• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

An alternate F-11 Tiger

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Hi all! Edited to neaten up some things.

Simple POD: Some bright engineer at Grumman notices that aircraft designed to fit two abreast in a 58 foot wide hangar won't fit 2 abreast in their allies 52 wide hangars. Management concurs and also observes that having more than one customer is good for business. Thus they alter the design in order to make fitting a wing fold easier.

I am going to blatantly and shamelessly rip off the wing of the FJ-4 for this exercise. Let the alternate universe lawyers sue if they wish, one is dihedral and the other is anhedral should be enough to keep them at bay.. lol.

The basic design can be fitted with either the traditional short or extended wingtips that flip upwards. The short tip has a wing area of 310 square feet at a span of 33.33 feet and the extended 340 at a span of 39.375 feet, in either case the wing carries 200 gallons of fuel per side for 208 gallons more than the historic Tiger unless it is fitted with the folding wing in which case it carries as much fuel in the inner panels as the historic Tiger.

The fold point on the wing is the dark line at the break between the flaps and flaperons and includes the tips of the tail folding down, giving a folded span of 13.5 feet. The flip tips, 27.75 feet. Tigers in USN service used the short tips, the increase in wing area over the historic Tiger reduces the launch/landing speed by 10%; if fitted with the extended tips 15%. The historic Tiger had a power on stall speed of about 105 MPH and a safe approach airspeed of 138 MPH so that translates to a power on stall of 94.5 short, 89.25 extended with a safe approach speed of 127.5 and 122.25 MPH respectively. If fitted with BLC and using the figures from Grumman installations of it on Cougars we can reduce this by a further 17 MPH, this will also give the equivalent of 7 MPH of WOD at launch. However fitting BLC with the J-65 would IMHO be quasi suicidal, but something to keep in mind for a better power plant.

With essentially 20% more fuel over the historic Tiger this one has about 20% better range and endurance.. except the folded wing version which would have exactly the same as the historic. EDIT: This comes out to about the range of the J79 Super Tiger with the historic fuel load... good lord the J65 must have been a pig!

Question.. if Grumman demonstrated this starting in 1955 to overseas buyers can you think of anyone that might show an interest?
 

Attachments

Last edited:

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
So Vickers-Supermarine has a dog in the Swift that's just not cutting it and Hawkers is being told to stay subsonic. The Type 545 is not proceeding quickly enough, Fairey have a research spec machine alongside EE.

RN is still including the RAN in it's thinking.
Glosters, Fairey, Shorts, Blackburn, AWA, Bristol all haven't got a single engine fighter available.

But a license of Grumman's design is an arguable case. As the UK would need to fit at the least a few avionics components and swap out the 20mm for 30mm cannon. Frankly they'd want to fit a UK engine rather than a US licensed UK engine, though the reheat chamber would be of considerable interest.

Dropping the Swift for the Tigre has it's attractions.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
By 1955 Clemenceau carrier has been started and Foch will follow soon. Etendard IVM is still a long way out and Crusaders even farther. Which mean your alt F-11F may sneak in their places...
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
So Vickers-Supermarine has a dog in the Swift that's just not cutting it and Hawkers is being told to stay subsonic. The Type 545 is not proceeding quickly enough, Fairey have a research spec machine alongside EE.

RN is still including the RAN in it's thinking.
Glosters, Fairey, Shorts, Blackburn, AWA, Bristol all haven't got a single engine fighter available.

But a license of Grumman's design is an arguable case. As the UK would need to fit at the least a few avionics components and swap out the 20mm for 30mm cannon. Frankly they'd want to fit a UK engine rather than a US licensed UK engine, though the reheat chamber would be of considerable interest.

Dropping the Swift for the Tigre has it's attractions.
A 200 series Avon will fit nicely.

I will have to go back and edit the heck out of the original post.. never post when sleepy late at night lol
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
So Vickers-Supermarine has a dog in the Swift that's just not cutting it and Hawkers is being told to stay subsonic. The Type 545 is not proceeding quickly enough, Fairey have a research spec machine alongside EE.

RN is still including the RAN in it's thinking.
Glosters, Fairey, Shorts, Blackburn, AWA, Bristol all haven't got a single engine fighter available.

But a license of Grumman's design is an arguable case. As the UK would need to fit at the least a few avionics components and swap out the 20mm for 30mm cannon. Frankly they'd want to fit a UK engine rather than a US licensed UK engine, though the reheat chamber would be of considerable interest.

Dropping the Swift for the Tigre has it's attractions.
You would not happen to know how fast a BH-5 could launch a 20k pound aircraft would you? I know 30k at either 75 or 85(seen conflicting figures), and I know the USN H-8 launches 15k at 105MPH which apparently comes out as enough to launch the 20k+ pound FJ-4. Trying to figure out if the BH-5 can fire this off the deck
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
The positional advantage the F-8 has in the development/procurement cycle is substantial, and although this is a better version of the Tiger it is not better enough to overcome it. The SuperTiger version would be superior to the F-3 Demon, as was the historic one. Why then did it not replace it? It keeps the Essex a viable strike carrier and congress might start thinking about smaller carriers.

Sorry about not doing much updating on this, but some of the time I have to do that the typing annoys the family..
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
So Vickers-Supermarine has a dog in the Swift that's just not cutting it and Hawkers is being told to stay subsonic. The Type 545 is not proceeding quickly enough, Fairey have a research spec machine alongside EE.

RN is still including the RAN in it's thinking.
Glosters, Fairey, Shorts, Blackburn, AWA, Bristol all haven't got a single engine fighter available.

But a license of Grumman's design is an arguable case. As the UK would need to fit at the least a few avionics components and swap out the 20mm for 30mm cannon. Frankly they'd want to fit a UK engine rather than a US licensed UK engine, though the reheat chamber would be of considerable interest.

Dropping the Swift for the Tigre has it's attractions.
Been thinking about this a bit... If we assume that Grumman demonstrates in '55 and the UK shows enough interest to pop for the construction cost of 1-2 prototypes fitted with the RA14 in the type 545 which has nearly identical performance to the J79 the ST used historically.. we have the Tiger break mach 2 in '56. Assuming Grumman would make the same kind of choices and alterations that they did in the historic Super Tiger, which should be a semi safe one.. then we have a mach 2 aircraft capable of carrying a decent AI radar and a weapons load over 9,000 pounds that you can store 6 of in the same space a 2 by 2 square of A-4s takes up.. on the offer available for delivery by no later than 1957 in limited numbers while UK factories tool up for large scale production.

Is it enough of a package that the UK could not pass it up? Six months in a yard to install steam cats on Albion and Bulwark gives you three Centaurs capable of operating it and in decent numbers.. does it derail the commando conversion, make an eventual Phantom acquisition less likely? 24 of these on the Centaurs, about the same on Hermes and Vickie but with Buccaneer.. If I am correct in my guesstimating and with BLC they could operate off a light fleet, would the Dutch have any ability or desire to acquire? I could possibly see the UK nudging Australia and Canada.. a common commonwealth carrier aircraft?

IF correct and a Dutch buy.. they don't have to be as passive with Karel Doorman in Indonesia or do they?
 

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
So there are pluses and minuses here.

UK US relations were not so great after WWII and got worse during and after Suez.

EE's P1 which became the Lightning is coming along.
Fairey's Delta II is progressing.
Saro's mixed powerplant fighter has government blessing.

I'm really not sure the Tiger is operable from Colossus Majestic carriers 'as is'
 

Hood

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
1,712
Reaction score
934
The weight limit for the Colossus/Majestic lifts was 17,000lb.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
The weight limit for the Colossus/Majestic lifts was 17,000lb.
Yup stock I think they were.. Bonnie flew the Banshee though which is the same weight as the Tiger so I think the upgraded units got heavier lifts
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
So there are pluses and minuses here.

UK US relations were not so great after WWII and got worse during and after Suez.

EE's P1 which became the Lightning is coming along.
Fairey's Delta II is progressing.
Saro's mixed powerplant fighter has government blessing.

I'm really not sure the Tiger is operable from Colossus Majestic carriers 'as is'
Would agree "as is" seems marginal for historic Tiger, but since this version is very close to the same wing loading as the Super E and the Argentines were reasonably sure they could use those on 25 de Mayo... might be a possible. Best case version of this alternate should have a power on stall of about 90 mph and a safe approach of 122 without BLC with it take another 15-17 mph off. Seems doable, though you still have the same problems as the A4 operating off of them.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
The weight limit for the Colossus/Majestic lifts was 17,000lb.

in the "unbuilt" section just a short scroll down the page.. they mention that the RCN were thinking of the A7 as well, but no onboard evaluation, implies to me that they at least thought the math might work for it
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Ok.. so lets look at a best case scenario.. with the additional fuel in the wing Tiger easily meets the loiter/range requirement for the USN GP fighter which would replace the F3 Demon, perhaps not en masse since the Phantom replaced many of those, but at least in usage on the Essex class carriers. So at the worst the Tiger would stay in carrier service until 1964. In a best case they slot J-79 into some new build airframes and convert some existing (if practical), and still use the F-8 in the day fighter role, one Tiger squadron and 1 Crusader on the CVA-19s and however many the CVS's carried to chase Bears/Badgers away even if still fitted with the J-65 in that role the economics now make sense with other Tiger units in service.

The J-79 has a much better SFC than the J-65, about 20% better given the improvements in range listed for the historic Super Tiger with the same fuel load, which would make the folding wing version I have here potentially acceptable. That would increase number embarked by at least 50% and that is difficult to ignore with Vietnam' demands. She is at least as good a dog fighter as F-8, and with the extended span tips should have better sustained turn performance than the Crusader. It would probably have a reasonably good combat record.

If the UK pops for a pair of prototypes at least to evaluate in comparison to the Swift she will show a great deal of potential while the F-104 is still getting her socks on and the Lockheed bribery machine isn't even geared up yet. This makes is very likely that Canada follows through and buys Tiger, assuming I am correct on BLC and the bigger wing making it usable on the light fleets.. this gives about 225 machines built under license for use by the RCAF and RCN most likely using a license built Avon with reheat or local alternative. This would make it likely for Australia to look at her as a replacement for the Sabers, and that would lead to another 140 units. If the Dutch could afford them, and as I recall unit cost for the Tiger was under a million, making it possible, and using the RCN as a guide, that is another 25 units. 390 total... Forgot about the French.. call it another 48 possible so 438 total.

A UK commitment to the type could see another 150 for the RN.

Hermes could operate an air group of 12 Tigers and 8 Bucs along with Gannets and helicopters for a LONG time. Update the Tigers avionics along the way so they are no worse than FRS.1

Even if none of the foreign buyers pan out and we rely totally on USN service for a modest case success the Tiger would be withdrawn from service with the Essex class most likely. Midways would be F-4's and A-7's, though a case could be made that the Tiger could be transitioned to an attack bird in Marine service replacing some A-4 units.

Edit: I am going to have to do some serious thinking on the USMC usage, more likely replace F-4 units than A-4 ones.. lot of potential in there that I am not exploring.
 
Last edited:

Volkodav

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
228
Reaction score
142
Great topic!
Just some tidbits for consideration ref possible RN use.
- If I recall correctly the RN determined that Hermes could effectively operate twenty Skyhawks, plus Gannets, Wessex etc. This suggests on your calculations she (and modernised Centaurs) could operate close to 30 Tigers
- The Tigers 13.5' height would permit storage in the hangars of Implacable and Indefatigable, permitting a cheaper, more austere modernisation on those two ships than that conducted on Vic.
 

riggerrob

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Mar 11, 2012
Messages
826
Reaction score
341
We wonder if the RCN and RCAF could be convinced to operate a common Tiger airframe in two different roles.
Any extra fuel ⛽ would help RCAF Tigers loiter along the coast to “welcome” Tu-95 Bear bombers.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
This is a fascinating thread for me, as I am not so up on 50s aircraft.
The RN seemed to develop a prejudice in favour of twin engined designs like the Sea Vixen and Buccaneer. Based on unreliable engines and need for endurance.
 

apparition13

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Jan 27, 2017
Messages
110
Reaction score
130
Regarding engines; the RB106 is the same size as an Avon, and has 15k/21.5k pounds of thrust. I haven't seen anything about SFC. And since the later Supertigers were designed to be capable of attack as well, you wouldn't need A-4s at all.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
Both the French Etendard and British Sea Vixen were deeply entrenched in their countries' industrial and naval procurement plans. The RN had a defined airframe with crew of 2, 2 engines and a weapon system(radar, missiles). It went on to adopt the F4 over the F8 for the same reason. Only with the demise of its big carriers would the RN grudgingly accept the P1127(sorry, Sea Harrier).
While we see the logic of using Bulwark and co for fighters, the RN saw its future in ships based on Eagle. Suez hastened this, as the Centaurs made good Commando ships.
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
However, if the US had introduced your version of the Tiger into service in the USN ( not sure how, but that is your thread) it would have opened up an interesting set of options.
Assuming that the Tiger( and not the Skyhawk or Crusader) became the USN's light fighter/attack aircraft alongside the F4 and A6
it would have been a major player in the Vietnam War.
Canada (Banshee) and Netherlands and Australia (Seahawk) would probably have received them in the early 60s and may even have kept carriers into the 70s
Brasil and Argentina would almost certainly have taken ex USN examples.
There is sadly no chance of India using them to replace its Seahawks on Vikrant unless the US/India relationship is altered.
Israel as a major Skyhawk user might have bought your Tiger too
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Great topic!
Just some tidbits for consideration ref possible RN use.
- If I recall correctly the RN determined that Hermes could effectively operate twenty Skyhawks, plus Gannets, Wessex etc. This suggests on your calculations she (and modernised Centaurs) could operate close to 30 Tigers
- The Tigers 13.5' height would permit storage in the hangars of Implacable and Indefatigable, permitting a cheaper, more austere modernisation on those two ships than that conducted on Vic.
Yeah pretty much. Regrettably the time frame I have in this precludes the Implacable's since they would have been sent to the breakers a year prior
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
We wonder if the RCN and RCAF could be convinced to operate a common Tiger airframe in two different roles.
Any extra fuel ⛽ would help RCAF Tigers loiter along the coast to “welcome” Tu-95 Bear bombers.
This Alt-Tiger has 20% more fuel than the historic with the non folding wing (still flip tips but not the 13.5 job), so even with the J-65 her range should go from about 1200 NM to about 1500 NM.. that will have a probable impact on the types survival post 1961 in the USN since she would exceed the requirements for the GP fighter the F-3 Demon is presently filling.. the J-79 would be 20% better on range so close to 1900 NM using the WIKI figures.

It would be extremely tempting to have this ability to use it in two services be enough to drop the hammer on the procurement. This MIGHT give a nudge to Australia who could do the exact same thing instead of Mirage III, and that MIGHT nudge the UK to look at it for the FAA. Generally they all have the same role: Destroy enemy aircraft and now and again drop something that blows up on those that annoy you...lol
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
Bob, your work on F-11F is brilliant. I'm closely following its developments.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
Hey you know what ? put an Atar on this thing, pitch it to French public companies just to piss off Dassault. I would say, SNCASO or SNCASE. Alternatively, boost Breguet, the last private company standing against Dassault.
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
More thought about this.

Bunker Hill and Franklin had suffered heavy damage and were never recommissioned
And yet they remained in reserve as long as the operational Essex lasted, that is, until 1970 !

In the early 60's there were bold plans to rebuild them. Meanwhile decommissioned Essex were proposed to both RN and RAAN.
Have instead the Bunker Hill and Franklin rebuild sold to these two, and park some of your "wonder Tiger" on the deck.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Both the French Etendard and British Sea Vixen were deeply entrenched in their countries' industrial and naval procurement plans. The RN had a defined airframe with crew of 2, 2 engines and a weapon system(radar, missiles). It went on to adopt the F4 over the F8 for the same reason. Only with the demise of its big carriers would the RN grudgingly accept the P1127(sorry, Sea Harrier).
While we see the logic of using Bulwark and co for fighters, the RN saw its future in ships based on Eagle. Suez hastened this, as the Centaurs made good Commando ships.

That they did.. IT does however give the RN the option to fulfill their "3 strike carriers and 3 light carriers" goal if you define Hermes as a strike carrier since it could operate Buccaneer. Not a perfect solution I grant you, but it would fill fleet needs without having to fight for large amounts of funding.

It would also have people take another look at HMS Unicorn as a possible commando carrier.. and that would be the real jewel! About 4000 square meters of 16.5 foot hangars and the ability to shove stuff out the back of the hangar into landing craft already built in and a bunk of shop space that can be converted to house marines... She can take Wessex without trouble and carry way more stuff than the 2100 square meter or so Centaurs.

Speaking of Centaur.. she can still carry Sea Vixen. ST would replace Seahawk in the inventory.. an ASW gannet takes about as much hangar as a Sea Vixen so call it 16-20 ST and 6-8 SV for the strike package.. you have ALL the all weather angles covered and the ability to get a real fast mover after the bears.

THE HUGE problem?

The USN absolutely did not want this aircraft!!!! Not that the historic J-79 ST wasn't capable.. she was 250 pounds lighter than the J-65 powered one but was "to heavy" for carrier usage.. This one runs into the same problem that the real one did: The USN did not want ANYTHING interfering with more super carrier funding! A M2 all weather bird capable of lifting from an Essex can do just that!

Hancock and her steam cat sisters all operated the F-3 Demon alongside the F-8, the crusader as a day fighter and the demon as a GP/AW sparrow launcher. The Demon was a dog though and gone by '64, having ST able to step right in and drop 50% more bombs than the Demon and fire as many sparrows (can even reuse the same radars), and with better range makes Essex/Midway sized carriers REALLY viable threats.

But it doesn't have to be this way totally if the timing is just a bit right with the alternate version.. she has the range to fulfill the GP requirements, historic Tiger did not. A UK Avon test bird a full year or so before the J-79 is ready pushes the USN in a different arc. It won't abandon the F-8, it is just to damn good a day fighter.. but they will bail HARD on the Demon!
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Bob, your work on F-11F is brilliant. I'm closely following its developments.
That is very kind.

I can do anything I want in this, but am honestly trying to be reasonable in choices made.

The USN is going to bail on the F4D sky ray, and it is going to bail on the Demon, and they are going to buying in HUGE on the Phantom and Crusader; there is nothing I can do about that even in my own mind, there is just no logic against it.

There is a very narrow band of time where having 3-4 squadrons of an improved Tiger makes some sense if the costs are low enough and the reward high enough. That will grow need and usage later, but for the moment what is at stake is 3-4 squadrons, one in the Atlantic, two in the Pacific and one reserve operating off the steam cat Essex's. If my thinking is correct on the effects of the greater wing area and BLC on the viability of H-8 Essex's then this becomes a done deal: No matter USN desires to encourage more super carrier procurement the tactical flexibility of being able to use H-8 ships in case of war (especially after Cuba), overrides everything.

I don't think it would fully replace A-4, or F-8, but it could be used to seriously supplement each of them in Vietnam and for LOW cost.

I am thinking of getting this to at least a D model (A would be J-65 no radar, B J-79 with, C likely would be a land ONLY version, D could be TF-41), and may move the landing gear from the body to the wings as the FJ-4, they would need to be a little longer because of the wing placement but that is super doable, which would open up some interesting possibilities...

Think Lightning belly guns but using Vulcan's and BIG ammo drums...but that is probably my inner 9 year old talking..


It doesn't take long before you start getting toward something that looks and acts a lot like an early F-20 Tigershark or single engine F/A-18
 
Last edited:

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
Bob You certainly give a lot of thought to this alt-navy scenario. You offer an interesting alternative to the Sea Vixen.
As ever, the F4 Phantom looms. Even though it is outside your timeline, the F4 and its Sidewinder/Sparrow fit, decent radar, two crew and two engines is what the RN wants (needs is another matter, and your points above show this). It matches their aim of getting their own supecarriers (CVA01).
The RN had a requirement for 2 Commando ships. Bulwark and Albion (then Hermes) were prefered to older ships (Ocean and Theseus). But new builds were hoped for.
If the RN had chosen the single seater route, Hawkers were waiting with their expertise in such planes.
But the SuperTiger might have punched through.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
will edit this later when I have more time to expand on it; but I am NOT positioning this as a SV replacement but rather an SR177 fallback...

Some more background information. Like the last one the source is Norman Friedman.

These are the planned air groups for Victorious at October 1956
1959
12 Scimitar
12 Sea Venom
8 Gannet ASW
4 Skyraider AEW
2 SAR helicopters

38 Total
1961-62
12 Scimitar
10 Sea Vixen
8 Gannet ASW
4 Gannet AEW
2 SAR helicopters

36 Total
1963
8 SR.177
8 Buccaneer
10 Sea Vixen
8 ASW helicopters
4 Gannet AEW
2 SAR helicopters
40 Total
This is air group for Eagle in 1963 as projected in October 1956
12 SR.177
12 Buccaneer
10 Sea Vixen
8 Gannet ASW or ASW helicopters
6 Gannet AEW
2 SAR helicopters

50 total
This is the projected air group for Centaur in the early 1960s as projected in 1956
12 Sea Vixen
8 Gannet ASW
4 Skyraider AEW
2 SAR helicopters

26 total
This is the projected air group for Hermes as projected in 1956
8 Scimitar
9 Sea Vixen
8 ASW helicopters
4 AEW Gannets
2 SAR helicopters

31 total
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
I am out of my comfort zone in the 50s but from what I have read:
The SR177 if it had been built would probably have been a failure like the Bristol 188 and E class peroxide subs. The SR53 was not very successful.
Even without the Sandys 1957 White Paper it would have been too difficult to operate reliably.
A Super Tiger option ( with suitable licence build and offsets) could well have beaten DH110 especially as the RAF had Lightning
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
Ah yes. If your Tiger is all-weather (or partially), it could replace the F-8D and F-8E Crusader (also known as the F-8U-2)

152 and 286 build.



This Super Tiger advantage, compared to the Crusader, is: smaller, shorter, lighter - because it directly went from J65 to J79, avoiding the heavy and bulky J57.
The J57 was extremely long, and the way the Crusader and its undercarriage were build, it needed the VI wing. Otherwise its afterburner would have hit the deck.

If your Super Tiger cut the Crusader production short, then you will also get the 42 French Aéronavale airframes. Once again, the Super Tiger (and its pilots) would have far easier time on the Foch and Clémenceau. The French Crusaders needed bleed air on top of their V.I wing.
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
I am out of my comfort zone in the 50s but from what I have read:
The SR177 if it had been built would probably have been a failure like the Bristol 188 and E class peroxide subs. The SR53 was not very successful.
Even without the Sandys 1957 White Paper it would have been too difficult to operate reliably.
A Super Tiger option ( with suitable licence build and offsets) could well have beaten DH110 especially as the RAF had Lightning

Quite possible.. see how I am structuring this is in part based on when people would be in the right place mentally/psychologically to making a decision. Historically SuperTiger was demonstrated in England JUST after the Sandy paper blew the crap out of things.. NO ONE was in a place mentally to even think about ST, it landed without even so much as a dead cat bounce
 

uk 75

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
954
Just to put the cat among the pigeons, Supertiger might have led to CVA01 being closer to Hermes in size than Eagle. Especially if this allowed a one for one replacement of Victorious, Ark, Eagle and Hermes in that order.
On the down side, replacing the Supertiger would have been difficult.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Just to put the cat among the pigeons, Supertiger might have led to CVA01 being closer to Hermes in size than Eagle. Especially if this allowed a one for one replacement of Victorious, Ark, Eagle and Hermes in that order.
On the down side, replacing the Supertiger would have been difficult.
I see the slightly larger CVA-1 as future proofing so not likely to get smaller
 
  • Like
Reactions: zen

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226
I am out of my comfort zone in the 50s but from what I have read:
The SR177 if it had been built would probably have been a failure like the Bristol 188 and E class peroxide subs. The SR53 was not very successful.
Even without the Sandys 1957 White Paper it would have been too difficult to operate reliably.
A Super Tiger option ( with suitable licence build and offsets) could well have beaten DH110 especially as the RAF had Lightning

Quite possible.. see how I am structuring this is in part based on when people would be in the right place mentally/psychologically to making a decision. Historically SuperTiger was demonstrated in England JUST after the Sandy paper blew the crap out of things.. NO ONE was in a place mentally to even think about ST, it landed without even so much as a dead cat bounce
As for France, one of the pilots send to test it... crashed it and got badly hurt in the process. It was circa 1958, when Clemenceau was being build.

Unlucky aircraft, really. Then again, I come to understand the RN requirements for naval aircraft in the early 60's were overly ambitious and complicated (can't remember the exact letter / number combinations, but what is sure, no room for an "off the shelf" foreign buy" there - unlike the Aéronavale Crusader deal).
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
Just to put the cat among the pigeons, Supertiger might have led to CVA01 being closer to Hermes in size than Eagle. Especially if this allowed a one for one replacement of Victorious, Ark, Eagle and Hermes in that order.
On the down side, replacing the Supertiger would have been difficult.

Ok now I have some time to type without annoying family..

The timing is structured where the UK will have a favorable opinion/impression of the type. See in the scenario as I have it, it is quite possible and plausible for them to make changes while it still not being the likeliest outcome. Let me explain. It would be possible, and plausible if one chose to have the RN alter the chose of which ships to convert to commando carriers; Ocean and Theseus would do the job, they just would prefer to use Centaurs for it. Same goes for aircraft purchases, though it would NOT affect SV this late in the game.. it is just easier for the UK to make the same choices but still possible and plausible for them not to. Net effect is that after the 57 paper blows the craps out of their expectations and cuts off all the stuff they thought would be coming down the line that they passed on Tiger FOR... they still have that favorable impression to latch on to that ST showing up just after the paper when they were totally closed down mentally missed out on. Being earlier in the time frame making an impressive bit of performance also builds buzz for the Canadians and Australians before F-104 can dazzle the eyes (and fatten the pockets) of all that behold her! It doesn't hurt that the leadership in the USN may not be fully gelled on the bigger/heavier spec for the GP fighter, allowing the Alt-Tiger to fill that slot. This will guarantee the types survival in front line service with the J-65 until at least 1964 when the F-3 was withdrawn and in second line service as CVS guards until 1967 when the historic Tiger was withdrawn from training command service.

That allows the RN to make vastly different and perhaps clearer choices in the 1961-64 time frame regarding procurement; particularly as a replacement for the SR. If they were comfortable with a single seat AI equipped fighter at that point mentally for the SR they are in the right headspace to look at ST NOW. This still leaves the RN likely to pick up Phantom.. it just leaves them open to also picking up low hour Tigers if the USN sheds the type and modify them in house to offset job losses in the air industry and use them as the supplemental aircraft the SR would have been.. they take up about the same space. I

They still at that point have some hope of a larger new carrier, so buying phantom is an act of hope that they will still make/take, they are just wise enough to hedge.
In the era of Scimitar and the S1 Bucc a hedge sounds like a safe move. The ST is just near enough to a lot of RN requirements that she can patch holes.

Iti is all part of a process to move from possible/plausible yet not the most likely even to possible/plausible and safer than not.

If the Canadians and Australians being exposed to the potential of ST with a good engine almost 2 years before Starfighter is enough to get them fixated on wanting Tiger enough to ink tentative deals contingent upon J-79 or choosing license built Avons (good for the UK), this will likely give the UK a feeling of herd safety... god explaining my mental process always makes me look like a madman when I read it... lol
 
Last edited:

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136
If the whole programs run roughly parallel to the F-5 program, including a Tigershark reboot she could run into the 90's/2000's
 

Archibald

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
3,678
Reaction score
1,226

There it is. Jean Franchi destroyed his back and one of the Super Tiger prototypes on June 23, 1958. Shame. Then again, the Aéronavale alone won't save the aircraft, not with 42 airframes... although a good case could be made, the Etendard IV would also bite the dust, adding 71 machines, total 113. that's more or less the number of Sea Venoms - Aquilons - previously build by SNCASE, around 125.
 

bobtdwarf

CLEARANCE: Confidential
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
99
Reaction score
136

There it is. Jean Franchi destroyed his back and one of the Super Tiger prototypes on June 23, 1958. Shame. Then again, the Aéronavale alone won't save the aircraft, not with 42 airframes... although a good case could be made, the Etendard IV would also bite the dust, adding 71 machines, total 113. that's more or less the number of Sea Venoms - Aquilons - previously build by SNCASE, around 125.
yup, as I recall I recounted the original story to you awhile back.

We have roughly 200 "A" models historically, no change in the alternate.. and with the timing here a likely additional 100 units just in the USN as I detailed above as an absolute floor.

Timing is such that this could plausibly work.

Edit: Having the USN continue using the type until at the very least 1967, and it being able to viably operate from Hermes and Victorious gives the RN some options post '65. It is hard to make the argument that we can't rely on a single seat, single engine multi-role-ish aircraft for fleet defense and strike when you are going to replace it with a... single seat, single engine VTOL multi-role-ish fighter with less than half the range and substantially reduce relative performance.

You have enough hulls to provide helos to the fleet with Centaur and Hermes et al... you can put Ark Royal in reserve for Eagle, and use the money that would have spent on her rebuild and the cruiser rebuilds to build two new medium to largish CV's and then use Victorious as a reserve hull.
 
Last edited:

zen

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
1,798
Reaction score
550
Just to put the cat among the pigeons, Supertiger might have led to CVA01 being closer to Hermes in size than Eagle. Especially if this allowed a one for one replacement of Victorious, Ark, Eagle and Hermes in that order.
On the down side, replacing the Supertiger would have been difficult.
Well.....rather it might lend weight to either the earlier 50,000ton design or the Civil Lord proposal for a 40,000ton affordable CV adaptable from CTOL to STOV/L.......in the real world starting with Buccaneers and Sea Vixens and then moving on to P1154 "Harrier".

More thoughts....

A potential run off is possible for an interim fighter for the RN. Come 1963 USSR displays heavy anti-ship missiles and the pressure is on to field effective defense against them. Something is needed now!
Shorts chose the F8 Twosader, so one of the others could choose a two seater Super Tiger, perhaps DH, Fairey or AWA or Brough (Blackburn).
This would compete for AW.406, against domestic P1154RN, and Type 583, and of course the mighty F4....however that would be the F4K.

However a Mach 2 capable twin seater Super Tiger, would 'seem' cheaper than domestic, higher performance than F8, and as 'quick and dirty' as the Spey F4 was projected to be. But much lighter, potentially much cheaper, easier to operate from current equipment on the CV Fleet and conveniently less threatening to the longer term ambition of OR.346....
 
Last edited:
Top