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

Getting a British Phantom

uk 75

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2006
Messages
3,222
Reaction score
2,013
The subject which perhaps has been kicked around on this website more than any other is whether the UK could have designed and built a two seater fighter-bomber in the 1960s to replace RAF Lightnings and RN Sea Vixens and replace RAF Hunters (The RN already had Buccaneer).
The Hawker P1154 was the only attempt at doing this that came anywhere close to being built (and then only for the limited RAF Hunter replacement role).
Unfortunately for UK industry the F4 Phantom was.available. After the usual political chaos, F4s replaced some of the RAF and RN types mentioned. But it also took Jaguar and Tornado as well as P1127RAF and Sea Harrier.
Hawker Siddeley and British Aircraft Corporation plus Rolls Royce/Bristol S. had the technical ability to design and build a British Phantom.
What was lacking in no particular order was:
Money
Air and Admiralty Staff competence
Political decision making
Industrial and Business Management
Would the British Phantom have looked similar to the US one (HS Brough) or been a vstol/vg/incidence wing 60s wonder?
That is my summary over to you?
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,787
Reaction score
4,009
October 2006... doesn't make me younger by any mean.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
The subject which perhaps has been kicked around on this website more than any other is whether the UK could have designed and built a two seater fighter-bomber in the 1960s to replace RAF Lightnings and RN Sea Vixens and replace RAF Hunters (The RN already had Buccaneer).
The Hawker P1154 was the only attempt at doing this that came anywhere close to being built (and then only for the limited RAF Hunter replacement role).
Unfortunately for UK industry the F4 Phantom was.available. After the usual political chaos, F4s replaced some of the RAF and RN types mentioned. But it also took Jaguar and Tornado as well as P1127RAF and Sea Harrier.
Hawker Siddeley and British Aircraft Corporation plus Rolls Royce/Bristol S. had the technical ability to design and build a British Phantom.
What was lacking in no particular order was:
Money
Air and Admiralty Staff competence
Political decision making
Industrial and Business Management
Would the British Phantom have looked similar to the US one (HS Brough) or been a vstol/vg/incidence wing 60s wonder?
That is my summary over to you?
Depends really.
Certainly components were in development, some into service.
We can say a twin reheated Avon powered aircraft, with 30mm ADEN cannon, AI.18, Red Top in IR and SARH versions. As with a number of other components, highly achievable.
We know BE.30, or RB.106 offered advanced turbojet equivalent or even better than US options. As was later RR and BSEL turbofans.

We know the AI effort was heading to FMICW after a sojourn into FMCW. We can say this earlier pre-Foxhunter set reached flight tests in a Canberra despite stop start funding/requirements. Starting with OR.346 back in 1960, this faced delays because of the changes to what or if it had a fighter to be developed for.
Had a consistent drive/funding been there....

In historical terms the Supermarine Type 556 was the RN desired solution and the stepping stone to a F4-ish sort of aircraft.

In a more cunning twist the Other Lightning. Delivers.


We can see, despite the risks with certain components, that DH's submission to OR.346 is actually the most pragmatic. A design that can be prototyped in a fairly low risk manner. Until the STOL components have to be tested.
Even had these failed (only the clang box diverter seems that risky) a big twin Spey Delta winged multirole aircraft, albeit tied to conventional runaways on land, could still result.
Not so fun for the Navy, but the RAF would be happy.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,787
Reaction score
4,009
The subject which perhaps has been kicked around on this website more than any other is whether the UK could have designed and built a two seater fighter-bomber in the 1960s to replace RAF Lightnings and RN Sea Vixens and replace RAF Hunters (The RN already had Buccaneer).
The Hawker P1154 was the only attempt at doing this that came anywhere close to being built (and then only for the limited RAF Hunter replacement role).
Unfortunately for UK industry the F4 Phantom was.available. After the usual political chaos, F4s replaced some of the RAF and RN types mentioned. But it also took Jaguar and Tornado as well as P1127RAF and Sea Harrier.
Hawker Siddeley and British Aircraft Corporation plus Rolls Royce/Bristol S. had the technical ability to design and build a British Phantom.
What was lacking in no particular order was:
Money
Air and Admiralty Staff competence
Political decision making
Industrial and Business Management
Would the British Phantom have looked similar to the US one (HS Brough) or been a vstol/vg/incidence wing 60s wonder?
That is my summary over to you?
Depends really.
Certainly components were in development, some into service.
We can say a twin reheated Avon powered aircraft, with 30mm ADEN cannon, AI.18, Red Top in IR and SARH versions. As with a number of other components, highly achievable.
We know BE.30, or RB.106 offered advanced turbojet equivalent or even better than US options. As was later RR and BSEL turbofans.

We know the AI effort was heading to FMICW after a sojourn into FMCW. We can say this earlier pre-Foxhunter set reached flight tests in a Canberra despite stop start funding/requirements. Starting with OR.346 back in 1960, this faced delays because of the changes to what or if it had a fighter to be developed for.
Had a consistent drive/funding been there....

In historical terms the Supermarine Type 556 was the RN desired solution and the stepping stone to a F4-ish sort of aircraft.

In a more cunning twist the Other Lightning. Delivers.


We can see, despite the risks with certain components, that DH's submission to OR.346 is actually the most pragmatic. A design that can be prototyped in a fairly low risk manner. Until the STOL components have to be tested.
Even had these failed (only the clang box diverter seems that risky) a big twin Spey Delta winged multirole aircraft, albeit tied to conventional runaways on land, could still result.
Not so fun for the Navy, but the RAF would be happy.

This is one of the most bizarre and frustrating aspects of post-Sandys British aircraft industry.
They had everything on hand to get either, a Mirage III or a Phantom world-beater (or at worse, a F-5 world beater)
- radars: check
- avionics: check
- AAMs: check
- advanced engines: check
What lacked was the right airframe at the right time. I remember drawing lists of "candidates" from Tony Buttler books.
There are a whole bunch of them from ER-103C to P.110 (1956 to 1981) : my favorites were the Blackburn 141 and its little brother the 146; the Hawker 1173; and some others I've forgotten.

Rolls Royce had a string of excellent engines from Avon to RB199; innumerable variants of excellent turbojets followed by advanced, compact turbofans that preceded the comparable G.E J101 that led to the complete P530 / F20 / Grippen families of LWF.
It must have been quite frustrating for RR to churn so many superb military engines and finding so few projects and airframes for them.
And obviously on the other side of the Channel, the situation was kind of reversed. Dassault was churning prototypes like crazy, only for them to fall victim of the Atar monoculture - or imported American engines, expensive and loathed by De Gaulle.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
I have mused over the concept of a carrier Fighter Attack machine to AW.406.
This can be achieved if
the empty weight is under 20,000lb, Effective Little Coefficient at TO of 0.59 or above,
engine s.f.c dry 0.7 and rehear 1.8 or less
Engine weight each of 1,550lb or less
And wing about 400sqft.

However raising inclination above 15 degrees at TO would ease launch requirements somewhat.

Weight can be achieved, if the engines are light enough, as this impacts fusilage, and in turn wing and undercarriage weights.

Though everything gets surprisingly easy if we switch toba single large engine.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,099
Reaction score
4,833
Seems to me like you would need really need something along the lines of a turboramjet as engines for such a fighter though.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
Seems to me like you would need really need something along the lines of a turboramjet as engines for such a fighter though.
Not really, 0.7 for a two shaft turbojet is achievable in the era.
Obviously turbofans achieve this more easily but often have lower thrust levels for a given diameter and lower velocity exhaust which impacts speed and altitude.
 

starviking

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2006
Messages
1,165
Reaction score
299
Develop the Supermarine Scimitar into a supersonic two seater ?
The question is: could Vickers Supermarine make a successful plane? They made a mess of the TSR2 (engines being accessed from the tailpipes being one bad VS idea)
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,787
Reaction score
4,009
Hawker and English Electric always looked better than the rest of the lot - to me at least.
Hawker had experience.
English Electric had sophisticated, advanced designs (P.10, the British SR-71). They were also kind of "fresh" in the game (Canberra). The P.8 looked like a Lightning cured of its well know flaws, shame it wasn't picked for F155T: it could have rode the Lightning coattails.

The others were a mixed bag.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
5,787
Reaction score
4,009
France had a similar mess and hodgepodge of good and bad, big and small aircraft makers in 1936 when the Front Populaire tried to rationalize the whole thing - and actually made it even worse. After the war (1952 was turning point) however the effort started rolling in the right direction; by 1970 with the merger of Nord and Sud aviation the job was done at least. It took aproximately 35 years, from 1936 to 1971, to achieve it.
Great Britain kind of did a similar move post-war and too late: in the jet age. The 1960 mergings into BAC were quite... brutal and counter-productive.

There are striking parallels between France miseries in the 1936-52 era and what happened on the other side of the Channel in the 50's.

Another interesting coincidence is the number of small-medium-large aircraft makers at the begnning: 15 to 20 players on both sides. I made a list of French aircraft makers circa 1936 for France fights on; I must still have somewhere. The number was quite astonishing, something like 18 or more (ever heard of Romano ? Hanriot ? and there were a whole bunch of others like them).
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text... Or not.
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
648
Reaction score
435
I'd still like to see the AFVG target a smaller (say Flogger -sized), less ambitious (and expensive) fighter. A little smaller and less capable than a Phantom or Tornado or MG, but useful and affordable. Something bigger than a M2000, not so big as a M4000. Bigger than the Jag, smaller than a Tornado. You could have a dedicated strike version a la the Flogger and Tornado families (M200N might count here as well), but might aim for a more limited multi-role from the start.

Then the Jaguar stays in the Alpha Jet/Hawk light class as originally intend allowing both parties to take advantage of huge economies if scale on both programs.
 

zen

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2007
Messages
2,373
Reaction score
1,091
I'd still like to see the AFVG target a smaller (say Flogger -sized), less ambitious (and expensive) fighter. A little smaller and less capable than a Phantom or Tornado or MG, but useful and affordable. Something bigger than a M2000, not so big as a M4000. Bigger than the Jag, smaller than a Tornado. You could have a dedicated strike version a la the Flogger and Tornado families (M200N might count here as well), but might aim for a more limited multi-role from the start.

Then the Jaguar stays in the Alpha Jet/Hawk light class as originally intend allowing both parties to take advantage of huge economies if scale on both programs.
You mean like....this?
 

_Del_

I really should change my personal text... Or not.
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
648
Reaction score
435
Nice! Yes, something very much like that! I know there were a slew of designs of all sizes related to AVG. Probably on the other side of the channel, as well.
Seems like a lost opportunity for something they could make and sell a slew of. Erases the need to keep adding capability to the Jaguar project.

And if what becomes the Jag stays small as originally intended, there's a market for thousands of those as well.
 

Thorvic

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
642
Reaction score
130
Ralph you missed something, the Hawker P1154 was foisted on to the FAA, they had AW406 as a Sea Vixen replacement and the Supermarine/Vickers 583 was leading contender. The Phantom & Buccaneer, were both 50s designs with 50s technology so their capabilities meant they did it simple & heavy duty. The RN wanted a supersonic mach2 interceptor with the capabilities to match or better the phantom, but using more advanced design technology in structures, design, engines & avionics to produce a smarter/lighter type capable of secondary strike role and able to carry ASM to replace the Buccaneers.
The P1154 was forced upon them, and the 583 mothballed, then when the P1154 proved unsuitable to meet RN needs the F4 Phantom was ordered as a stop gap, the hope was still to develop a more advanced VG design, and the 583 experience was channelled into the AFVG, again seen as a common type t replace Phantom/Sea Vixen & Buccaneer in the early 70s.

The P141 was a 1967 design for a UK Phantom, aimed at the RAF (as the FAA Carrier fleet was doomed at that stage) however there is a mention in the brochure about it being compatible for development to Carrier use should the need arise. The brochure does detail alot of the reasoning behind the design decision.
 
Top