Writing a book on the cold war turning hot (with paper planes)

X

XR226

Guest
Hello,
This is my first post and i'm not too sure where to put it. Apologies in advance.

I'm planning in the near future to write a book about an armed conflict between the USSR and NATO. The majority of the action centers on the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm.
It will be set in the early nineties and feature some RAF aircraft that never made it into production.

Notably:
BAC TSR-2
HS.681
Hawker P.1216
Hawker P.1154 (RN and RAF variants)
Westland Rotodyne Type Z

Would these aircraft still be in service (with the exception of the P.1216 as that would just have entered service) by that time, or would the RAF replaced them?



Thanks
 
Sounds interesting, I guess it depends how far back your alternative history starts as to what aircraft you use. I'd leave out the P.1154 and stick to Harrier GR3s and Sea Harrier FRS1s being replaced by P.1216s. Add in some multi-role VC-10s too!

Good luck with the story.
 
Would the Shorts Belfast still be used?
I'd like to use the P.1154, but would it have been successful? Or would it be like the TSR-2, spend huge amounts of money on it and then the politicians cancel it.
The alternate timeline starts in 1957 with Duncan Sandys not writing his Defence White Paper.

I'm just writing down ideas at the moment, not actual story. (except that it starts at Gravelly Hill Interchange aka Spaghetty Junction, which is outside Birmingham)
 
XR 226

You have certainly come to the right site. If you take a look at the various threads on projects here you will soon realise how many different views and how much information there is around.

If you can get hold of a copy of Damien Burke's excellent book on the TSR 2 it will give you an insight into how this single project is full of difficult problems, any single one of which might have made the final aircraft well nigh impossible to introduce into service easily.

Michael Pryce (Harrier) has authored an article on 1154 which is available online. Reading this you will again see how involved the subject is. Harrier has also written an article on 681.

A novel based on an RAF or Fleet Air Arm Squadron operating one type of what-if aircraft might be a good starting point. There are a number of excellent novels around about real world military actions involving such squadrons. Using a what-if aircraft and perhaps also including some of the pitfalls and politics would be spicy indeed.

World War 3 has its own massive series of books and articles (I think there is an excellent listing of these somewhere online). Taking the Cold War beyond its real world end in 1991 (Gulf War etc) has also been done in places. Usually the assumption has been that Gorbachev is thrown out and replaced by a hardliner (what many feared at the time) either by a political coup or (as happened but failed) a military coup. This also opens up the possibility of Soviet what-ifs in equipment.

I admit to being a bit nerdish (okay I make Nyles Crane look like Wayne Rooney on this subject) so would never dream of trying to tack on real world characters and in particular the services who do an amazing job to the strange world of what-if. If you can and produce a decent novel in the process, good on you. Frederick Forsyth, who wrote what is still the best WHat-if political thriller "Day of the Jackal", had to do an enormous amount of research and was a trained journalist with experience in danger zones and the political world. Writing what he knew about from personal experience made the novel.

Hope some of this helps. If all else fails the models and pictures of these planes will keep you hooked.

UK 75
 
Ey up Everyone,
I've been on holiday down south (Portsmouth).
Thanks for the advice and guidance.
In response to uk75, i have a copy of Damien Burke's TSR-2 book and a very good read it is too.

I will do more research.

I'll report back soon

(And i apparently can't spell Spaghetti)
 
uk 75 said:
XR 226

If you can get hold of a copy of Damien Burke's excellent book on the TSR 2 it will give you an insight into how this single project is full of difficult problems, any single one of which might have made the final aircraft well nigh impossible to introduce into service easily.
Click to expand...

If the premise is that Sandys never wrote the White Paper, one can argue that many of the projects which were cancelled would have gone ahead, and the rationalisation of the industry might have been accomplished in a less brutal fashion. TSR.2 might well have been developed differently, with EE given clear leadership of the project and not forced into a marriage of bull-headed equals with Vickers, nor forced to adopt the red-headed stepchild which was the BS Olympus to power its baby. In fact, with other fighter projects going ahead, EE might have been able to drop the Lightning and devote full effort to getting the TSR.2/P.17 right, on budget, and something approaching on time.

(ETA: Not to mention that with other projects going ahead, it would not be forced to become all things to all men and the specification might have stayed within sane limits.)

A novel based on an RAF or Fleet Air Arm Squadron operating one type of what-if aircraft might be a good starting point. There are a number of excellent novels around about real world military actions involving such squadrons. Using a what-if aircraft and perhaps also including some of the pitfalls and politics would be spicy indeed.
Click to expand...

IMO read John Winton's "Carrier" and take the fate of the fictitious HMS Furious's air group as an example of what NOT to do. (Spoiler available on request if you want it.)

I have to admit, I briefly considered such a novel, set in the late 1950s. Real life and competing projects ate up too much of my time. :(
 
pathology_doc said:
IMO read John Winton's "Carrier" and take the fate of the fictitious HMS Furious's air group as an example of what NOT to do. (Spoiler available on request if you want it.)

I have to admit, I briefly considered such a novel, set in the late 1950s. Real life and competing projects ate up too much of my time. :(
Click to expand...
Think you mean John Wingate's "Carrier" http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/w/john-wingate/ he also wrote "Submarine" and "Frigate". Good reads if I remember correctly.
 
One thing to note is that if an earlier cancelled project goes ahead, for example the P1154, it is going to have an effect on future projects in that timeline. So it's unlikely there'd be a project called the P1216, but on the other hand an aircraft project like it might appear.
 
I've done a little more research and the 1966 Defence White Paper (in my stories universe) will not be written.

Instead the RAF and RN and Army magically (i haven't figured out how to explain this though) get enough funds to build and procure all the major military projects that were cancelled.
 
XR 226

I have been giving this some more thought. Are you familiar with the Alternative Universe Sci Fi and Sci Fantasy stories that appear in both novel and comic form. A few years back there was an excellently imagined (if rather bleak) Comicbook novel called "Ministry of Space" in which Britain actually had a Space Programme and landed on the Moon and Mars (Sadly it was funded by Gold stolen from Nazi looting in the Camps).
The beauty of the comic book format is of course that one can have marvelous illustrations of the equipment involved and it requires less sticking to the limitations of the real world.
As you will have found, there were very strong real world reasons why the equipment in the 50s and 60s did not come to fruition. TSR 2 in particular would have had to take a very different form if it were to be a practical weapon.
There are also a number of different turning points. The 1957 Defence White Paper killed off the big Avro 730 bomber and the various Fighter Interceptor programmes. Had these continued in an alternate world, the TSR 2 programme would not have taken the form it did. Similarly if the 1962 era planned weapons (TSR2/681/1154 and CVA 01 carrier) worked as the planned wanted (no 1966 financial crisis and East of Suez withdrawal) they would have continued in service well into the 80s at least, and probably beyond. Their successor systems would have been radically different from Eurofighter or P1216- probably evolutionary rather than a clean break. European collaboration was always sought as the next step after these programmes.
 
SteveO said:
pathology_doc said:
IMO read John Winton's "Carrier" and take the fate of the fictitious HMS Furious's air group as an example of what NOT to do. (Spoiler available on request if you want it.)

I have to admit, I briefly considered such a novel, set in the late 1950s. Real life and competing projects ate up too much of my time. :(
Click to expand...
Think you mean John Wingate's "Carrier" http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/w/john-wingate/ he also wrote "Submarine" and "Frigate". Good reads if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

*D'oh!* Thanks for that. Yes, that's the one. Haven't read "Submarine", but from the precis given on the back jacket of Carrier, it doesn't end well for the heroes. (Didn't he also write a WW2 novel where a major character suffers a horrific death on the last day of the war? Dismal endings would seem to be a pattern with him.)

Instead the RAF and RN and Army magically (i haven't figured out how to explain this though) get enough funds to build and procure all the major military projects that were cancelled.
Click to expand...

Oodles of North Sea oil money with the Arab oil crisis magically backdated ten years? "We found the money somehow" is easy enough to explain. Perhaps all the US military a/c sales efforts to Europe, Japan, etc. failed because of dodgy salesmen or clever industrial espionage :p , and Britain's aircraft industry had $$$$ from licence building and O/S purchases. Perhaps Duncan Sandys had an aviation epiphany the night before he tabled his White Paper (or a midnight visit from a whole bunch of burly RAF and FAA pilots), and with a government hell-bent on making and selling a/c instead of cancelling them, the Brits got the edge in the European/pro-Western overseas market? B) The possibilities are endless.
 
All the non-existent White Paper's and how the aircraft entered production/service is backstory and won't be covered to too greater detail.
I just want it to be plausible (including where they get there money from).
 
pathology_doc said:
SteveO said:
pathology_doc said:
IMO read John Winton's "Carrier" and take the fate of the fictitious HMS Furious's air group as an example of what NOT to do. (Spoiler available on request if you want it.)

I have to admit, I briefly considered such a novel, set in the late 1950s. Real life and competing projects ate up too much of my time. :(
Click to expand...
Think you mean John Wingate's "Carrier" http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/w/john-wingate/ he also wrote "Submarine" and "Frigate". Good reads if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...

*D'oh!* Thanks for that. Yes, that's the one. Haven't read "Submarine", but from the precis given on the back jacket of Carrier, it doesn't end well for the heroes. (Didn't he also write a WW2 novel where a major character suffers a horrific death on the last day of the war? Dismal endings would seem to be a pattern with him.)
Click to expand...
Haven't read the WW2 novel but yes, the story telling was rather sobering. Probably a very realistic account of fighting WW3 with the state of the UK's armed forces in the 80's.
 
uk 75 said:
A few years back there was an excellently imagined (if rather bleak) Comicbook novel called "Ministry of Space" in which Britain actually had a Space Programme and landed on the Moon and Mars (Sadly it was funded by Gold stolen from Nazi looting in the Camps).
Click to expand...
Yups, that was an excellent read.
 
Evil Flower said:
uk 75 said:
A few years back there was an excellently imagined (if rather bleak) Comicbook novel called "Ministry of Space" in which Britain actually had a Space Programme and landed on the Moon and Mars (Sadly it was funded by Gold stolen from Nazi looting in the Camps).
Click to expand...
Yups, that was an excellent read.
Click to expand...


Idd, one of the best things Warren Ellis ever wrote. And I'm a big Ellis fan.

51EnH%2BttlZL._SL500_AA300_.jpg
 
XR226 said:
Hello,
This is my first post and i'm not too sure where to put it. Apologies in advance.

I'm planning in the near future to write a book about an armed conflict between the USSR and NATO. The majority of the action centers on the RAF and the Fleet Air Arm.
It will be set in the early nineties and feature some RAF aircraft that never made it into production.

Notably:
BAC TSR-2
HS.681
Hawker P.1216
Hawker P.1154 (RN and RAF variants)
Westland Rotodyne Type Z

Would these aircraft still be in service (with the exception of the P.1216 as that would just have entered service) by that time, or would the RAF replaced them?

Thanks
Click to expand...


the Hawker P.1154 "Harrier" would be in service around the nineties
and have show in Falkland War, how good supersonic VTOL are
OTL: See who long the Harrier (P.1127) is now in Service


On BAC TSR-2 with this Plane in service
there would be NOT Panavia "Tornado" but a Panavia "Panther", one men Fighter
index.php

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3836.0.html
OTL: GB insisted on two men multi-use Combat jet, in order to get a new Bomber
I even make the speculation that TSR.2 is sell to Other NATO partners as Bomber (like to Germany and Italy)
But TSR-2 need British Commutation and Navigation Satellite in Orbit, so you need Blue Streak Sat launch Rocket
so push that ELDO works
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4130.0.html
or take pure British solution
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,5063.0.html
 
TSR-2 did not need a satellite network, it just needed to work, and not be crushingly expensive, and be considerably more flexible, etc have such bloody impossible demands placed on it. Why the hell does a tactical bomber need to be capable of a 1000nm radius thermonuclear strike unrefuelled on internal tankage after short-field takeoff, fer gawd's sake?

Then of course there's project management and the bureaucracy; but if they'd stuck to what they said they wanted instead of what they kept on asking for, the P.17 could have been designed wholly by EE, with half the manufacturing outsourced to Vickers if Govt. was really that desperate to merge companies, and the whole process might have run a lot smoother.
 
pathology_doc said:
Why the hell does a tactical bomber need to be capable of a 1000nm radius thermonuclear strike unrefuelled on internal tankage after short-field takeoff, fer gawd's sake?
Click to expand...

Presumably, to launch a retaliatory strike after all the big airfields and loitering tankers are destroyed.
 
Sorry to be a bit dull, but TSR 2 had a quite specific role. It was intended to replace the Valiants and Canberras in the RAF's operational theatre nuclear role. It was not intended to carry the national deterrent.
The Valiant squadrons were eventually replaced in this role by Vulcans after Polaris took on the deterrent. They were roled with dropping WE177s on targets like airfields and railway junctions in either Europe or possibly in support of CENTO and SEATO. Tornados took on this role in the 80s but lacked the range of Vulcans or F-111s.
Had TSR 2 worked either in its BAC or original English Electric version, its task would have been mainly NATO assignments.
In the real world the UK did not become involved in a shooting war where TSR2 could have been used until the 1991 Gulf War (It would have been less useful than the Vulcan in the Falklands).
Even in 1991 TSR2 would have been a less efective conventional weapon platform than the Tornado. TSR2 was not designed to carry much in the way of conventional weapons.
A war story involving TSR2 squadrons would be up to and possibly nuclear release actions.
 
Of course a novel might embroil the UK in a hypothetical confrontation which played to the TSR2s (and the HS 1154/HS 681 combination) other major role.

The TSR2 was also intended to provide a nuclear delivery system for rapid deployment to the Far East in support of British interests there. Mainly the defence of Malaysia and Singapore. There was a real fear that Indonesia might be developed as a Soviet satelite in the region, and that it might even get nuclear weapons that could threaten Australia as well. China was also feared as a possible sponsor of nuclear rogue states in the region.

The UK intended to deploy a fleet at Singapore based on a CVA 01 and supporting ships, and a Commando carrier. The RAF would provided tactical airpower and mobility for the UK 3 Division's airportable brigades. TSR2 would provide a nuclear punch, freeing the Vulcans for conventional bombing and eventually replacing them/
 
IMHO, the TSR.2 reference mission makes a lot of sense - 1,000 nautical miles from Lincolnshire gets you into most of the non-Soviet Warsaw Pact countries, and in the context of the time dispersing aircraft to unimproved sites made a lot of sense. Remember that the original TFX specification was fairly similar, including the rough field requirement. These aren't really 'tactical' but 'theatre' strike aircraft. The real oddity to my mind is calling for high level Mach 2 performance and low-level subsonic penetration on the same sortie.
uk 75 said:
Even in 1991 TSR2 would have been a less efective conventional weapon platform than the Tornado. TSR2 was not designed to carry much in the way of conventional weapons.
Click to expand...
OTOH, it's reasonable to suppose that over 15 to 20 years of service some capability between 'drop iron bombs' and 'obliterate small city' would be provided for.

Edit: fix quote tags.
 
RLBH

You are of course right that there were options to fit TSR 2 with conventional armament.

However, when you examine the external carriage options discussed in Damien's book they
do seem to have had limitations and the overall loading was nowhere near as well designed
as Tornado (which after all was designed after NAO adopted flexible response). TSR 2 was very
much a child of the nuclear late 50s.
 
Let's say TSR.2 enters service (after many delays and much angst) in 1967. It's about this time that EOGB and LGB weapons are getting worked out, providing a degree of "precision strike" capability without the use of nuclear weapons. Blue Boar was the ancestor of these weapons, and if we are already hypothesising TSR.2 making it into the RAF, why could Vickers have not been slowly working on Blue Boar in the background? Ten years of TV guided weapons research would basically give you a British Walleye, and it might not even take that long.
 
Blue Boar, sounds like a nice piece of hardware.
The main focus of the book (as far as aircraft are concerned) is the P.1216, and i must get a copy of the new book.

The other types of aircraft will be in the background, the Fairey Rotodyne Type Z will be a troop/supply transport. The P.1154's will be ground attack/interceptor. TSR-2 (aside from the obvious) conventional ground attack. The Shorts Belfast will still be used in its primary role and the HS.681 will act like a V/STOL C-17 Globemaster III.
 
XR226 said:
Blue Boar, sounds like a nice piece of hardware.
The main focus of the book (as far as aircraft are concerned) is the P.1216, and i must get a copy of the new book.

The other types of aircraft will be in the background, the Fairey Rotodyne Type Z will be a troop/supply transport. The P.1154's will be ground attack/interceptor. TSR-2 (aside from the obvious) conventional ground attack. The Shorts Belfast will still be used in its primary role and the HS.681 will act like a V/STOL C-17 Globemaster III.
Click to expand...
If the P.1216 is the main aircraft of the book, I would start my alternate history with the Falklands war going badly in 1982 and either a rematch in 1983 or a humiliating diplomatic solution.

Imagine if all Argentine bombs exploded on impact, they attacked with rockets in "Bomb Alley", the Veinticinco de Mayo got a strike off and they hit a carrier instead of Atlantic Conveyor. All of these scenarios and many more would have made victory in 1982 that much more difficult and would have altered the course of history.
 
I know I am being a bit picky, but when you get Michael Pryce's book on P1216 you will
see what I mean.
P1216 emerges directly from the success of the UK and US Marines operation of the P1127 RAF
(what we call the Harrier). P1154 would not have been a true VSTOL aircraft and in fact would have been much close to the Jaguar in role and operations. I doubt if the US Marines would have
found it as useful or easy to use on their Helicopter carriers.
I agree that P1216 would have been a logical follow on to the Falklands. But surely more so after the success of the real world Harriers in that conflict.
If you are genuuinely keen on P1216 I would ditch the whole 60s what-if stuff and take your point of divergence as the Post Falklands UK. There are some nice pics of Mrs T admiring the P1216 model in Michael's book. Imagine that she had already fallen out of love with the Europeans and was prepared to see an all British project (with some US input from the Marines). The result could have been an accelerated development of P1216 in time to replace Phantoms and Jaguars by 1990
-ready for the World War 3 scenario in 1991 when Gorbachev is overthrown and Germany under Kohl tries to help East Germany with money for the military regime in Moscow. Thatacher and Bush Senior prepare to square up to the Soviets a la Desert Storm in 1991.
 
Sorry about the typos in my previous, but I am on a Library computer and in a hurry.

The other route that might work, if you really want to have the menu of what-if projects
and not get bogged down in too much reality is to go for a more Steampunk-Alternate Universe
approach and just cherry pick the stuff you think is cool. By having a truly alternate England with different politicians and other names you can then play around. For example instead of the Conservatives and Labour governments you could have Gold and Purple (I left this for you to
dream up). But you get the idea.
 
Is it possible to have the P.1154/P.1216 flying at the same time, or will it be more accurate to have one OR the other?

And TSR.2 will be used primarily as a conventional bomber, nuclear strike is a last resort.

Is the Fairey Rotodyne a plausible idea? Or would the HS.681 fufilled the same role?

I'm beginning the backstory now, but this project is on the back burner, i've got three other stories to finish first.
 
XR226 said:
Is it possible to have the P.1154/P.1216 flying at the same time, or will it be more accurate to have one OR the other?

And TSR.2 will be used primarily as a conventional bomber, nuclear strike is a last resort.

Is the Fairey Rotodyne a plausible idea? Or would the HS.681 fufilled the same role?

I'm beginning the backstory now, but this project is on the back burner, i've got three other stories to finish first.
Click to expand...

on TSR.2 this Plane would play in This TLS same role of OTL Panavia Tornado,

about P.1154/P.1216
i don't know wat year the P.1216 had to be build
but it logic that Phaseout of P.1154 goes step by step until each squadron got new P.1216, wat take some time
in simply words: both of them are in Service...

Fairey Rotodyne vrs HS.681
the Rotodyne is VTOL gyroplane, while HS.681 is a long-range STOL
the Rotodyne "Y" has payload of 2900 lb and maximum range of 520 mi at 213 mph
the HS.681 has payload of 35,000 lb and maximum range of 4,801 mi at 453 mph?

if you look for good VTOL Transporter take Dornier Do131 or
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,271.msg131363.html#msg131363
Hawker Siddley HS-129 and Handley Page HP.135
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,634.0.html
 
So they could (with a little stretch of the imagination) all be flying at the same time.
Well at least the Rotodyne and the HS.681 stays in
Ok, now for the Shorts Belfast, would it still be flying with Strike Command in the early nineties?
 
XR226 said:
So they could (with a little stretch of the imagination) all be flying at the same time.
Well at least the Rotodyne and the HS.681 stays in
Ok, now for the Shorts Belfast, would it still be flying with Strike Command in the early nineties?
Click to expand...

that's you to decide
one of major problem for the Shorts Belfast/P.1154/TRS.2 was the Sterling Crisis of 1965.
OTL: the Short Belfast flew in nineties, but in commercial use. ironically contracted to support the RAF during the first Gulf War!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shorts_Belfast
 
XR 226

My 1975 Orbat for the types you are interested in envisaged the existing RAF being replaced
by the types planned at the beginning of the 60s thus

Vulcans and Buccaneers TSR 2 (no service name like VC 10s or F111s

Jaguars, Phantoms and Harriers HS 1154 Harrier

Lightnings Lightnings (all up to F6 standard) plus off the shelf
F4 E Phantoms like the Luftwaffe

Hercules HS 681 Aldershot

Belfast 5 C5K Galaxy ordered as part of deal with US
who take some 681s
VC 10 In use as a Maritime, Transport and Poffler aircraft

In my RAF the TSR 2s and Harriers are going to be replaced by the Advanced Fighter Strike
aircraft (also for RN use). The Germans join this programme to replace their VJ 101D and VAK
191 vstol force. Aircraft in service from 1982 looking like a Tornado but with vstol as well as
swing wings (see the BAC 581 and BAC 583).

Andover The Andover was used for the requirement originally to be
met by the Rotodyne. The development of 681 allows
the UK to develop the HS 129 with Dornier (builders of the
similar Do 131). However, Germany orders the Transall C160
from France instead of the 681 and the 129 continues as a
UK national programme replacing the Andover in 1979

Helicopters Westland enters into a c-operation agreement with Italy
and the US to build the Chinook, and an Anglo Italian
medium lift chpper (a sort of early eh 101)

Please feel free to raid this.

Poitical back story is that the Berlin and Cuba crises of 1961 and 1962 are followed by a Czech
and Polish crisis in 1964. The Conservatives under Reginald Maudling win the election and use the
crisis to get loans from the US for rearmament. The Far East presence is maintained after Indonesia recieves Soviet TU22 Blinders and MRBM missiles. Australia cancels F-111s in return
for immediate delivery of Vulcans and then TSR 2s.
 
Thank you uk75 for all that information.
I may raid some of it.

RAF Transport Command
Shorts Belfast--main strategic airlifter
HS.681--medium range tactical airlifter
Westland Rotodyne--troop transport and short range airlifter.
VC-10--strategic transport/tanker.

RAF Fighter/Bomber Command
EE Lightning--interceptor for home defence
P.1154 (RAF Variant)--ground attack/interceptor
TSR.2--CAS, conventional ground attack, basically the Tornado, but bigger and in service earlier.
P.1216--fighter/bomber
(Now really stretch your imagination for this one)
Nimrod AEW3

The FAA will be equiped with the P.1154 (RN two seater).
Were the FAA to receive any new aircraft besides the P.1154, or were they to stick with the Gannet's, Buccaneer's and Sea Vixen's.
The RN will have CVA-01 carriers plus Bristol class escort destroyers.
 
I've seen P.1154 diagrams showing Red Top (or a missile that looks similar) fitted on under wing hardpoints.
Was it supposed to be used in the fighter role then?
 
Yes, although this was the era of the interceptor, because turn-and-burn dogfighting was dead and the gun was unnecessary /sarc.
 
I forgot to mention that it was the RAF single seater that had Red Top's fitted.
Were the Red Top's used for self defence then?
And the P.1154's (both variants) in my book have a single 30mm cannon fitted.
 
XR 226

The Royal Navy P 1154 was a very different animal from the RAF version. It was overspecified by the RN into a two seater all weather fighter version (A vstol Phantom). However, a single seater version was offered to both the RN and RAF which would have had a good fighter capability

General Melchett, a kitbasher has an excellent thread on ths subject with pics

http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t29229.html

In my UK 75 orbat the RN soldiers on with Sea Vixens until 1974 when the Furious (as Queen Elizabeth CVA 01 was once mistakenly called in magazines) came into service to replace Ark Royal.
She and Eagle are the two in service carriers until 1982, when the second CVA 01 type ship enters service. Hermes serves as a fixed wing carrier with Buccaneers. All three ships are due to get Sea Harrier 1154s in the seventies, though numbers may be reduced in favour of BAC 583.

The original RAF 1154 is primarily a ground attack plane like the Hunter which it replaces (and the Jaguar which carried out this role in the real world). However it can serve as a fighter with two Red Tops against low end threats in places like the Far East.

Hope this helps

ps Sorry I really hate the Belfast. It should never have been built. Then the RAF could have had some C5s years before they got C17s. Fairey Rotodyne was a poor performer and a noisy mother.
I think the RAF always wanted Chinooks.
 
How much in the way of avionics do you need to support Red Top as a dogfight missile? Remember we're not talking about the need to find an aircraft in pitch black and slave the missile seeker to it before firing; we're pointing the whole airplane at an enemy fighter which has just overshot or been turned inside in VFR, then boresighting, listening for the buzz and letting fly - in essence using Red Top as a faster, more lethal version of the early AIM-9s, but with a substantially increased rear-hemisphere lock-on arc.
 
Then it depends on your definition of fighter, doesn't it? That self-defence A2A capability can also translate to the killing of slower, less manoeuvrable aircraft, e.g. Soviet bombers and maritime recon aircraft, as well as any enemy fighters or interceptors that get careless or whose pilots aren't up to the game. If that's not acting as a fighter, what is?

If I knew I had probable enemy nuclear bombers inbound and I had RAF P.1154s with Red Top capability, you can bloody well bet I'd be putting those planes up, if only to catch as many leakers as possible in case my air-superiority assets got distracted by the bomber escort. Fighter is as fighter does.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom