NBMR.3 not V/STOL?

[PMN1]

If NBMR.3 had not called for the aircraft to be V/STOL, what, if any changes are you likely to see with the aircraft that actually entered service after the dust had settled?

 

[royabulgaf]

Probably off the shelf Phantoms or Mirage 3s, depending on the agreed all-up weight. My guess is Micky D would push a single-seat Phantom as the US entry, then decide that the major modifications would cost too much. Then the French will buy Mirages, the Brits will make Phantoms with RR engines they will sell to the Benelux countries, Norway and Sweden will buy Drakens, and the Germans for some reason will buy Phantoms with Atar engines.

 

[alertken]

NBMR.3 was invented 8/61. The logic for V/STOL was a very short/zero iron opening, moving soon to IRBM deletion of runways, responded to by NATO dispersed/autobahn delivery of tactical nukes. (I permit you to raise eyebrow at the inconsistency of deploying from 8/61 hundreds of runway-hugging F-104G which had no military utility other than to deliver nukes: if the thing slowed down to seek an iron target of opportunity it would die). For the nuke job F-104G was the bees' knees. So: without V/STOL: no NBMR.3, even more F-104G.