EE P42 and successor studies


ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
15 July 2007
Reaction score
This is my first attempt having scanned through extent threads for this and not finding it.
Its EE's military successor concept for after the P.42 flights building on the hypersonic knowledge gained.

I forget the number and the magazine source right now and will get back to you when I dig it out to refresh my memory. Orriginal source is in the picture.

Viewed as a fighter for RAF and RN use.
AAM's where supposed to be submerged on the upper inner wing surface apparently.
Many thanks for your contribution, Zen.. What an amazing design!

I can recall which issue but I read an article in Air International many years ago that told something like this: “Fast jets were replaced by faster jets until the 70’s. Eurofighter could have been a Mach 4 aircraft, but advances in SAM technology forced aircraft to fly low and modern fighters top speed is between 1,5 and 2,5 Mach”.

Thanks to your post I can see what a real Mach 4 fighter could have look. I love the “drop-nose” feature.

Hey Archibald and the boys at whatifmodelers forum, that makes a great start for an “Alternative RAF for the 90’s” topic! I’d love to see this beast in Royal Navy colours ::)


Yeah, an alternate world with mach 5+ operational fighters ;D
Red Flag 2002 with the Dassault mach 4+ design (more to come in Le Fana de l'aviation soon) and this EE. design...
Three view drawing comes from:

'Air Pictorial ' May 1999
Article :Hypersonic high-flyers. English Electric Secrets of the Sixties-part II
by Chris Gibson.
Correct, but missed the number which was EAG44___something.
zen said:
Correct, but missed the number which was EAG44___something.

from the article, i believe it to be the EAG 4427, but the picture is not captioned as such, and the article also mentions the EAG 4426, which was to be larger, TSR2 as opposed to Lightning sized and which was similar,but differed in detail.

The SR-71 started life as the YF-12, so a high supersonic speed fighter was built, albeit converted into a recycle role. The Mig-25 was also theoretically capable of a decent tip speed.

For 'fighter' do we mean Air Superiority (where the fighter will combat other fighters) or Air Intercept (where the fighter will combat other bombers). High speed is good for the latter, but not as important for the former. Air to Air missile technology as well as Surface to Air missiles has also had a significate bearing on the need not to have such advanced aircraft.


  • EAG.3273.jpg
    6 KB · Views: 1,253
  • EAG.3280.jpg
    11.5 KB · Views: 1,210
  • EAG.3281.png
    42.3 KB · Views: 1,226
  • EAG.4426.jpg
    13.5 KB · Views: 1,241
Stargazer2006 said:
danielg said:
The SR-71 started life as the YF-12

Not so. Both derived from the A-12, but the SR-71 came first.

Actually, no. The YF-12 was first, by about sixteen months (first flights August 1963 vs. December 1964). But I believe it is true that the YF-12 and SR-71 are separate forks off the A-12 tree, rather then being a straight line development.
My apologies for a bit of a bump here, but it didn't seem worth creating an entirely new thread purely to question a few bits of viability. Considering the amount of fuel which might have been carried by the EAG.4427, would it have had a combat-radius sufficient for it to actually serve sufficiently within the strike-role without excessive buddy-tanking from another aircraft?

It's just a point of curiosity that hit me reading through Tony Butler's section upon them.
lark said:
Three view drawing comes from:

'Air Pictorial ' May 1999
Article :Hypersonic high-flyers. English Electric Secrets of the Sixties-part II
by Chris Gibson.

Also from the same source,

here is a variant of P.42 and the EAG.4397,the last one was a 100 passenger
transport version of P.42.


  • P.42   1.JPG
    P.42 1.JPG
    66.2 KB · Views: 581
  • EAG.4397.JPG
    40.5 KB · Views: 359
Thank you Chris,

I have this book,but I can't send any drawings from it.
Ah, yes, remember the Air Pictorial article, too, although it was outshone by Tony book later, of course !
(Just used the article as basis and added the underside view)


  • EAG-4427.gif
    46.8 KB · Views: 323
  • EAG-3280.gif
    44.5 KB · Views: 322
  • EAG-3273.gif
    48.5 KB · Views: 318
Jens, were the first and third project meant to be stealthy? They sure seem to evade forum posting... Completely blank pictures!
Looks like the EAG 3273 and the EAG 4427 were stealth designs... ;)

Just saw Skyblazer beat me to the punch!

Stealth designs indeed, visible only to the believers in stealth, just like the fairy tale "The Emperor's
New Clothes" !
Sorry, have attached the drawings again, they should be visible now. :-\
Courtesy of the Internet Archive
What is the objective of this design?(EAG.3280)


  • p.42 drawing.jpg
    p.42 drawing.jpg
    123.2 KB · Views: 420
  • p.42.png
    417.5 KB · Views: 354
Last edited:
How close did the P.42 really come, from being build ? Avro 730 level ?
That comment from is a bit misleading as it implies that Petter was involved in the design of the P.42. He had resigned from EE in early 1950


  • Odyssey23_January2013.pdf
    610.6 KB · Views: 34
  • 3.JPG
    124.3 KB · Views: 1,041
  • 2.JPG
    75.6 KB · Views: 1,001
  • 1.JPG
    43.1 KB · Views: 1,003
Some Russian site shows us naval strike version. Please check yourself.
Last edited:
Hi! EAG.4396/4413 three stage to orbit system.


  • 4396 and 4413.JPG
    4396 and 4413.JPG
    155.9 KB · Views: 221
Hi! EAG.4416.


  • 4416.JPG
    130.8 KB · Views: 220
Hi! 4435?


  • 4435.JPG
    128.9 KB · Views: 302


  • specialty_press_bsp_5_britains_space_shuttle_page_052.jpg
    141.7 KB · Views: 340
Last edited:
Air Pictorial 1999-05 / C.Gibson - Hypersonic high-flyers : English Electric's secrets of the 'Sixties (2)
Thanks a lot Gibson-san!!
Naval strike version. Please take care for folding nose.


  • 4427.jpg
    97.8 KB · Views: 356
Great find nickwspoon-san!!
This model looks like follwing picture.
Maybe smaller space ship was located top of the booster and disappeared now?


  • P-42.jpg
    225.6 KB · Views: 292
Last edited:

Similar threads

Top Bottom