Register here

Author Topic: RN with F8 instead of F4  (Read 3188 times)

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 847
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #15 on: August 24, 2018, 08:11:37 am »
If a lower target of CV had been set they'd still have their interoperability but with F8 toting CVs instead such as Essex conversions.

Really interesting is the possibility of the smaller cheaper 40,000ton to 42,000ton CV type such as the civil lord of the Admiralty proposed to operate Sea Vixen initially and the P1154 'Harrier' later on.

Swapping Sea Vixen for F8 would extend the useful life of the initial option and delay the pressure on ISD for the P1154 type aircraft. Likely this 'temporary' solution would gain a greater permanence.

It might also attract greater RAN interest and provide for greater anglo-french cooperation.

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1225
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #16 on: August 29, 2018, 01:59:55 pm »
It is a shame that the US Navy did not carry on building ships of the Essex class size as Anti Submarine and Light Strike carriers. The Royal Australian and Canadian Nvies as well as the Dutch and British Royal Navies could have used these ships with F8s as fighters and Buccaneers as strikers. The S2s would have given way to S3s as aew,asw and cod aircraft. A balanced air group on an efficient class of ship.

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 847
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #17 on: September 03, 2018, 04:01:27 am »
More it's the flipside I think, RN by pursing the large and expensive CVA-01 type left Essex conversions as the only other option.

By taming their ambitions they'd achieve more.

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1225
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #18 on: September 05, 2018, 05:52:23 pm »
A single CVA 01 entering service in the early 70s would have filled the same role as Ark Royal with Phantoms and Buccaneers and allowed
Ark and Eagle to go into well deserved retirement.
A second CVA instead of the Invincible Class could have entered service in 1980 or so.
The departure of the Tiger Class and Bulwark would have allowed the manning of one CVA, with the other serving in emergencies like Fearless and Intrepid.
This could have been managed bya sympathetic and less doctrinaire Government.
In that case the F8 would not have been needed.

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 847
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #19 on: September 06, 2018, 11:29:26 am »
Why do this?

Why not just start a thread?

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1225
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #20 on: September 06, 2018, 12:19:39 pm »
I started this thread in the first place to look at the F8 option.
I was making the CVA01 point in connection with the F4
Phantom.
I am thus disagreeing with my own proposition. No need to start another thread.

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1225
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #21 on: September 06, 2018, 12:32:35 pm »
To put it another way, I cannot see who could have persuaded the RN to go with a Hermes/Foch/Essex size carrier and F8 instead of F4. I was comparing this option mentally with the Invincible and Sea Harrier force we ended up with. But of course who in 1962 knew that this would happen.

Online kaiserd

  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • ***
  • Posts: 510
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #22 on: September 06, 2018, 01:07:42 pm »
To put it another way, I cannot see who could have persuaded the RN to go with a Hermes/Foch/Essex size carrier and F8 instead of F4. I was comparing this option mentally with the Invincible and Sea Harrier force we ended up with. But of course who in 1962 knew that this would happen.

In the context of 1962 the US had moved onto the F-4 and were eying up Missileer concept (which evolved into the F-111B then the F-14). And no one apart from France bought the F-8 or a directly equivalent naval fighter in terms of weight and capacity for the next decade or more (A-7 and obviously the Super Etendard possible exceptions at a push - very much attack focused). The parallel developments of heavier more capable “conventional” missile armed naval fighters and the emergence of V/STOVL naval fighter concepts sucked up focus and funds.
It a fair point to wonder in retrospect if this rush to these two extremes were perhaps missing what a conventional middle weight option could have delivered. But that doesn’t make the F-8 the answer to what the Royal Navy wanted or thought they needed at the time the decision was made.
And the F-8, for all it’s virtues, was certainly not an F-18 or F-16 before their time (as capable or more so than heavier equivalents due to developments in avionics, design etc.)
The French stuck with it as long as they did due to the lack of a replacement.
« Last Edit: September 07, 2018, 03:30:57 am by kaiserd »

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 847
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #23 on: September 13, 2018, 10:26:45 am »
A middle weight option was possible but yes the F8 could only survive in circumstances of being viewed as a temporary solution until some wonderweapon was ISD.
That was the MRI system, originally the P1154 and later Jaguar.
As I said earlier Type 585 or Mirage F2 and F3 and later G solve this.

Offline Archibald

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 2067
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #24 on: September 13, 2018, 11:16:21 am »
To put it another way, I cannot see who could have persuaded the RN to go with a Hermes/Foch/Essex size carrier and F8 instead of F4. I was comparing this option mentally with the Invincible and Sea Harrier force we ended up with. But of course who in 1962 knew that this would happen.

And now, the French point of view. The decision to buy 42 Crusaders was taken by De Gaulle himself, whose son Philippe was an Admiral in the French navy. In order to pay for it, one of the Masurca (think Sea Slug) massive air-defence frigate was cut.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masurca
Most of the French Navy, including Admiral Sanguinetti, was dead against the decision. The doctrine was that the French Navy could not afforded Tomcats or Phantoms or a carrier big enough to support them.
As for interceptors onboard Foch and Clemenceau, Sanguinetti noted that Crusaders took too much room from attack aircrafts, for the limited air defence they provided.

Before the Crouze, the French Navy air defence was to be as follow

-  the Masurca large ships - six Suffren class were planned with only two build, + Masurca on Colbert, so that's three, but MASURCA was cumbersome, like Terrier and Sea Slug
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffren-class_frigate

-  the SM-1 tartar armed ships - four type 47  class.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T_47-class_destroyer

Buying Crusaders threw a wrench into this.

The Masurca system that had lost its frigate was first to go on the Jeanne d'Arc but ended on the Colbert cruiser.

In fact a pair of Tartar systems was transfered to a pair of new air-defence ships in the 80's, the Cassard-class - still in service today !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassard-class_frigate

One that got the French Navy air defence issue perfectly right was Tom Clancy in Red Storm Rising. Boom goes the Foch, despite the Crusaders...
« Last Edit: September 15, 2018, 05:31:54 am by Archibald »
Conservatoire de l'Air et de l'Espace d'Aquitaine
http://www.caea.info/en/plan.php

Profanity: weaker mind trying to speak forcefully

Political correctness: just bury your head in the sand for the sake of appeasement and "peace for our time"
- https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serge_Dassault#Affaires_

Offline uk 75

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1225
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #25 on: September 15, 2018, 04:48:49 am »
Thanks everyone for making this thread so detailed and interesting. It would be a very helpful to anyone interested in the early 60s carrier and F8 issues.

Offline Volkodav

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #26 on: October 23, 2018, 05:56:48 am »
Interesting that the Missileer was mentioned in this thread as I started thinking about it as I read through from the start.  In interim RN wiff could have been a FAW3 Seavixen done up as a sort of semi Missileer, an updated radar and missile combo to keep the type relevant into the 70s.

Offline zen

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 847
Re: RN with F8 instead of F4
« Reply #27 on: October 23, 2018, 10:50:23 am »
Let's do that.