Originally Posted by
pr00ne
Typerated,
Just to further back up what Finningley Boy said earlier, the RAF got exactly what they wanted in MRCA/Tornado. The range issue concerned the TSR-2 and F-111K, and was predicated round the Far East requirement, not Europe. Even after the pull out from Singapore and Malaysia was announced, Healey was talking about basing long range strike aircraft (TSR-2 then F-111K) on islands in the Indian ocean or even in Australia.
The MRCA as was was conceived in a post Far East era and that long range requirement was no longer there. The idea of the RAF striking Moscow went with the end of the V-Bomber deterrent, and the tactical requirement was to strike Eastern Europe and the Kola peninsular, which is what Tornado was actually designed for.
It was THE best solution to this need, and gave the RAF the fast, low level, two seat radar equipped well defended strike aircraft it had sought to replace Canberra from the late 50's on. Buccaneer was an interim replacement, never really up to the job, and as for Jaguar...
The MRCA was in fact the REAL replacement for the Jaguar's predecessor, the Phantom FGR2, the aircraft I flew in Germany. This was the fast, low level two seat well equipped and versatile radar equipped strike aircraft that the RAF needed in Europe. Just so ironic that it had actually been a planned purchase to replace Lightning in the AD role. The fact that the RN no longer had a requirement for their FG1 fleet beyond the 28 they eventually took, meant that some one in the ivory towers realised just what they could do in Germany with the FGR2, especially as NATO had adopted flexible response and a conventional period of warfare, as opposed to the all out nuclear retaliation that the TSR-2 was designed for.
I realise that the MRCA range was woeful compared to that of the Vulcan, but in fact there never actually WAS a Vulcan replacement in the RAF, as the bulk of the RAF Tornado fleet was committed to Germany, thus restoring a level of credibility to the strike attack role lost when the Jaguar replaced the FGR2 in Germany. When the RAFG Jaguar squadrons re-equipped with Tornado the Vulcan squadrons just withered on the vine and were disbanded one after the other. The TRUE Vulcan replacement of course was Polaris, THIS was the UK threat to Moscow and other points east. The remaining Vulcans post 1969 being committed to theatre nuclear strike, the conventional capability also being left to wither on the vine, hence the hasty rushing around to resurrect it in 1982!
In fact, talking of the post 1969 theatre nuclear Vulcans, I always wondered at some of my allocated strike targets in RAFG. SAM sites and similar in Eastern Germany, they always to me looked like we were blasting a path for someone else...
And as for your snipe at the F3, it was NOT a fighter designed to mix it with Migs and Sukhois, it was a long range autonomous interceptor designed to loiter 400 miles off the UK coast at low level at night or in a snow storm and take out Regimental sized Backfire raids heading for the UK. NO other aircraft of the day, with the possible exception of the AIM-54 equipped F-14, came anywhere near meeting that requirement. It wasn't the fault of the F3 that the world changed in 1989.
Depends I suppose by when you are looking at the RAF' requirements - in 1968 for the "Future Aircraft Study" this was for an aircraft with strategic range and with the range for operation outside of the Central Front.
But as the other 5 nations (initially) for MCRA were after a single seat F-104 replacement the RAF requirement was whittle away. From 1000 miles radius for F-111 and TSR_2 down to 700 ish for AFVG Tornado radius was heading south in order to secure collaboration.
It might be what they wanted when they got them but it was not what the started the exercise wanting - not even close!
As an aside to the RAF 60/early 70s purchasing fun and games to buy the Harrier/Jaguar /F-4/ Buccaneer/ Tornado - they will come in useful we just don't know where yet philosophy!
The Tornado requirement for the Germans was impacted by the Luftwaffe wanting to buy the Jaguar to replace the F-104 but being lent on to buy the F-4F (to offset the cost of US troops in Germany - echos of today!) the F-4 was then more used as a fighter.
On face value I'd agree with your F3 comments - the F-15 was rejected as single seat design and the need was seen for a 2 seater interceptor to find the Backfires behind lots of ECM.
But I'd also suggest it did not need too much imagination to envisage an Air-Air only F-15E variant - I might be wrong but I'm sure Warton did!