Yankee_Aviator

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
29
Reaction score
30
I just want to know why the British insisted on multinational collaboration rather than pursuing the UKVG as a purely indigenous British aircraft. I've heard from some places that the British government had mandated that they would only procure multinational planes in the future, but I have not been able to verify this. If it's true I would like to know what their reasoning was. I've always been all about country of origin of aircraft, I just don't see the merits of multinational aircraft. Different requirements between different countries and political disagreements lead to delays and cost overruns which negate any advantage in shared development costs, plus it takes away from the national pride that developing an advanced military aircraft brings. Morale is important. Last part is just my two cents, if anyone has any info on the British government requiring multinational collaboration, please share.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,731
Reaction score
6,957
I just want to know why the British insisted on multinational collaboration rather than pursuing the UKVG as a purely indigenous British aircraft. I've heard from some places that the British government had mandated that they would only procure multinational planes in the future, but I have not been able to verify this. If it's true I would like to know what their reasoning was. I've always been all about country of origin of aircraft, I just don't see the merits of multinational aircraft. Different requirements between different countries and political disagreements lead to delays and cost overruns which negate any advantage in shared development costs, plus it takes away from the national pride that developing an advanced military aircraft brings. Morale is important. Last part is just my two cents, if anyone has any info on the British government requiring multinational collaboration, please share.

TSR-2 & P.1154 - they had been badly burned twice earlier in the decade. Also GB economy going down the drain on a crazy train, money had to be found elsewhere.

Also (ask NASA) involving international partners helps making large and expensive projects cancellation-proof. Concorde was the most extreme end of this: the French had conveniently omitted any escape clause back in November 1962; the British ended with their backs against a wall.

Space station Freedom-Alpha-ISS is another startling example. As soon as Canada, Japan and Europe were tied to it (1988) that thing could never, ever be cancelled.
 

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,845
Reaction score
3,534
Collaboration with foreign partners on all major aerospace projects was one of the recommendations from the Committee of Inquiry into the Aircraft Industry, 1964-1965 (the Plowden Committee).

It was however advocating something that the Ministry of Aviation had already been doing since at least 1958 and which was becoming quite widespread among the European aircraft manufacturers by this period as a means to share R&D risk and costs, boost order books to reach break-even points sooner and ensure factories were kept open with work (building a bit of something being better for local unemployment than building nothing). It was also a means to reshape the aviation industries of Europe as fewer centres of production were required.

The US of course viewed this differently but they had selective tendering and large corporations tended to merge over time into larger conglomerates to achieve the same end.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
8,078
Reaction score
4,417

Attachments

  • AFVG-05.png
    AFVG-05.png
    344.3 KB · Views: 114
  • AFVG-06.png
    AFVG-06.png
    627.4 KB · Views: 117
  • AFVG-97.png
    AFVG-97.png
    935.1 KB · Views: 113
  • AFVG-99.png
    AFVG-99.png
    1.2 MB · Views: 113
  • TSR2 AND AFVG SAME SCALE.JPG
    TSR2 AND AFVG SAME SCALE.JPG
    120.3 KB · Views: 119
  • AFVG-09.jpg
    AFVG-09.jpg
    295.1 KB · Views: 121
Last edited:

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
7,731
Reaction score
6,957
In a saner world, Dassault would have been more honest on the AFVG (no G / G4 / G8 unuseful diversions) while SNECMA would have bet on the M45s as a logical Atar successor; instead of TF306 and M53.
The M45 nearly had enough thrust to replace the older Atar 9 variants at 6 tons of thrust; growing up to 7 tons or 9 tons, and into the Mirage F1... and a second batch of Mirage IV post 1968. It would have done wonders to their respective ranges.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
8,078
Reaction score
4,417
I have never seen an official detailed drawing of beautiful AFVG. What a pity. Untouchable information?
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
8,078
Reaction score
4,417

Yankee_Aviator

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
29
Reaction score
30
From "Meilensteine der Luftfahrt: Die deutschen Senkrechtstarter", DaimlerChrysler Aerospace:
An artist impression of the NKF and a 3-view of the Panavia 100, the single seat version of
the MRCA Tornado.
Is there any additional information specifically about the NKF? I've tried to research this aircraft (want to get an idea of how much Germany actually contributed to the final production model design of the Tornado) but there's nothing about it online, if anyone has any background on the NKF I would love to read about it.
 

Yankee_Aviator

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
May 12, 2021
Messages
29
Reaction score
30
Re Tornado dogfighting, the RB.199 was targeted at two design points IIRC: low level high speed cruise/penetration (mil thrust) and Mach 2 at altitude in a straight line for interception (original MRCA/IDS was intended for this, before ADV) in 'burner. Generally, 'off design', Tornado lacked thrust, and dogfights need lots of it, even with auto-sweep.

That said, I recall someone saying that the most realistic thing about Top Gun was the bedroom scenes. I'm not sure the F-14 was too great a dogfighter - engines also a bit low thrust on A model.

AFVG with M.45s seems to be an even worse candidate.
While it's true that the TF-30 was a trashcan of a fighter engine (no seriously, pilots joked that the F-14A was "a nice airplane powered by two pieces of sh*t"), the GE F110 in the F-14B remedied the aircraft's engine problems and provided more thrust. The F-14 was a very capable dogfighter, it had a phenomenal roll rate and the VG wings gave it a much smaller turn radius than its contemporaries, the Tomcat was very strong in the 1-circle fight because of this, and was also a decent rate fighter, albeit not as good as the F-15 or the rocketship we know as the Viper in the rate fight.
 

alertken

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
692
Reaction score
381
YA #96. I can report mutual respect, across BAC+FIAT+MBB - commitment to make this work, so to see off F-Anything. You may ask why respect FIAT, who had less current design experience I hear you say, but when the first wingset arrived in Manching from Turin the BAC/MBB folk fronted up ready to laugh at agricultural unquality...but did not.

You might find value in researching pivots. MBB for NKF schemes in 1967 had taken a licence with Grumman for F-111B centre box, machined from solid titanium for strength to solve the issue of stores on outer wing. That went straight into Tornado, royalties paid. There is a lingering Brit narrative that F-111A "stole" Vickers/Barnes Wallis Swallow/VG genius from 1959 MWDP-funded Study, but pivot/stores-on-wing was a NASA objection to Wallis. Note that 1960 BAC moved VG Study from Weybridge (Wallis) to Preston (EE).
 
Last edited:

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,876
Reaction score
8,844
NKF was the end result of the US/FRG program.

NKF:

nkf-jpg.44689


EWR A400 (final version of US/FRG)

3551-96b67a7d49b077e78e594f3d74fd73d5-jpg.642481



NKF was basically redesigned A400 with no lift jets.

https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/th...gram-boeing-ewr-360-republic-ewr-a400-avs.452
 
Last edited:
Top