammunition. A KB-18A strike camera in the lower forward fuselage engine compartment was used for strike damage assessment.

Avionics were radically upgraded, the main changes going into the sophisticated new navigation and weapon delivery system that allowed all-weather operation. The AN/ASN-91 navigation/weapon delivery computer was the primary element of the system and continuously computed weapons delivery and navigation data for greatly increased weapons delivery accuracy. An AN/ASN-90 inertial measurement set provided basic three-axis navigation and an AN/APN-190 Doppler radar measured speed and drift angle. The new AN/APG-126 forward-looking radar provided nine modes of operation for air-to-ground ranging, terrain-following, terrain-avoidance, ground mapping, and other functions. An AN/AVQ-7 head-up display received and displayed computed attack, navigation and landing data from the tactical computer, and a projected map display showed navigation data."

[pr00ne]

RAFEng074to09,

Are you deliberately trying to historically wreck the British aerospace industry? Your little suggestion re that thing called the Jaguar would have meant no Hawk....

As to the A7 I'm not sure, the Jaguar squadrons in RAFG replaced Phantom FGR2 squadrons, and I'm not at all sure that anybody who suggested replacing a strike attack Phantom FGR2 with an A-7 would have been taken seriously. Seeing as how the Jaguar was rapidly replaced with Tornado, why not just leave the Phantom FGR2 in RAFG strike attack and find something else to do AD?

[Minnie Burner]

RAFEng074to09,

why not just leave the Phantom FGR2 in RAFG strike attack and find something else to do AD?

Like I said earlier....
https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1242/etjpw9ox0aejjox_b14640aa066752f49fa934316d7f23f0da1df2ff.jpe g

[Minnie Burner]

ORAC
How often did you see an Eagle refuelling from a Victor?

[ORAC]

My first tour as an FC was at Neatishead in 1975. One of the sorties I controlled was providing flight safety cover for a pair of F-15As who were intercepting low level targets under the control of an E-3A. All three in the UK on a sales demo for the RAF, and within months of the first USAF Sqn forming.

The period overlapped precisely with the time the FGR-2s were being transferred to 11 Gp in the AD rile (Oct 74 to late 76).

If the Jag hadn’t been converted into a bomber rather than a trainer, or had been just a couple of years later, the RAF might well have replaced the single seat Lightning with the single seat F-15A.

The F-18 first flight wasn’t until 1978, and it didn’t enter operational service till 1983. Way to late for the RAF.

[typerated]

By the early 70s the RAF could have been:

F-4 for long range AD
Viggen for short range AD and CAS/BAI replacing Lightnings and ordered instead of Harrier and Jaguar
Buccaneer for strike.

With upgrades these could have been relevant well into the 90s.
Think what the Germans did with the F-4, and a Buccaneer Mk3 with essentially Tornado avionics

If Typhoon had not been too delayed we could have missed out a whole generation of Tornado GR1/4/F3 and Harrier GR5/7/9 etc with no drop in capability?

[Asturias56]

But what would have happened to the shareholders in BAe????

[typerated]

probably not as bad as it sounds.

building Bucc's
Viggens under licence and mid life on F4's.

Maybe might have had more chance of exporting these than say Jag's??

[DCThumb]

By the early 70s the RAF could have been:


Think what the Germans did with the F-4, and a Buccaneer Mk3 with essentially Tornado avionics
?

I understand that a Buccaneer flew with Tornado Avionics as a test bed. As a weapons platform it was more capable then the Tornado particularly with a full load I believe. As soon as the avionics trial concluded it was destroyed to prevent any more embarrassing evidence being gathered. Apparently.

[ORAC]

https://www.pprune.org/military-aviation/370724-buccaneer-versus-tornado-there-s-only-one-way-find-out.html#post4873962