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

Tornado Projects

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,004
Reaction score
5,685
The original plans for the Tornado ADV included a LLTV mounted under the nose for long range target ID day or night, and an HMS.

Sources
Marconi builds Tornado LLTV system Flight International 2 Sept 1978 p730
Ferranti Develops Helmet Sight Flight International 21 Oct 1978 p1468
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
469
Need your help with Panavia Tornado 2000? proposal

A few years ago I was looking at an aviation magazine that had a brief blurb on a proposed Tornado 2000.
From what I can remember it was a proposal to increase the Tornado IDS limited range a more useful one, plus from memory it was to have an avionics update (and possibly some stealthier features).
The range increase was to be from insertion of fuselage plugs, before and after the wing box (i.e. Tornado F.3 style).

Does anyone have anything on this proposal?
Was it intended for the RAF? Or was it a proposal by the Panavia consortium?

I think an improved Tornado IDS of this proposed nature would be far more viable and marketable.
For as many times it has been proposed as an F-111 replacement for the RAAF, the existing Tornado IDS just doesn’t have the range, as far as I am concerned!

Regards
Pioneer
 

Thorvic

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
642
Reaction score
130
Re: Need your help with Panavia Tornado 2000? proposal

The main fuselage and wings remained the same with the forward fuselage being extended in similar manor to the F-3 but with a new faceted appearance rather than the traditional boxy shape. The intakes were also changed to a more stealthy shape.

Avionics were to be updated and may be a more multimode radar fitted. I think somebody posted images a couple of years ago on What-if.
 

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,614
Reaction score
184
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
Re: Need your help with Panavia Tornado 2000? proposal

Not a problem.
 

Attachments

  • ek45mb.gif
    ek45mb.gif
    59.4 KB · Views: 3,196
  • Stealth tornado 2000.JPG
    Stealth tornado 2000.JPG
    410.6 KB · Views: 3,072

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
469
Re: Need your help with Panavia Tornado 2000? proposal

Thanks Matej for the drawings

Regards
Pioneer
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,004
Reaction score
5,685
Re: Need your help with Panavia Tornado 2000? proposal

I posted the first image, its from Air Power 2000 by Michael J. Gething. The second scan is from WAPJ Magazine Tornado IDS Variant Briefing, I'm not sure of issue.
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,004
Reaction score
5,685
GAFAD (German Air Force Air Defence)

Post 1975, single seat Tornado possibly with fixed wing.

By 1980, a carbon fibre FSW design was being studied, giving reduced drag at transonic speeds

LVJ Tornado

1980 project. Tornado ADV fuselage with low set compound delta wing and short coupled canards on air intakes.

Super Tornado (Tornado International)

1987 proposal. Tornado ADV cleared for Sea Eagle, ALARM and bombs. Offered to export customers and RAF for Buccaneer replacement. Stopped in 1988.

Tornado J

1987 proposal to Japan's FS-X program. Based on ADV airframe with features from IDS and ECR.

Tornado ADV Upgrade

In 1988 an upgrade of ADV with AN/APG-65 radar and EJ200 engines was briefly considered.

Source:

World Air Power Journal 31 Winter 1997
 

Spinners

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Sep 21, 2006
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
overscan said:
Tornado ADV Upgrade

In 1988 an upgrade of ADV with AN/APG-65 radar and EJ200 engines was briefly considered.

You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.
 

boxkite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2006
Messages
855
Reaction score
190
If anyone is looking for an artist's impression of the Tornado 2000, here is one from the "AIR International" May 1993 (pg 219)

Artist's impression of BAe's proposed Tornado 2000, designed to fulfil the requirements of ASR 425 for a new combat aircraft which would enter service in the second decade of the next century. Intended as an advanced, multi-role, low-level penetrator version of the Tornado, the aircraftwould feature increased range, reduced radar cross section, electronic warfare enhancements, additional reconnaissance systems and compability with future precision guided weapons.
 

Attachments

  • BAe Tornado 2000.JPG
    BAe Tornado 2000.JPG
    130.8 KB · Views: 2,519

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,180
Reaction score
1,404
BAe ad from 1991 with something Tornado 2000 look-alike
 

Attachments

  • tornado2000baead.jpg
    tornado2000baead.jpg
    195.3 KB · Views: 2,441

Matej

Multiuniversal creator
Joined
Feb 13, 2006
Messages
2,614
Reaction score
184
Website
www.hitechweb.genezis.eu
flateric said:
Tornado 2000 look-alike

The citation from the text in my reply no.3:

There have been suggestions that the Tornado 2000 also formed the basis of a "Long Range Penetrator", with an even more dramatically chined forward fuselage, a fixed, highly swept delta wing, and prominent LERXes. This aircraft would have retained the Tornado 2000's massive conformal tanks, with ASMs carried semi-conformally on its sides.

Coincidence? I don't think so.
 

Pioneer

Seek out and close with the enemy
Senior Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,007
Reaction score
469
I know this thread is a little old - but!

I found this in a copy of Pacific Defence Reporter, Feb 1981, Vol VII No.8

With the aeroplane now entering service, Panavia reports a very high degree of interest from a large number of potential export customers some of whom have a requirement for both capabilities within a single variant.

This to me was the biggest down fall of the Tornado potential in terms of export potential - two specialized types 'Strike/Interdiction/reconn' or 'Interceptor'. Panavia failed to produce a true all-round multi-role variant within the one plane! Panavia failed to deliver on what the market wanted!
Only the likes of the RAF and the RSAF could afford to field two specialized variants!
Potential lost!!!!

Just my 20-cents worth
My opinion based on Tornado F2 or F3 variant fuselage (offering improved range on internal fuel and more internal space for avionics), with Hughes APG-65 'true' multi-mode radar = great all-round multi-role fighter-bomber?


Regards
Pioneer
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,304
Reaction score
1,322
The Tornado wasn't designed with much fighter capabilities in mind and although the
F.2/F.3 seem to have been relatively succesful as a long range interceptor, that was a role
quite rarely needed in other nations. And when the Tornado appeared on the market, true
fighters already had to have as much agility, as possible, something it never could have achieved
in its basic configuration. So I don't think, that Panavias optimism in the market potential for
a more fighter-like version was really justified. In the RAF the Tornado was the true successor to
the Canberra and in the german airforce to the F-104G, which was developed as a bomber, too,
not as a fighter.
 

Gridlock

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
241
Reaction score
5
"In the summer of 1979 there was a snifdf of interest in the Tornado from the USAF. They were looking for an attack aircraft to fill the gap between the F-111 and the F-16, they wanted about 150 aeroplanes which could have been Tornados [...] had they bought it the British government would cancel the ADV and buy 165 2-seat F15s instead"


-- Mike Elsam
 

AndyG61

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jun 29, 2011
Messages
3
Reaction score
1
Realise this is an old thread, but .....

Some Tornado F3's were modified to carry 2 ALARM in place of the Skyflash, to provide a potential SEAD capability in Gulf War II; in the event they were not used, but XI Squadron operated them for a while, with the unofficial designation of EF3! The mod was also offered to the Saudi's, who displayed some interest as they were really not happy with the 'fighter' Tornado and it would have given them a more useful role - as far as is known this went no further, but the Saudi's are a secretive bunch, so who knows?
 

RavenOne

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Jun 18, 2008
Messages
435
Reaction score
668
Gridlock said:
"In the summer of 1979 there was a snifdf of interest in the Tornado from the USAF. They were looking for an attack aircraft to fill the gap between the F-111 and the F-16, they wanted about 150 aeroplanes which could have been Tornados [...] had they bought it the British government would cancel the ADV and buy 165 2-seat F15s instead"


-- Mike Elsam

There was also a 'Wild Weasel' Tornado variant proposed of the ECR variant I believe as replacement for the F-4G :)
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,156
Reaction score
4,893
RavenOne said:
Gridlock said:
"In the summer of 1979 there was a snifdf of interest in the Tornado from the USAF. They were looking for an attack aircraft to fill the gap between the F-111 and the F-16, they wanted about 150 aeroplanes which could have been Tornados [...] had they bought it the British government would cancel the ADV and buy 165 2-seat F15s instead"


-- Mike Elsam

There was also a 'Wild Weasel' Tornado variant proposed of the ECR variant I believe as replacement for the F-4G :)

I would say certain countries wish they had that version now in Libya.
 

alertken

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 20, 2007
Messages
629
Reaction score
258
Can we find 1973 PanAp, an AlphaJet-niche single seat, cheap derivative, for Luftwaffe? This was a paper puff, as FIAT, BAC and MBB were happy to work together to sustain what had begun, May,1968, as a (maybe Dassault), Fokker, Sabca, 7 Nation/8 User programme of >1,000 units. But they were not enthusiastic to abandon other solo or (FIAT/Embraer AMX) bilateral schemes. The business structure of Panavia GmbH had no resources other than Project Office administration. So, no motive, no funds to perpetuate Tripartite collaboration.

In 1979 UK solo-funded BAe's EAP unstable canard concept; FRG, working in the same field, was willing to do it all again and decline US sirens (FRG was obliged to offset much $:DM pain in US Forces, Germany and the best way of doing that was to buy $ kit); Italy came on board a going concern; newly civilised Spain was welcomed: enter Typhoon. Product was Customer-led, where Mirage 2000N and Rafale were Supplier-led: EMD preferred 100% of some, rather than <40% of maybe many, maybe none. The French State apparatus went along with that and incurred very heavy expense. As they did throughout the Deterrent triad. Independence costs twice: in visible cash, and in what fine folk are not exporting because they are making solo-munitions. We do not embark on these things in order to sell them overseas: we do it for National Defence, and it is politicians' judgement whether solo is right (Rafale), collaboration(Typhoon),or off-the-shelf, as is import (AMD's customers; France - E-3F, E-2C). There's no absolute right way, because no State can do it all solo, guns and butter.
 

Jemiba

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
8,304
Reaction score
1,322
Another photo of the Panavia 100 single seater models from Aviation Week, June 1969.
The strange shape of the intake just reflected the fact, that their configuration wasn't
determined then.
 

Attachments

  • Panavia-100.jpg
    Panavia-100.jpg
    110.4 KB · Views: 1,445

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,262
Reaction score
2,128
Here is a picture of the Panavia-100 model from another angle in Brassey's Annual 1973.
 

Attachments

  • Panavia-100.png
    Panavia-100.png
    528.2 KB · Views: 1,193

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
15,156
Reaction score
4,893
PANAVIA PROPOSES 'TORNADO-J' FOR FS-X
Military Technology Exchanges Proposed

Tokyo AEROSPACE JAPAN-WEEKLY in English 23 Feb 87 pp 1, 2

[Text]
Panavia Aircraft announced at a press conference on
February 12 in London that the company proposed a plan to
develop a new version of its Tornado fighter aircraft
jointly with Japan for the FS-X next support fighter of the
Air Self-Defense Force (ASDF).

The proposed new aircraft called a "J" version is
modeled on the Tornado ADV aircraft which is currently
manufactured for the British Royal Air Force (RAF). The
proposal is aimed at developing jointly with Japan a new
fighter which will satisfy all requirements of ASDF. For
this purpose, Panavia has also proposed that an agreement on
military technology exchanges should be concluded between
Japan and Europe.

The FS-X options are now narrowed down to purchase of
off-the-shelf foreign aircraft (including Panavia Tornado,
General Dynamics F-16 and McDonnell Douglas F/A-18) and
development of new aircraft (either domestic development or
joint development with foreign manufacturers).

The joint development proposals of the U.S. have
recently been in the spot light. In the circumstances',
Panavia's joint development proposal is aimed at countering
the U.S. manufacturers.

Under the FS-X operational scenario, ASDF plans to
deploy new support fighters at Matsushima Air Base in Miyagi
Prefecture for attack operation against enemy fleets
approaching Hokkaido or the coast of Japan Sea.

In time of emergency, however, the FSX fighters may be
deployed down south at Hyakuri Air Base because even
Matsushima Air Base is too close to the front fine.

The FS-X will have to fly up to the east coast of Hokkaido
to attack enemy ships and return to the base. In some cases,
the fighters will have to perform air-to-air combat during their missions.

According to ASDF's requirements, the FS-X has to be armed with four
air-to-ship missiles (or six 500-pound guided bombs), two air-to-air
missiles and a 20mm machinegun (with 500 rounds). The Panavia Tornado
and the McDonnell Douglas F-15E dual-role fighter are the only aircraft
now available to satisfy such requirements and an operational scenario.

This is why Panavia has proposed a joint development of
the Tornado-J Although no details of the Tornado-J
proposal have been disclosed yet, Panavia is now attracting
much attention of the Japanese aircraft industry as well as
Asia's engineering staff who have been concerned about a
joint development with the U.S. only.

Europe believes that the FS-X is a good chance for
Japan to appeal its efforts of correcting the current trade
imbalance between Japan and Europe. If necessary, West.
Germany, the U.K. and ltaly will ask Prime Minister Yasuhiro
Nakasone for Japan's introduction of the Tornado at tne
coming Venice Economic Summit meeting in June.

Note: The guided bombs mentioned are likely to have primarily been GCS-1[MK 82] infrared-guided bombs intended for use against landing craft and the like.


http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a348059.pdf (pdf pages 54-55)
 

datafuser

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
126
Reaction score
32
From The Economist, 4 July 1981.

BAe tried to get the Saudis interested in a lighter, single-seat Tornado without its VG wing.
 

Attachments

  • 1981-7-4.png
    1981-7-4.png
    300.2 KB · Views: 723

datafuser

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Dec 2, 2006
Messages
126
Reaction score
32
Thanks a lot for that.

Is there any drawing or artist's impression of the P.110 other than those in the Evolution of the Eurofighter Typhoon thread?
 

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,991
Reaction score
5,274
From the book;

Flugzeuge. 1000 Maschinen aus aller Welt mit sämtlichen technischen Daten. Vom ersten Fluggerät bis zum Überschalljet
 

Attachments

  • 1.png
    1.png
    289.6 KB · Views: 585

Thorvic

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
642
Reaction score
130
The original plans for the Tornado ADV included a LLTV mounted under the nose for long range target ID day or night, and an HMS.

Sources
Marconi builds Tornado LLTV system Flight International 2 Sept 1978 p730
Ferranti Develops Helmet Sight Flight International 21 Oct 1978 p1468
20191016_200451.jpg 20191016_200502.jpg 20191016_200541.jpg

EAG 4898 as requested by Chris Gibson for SMW 2019 for the intended launch of Typhoon to Typhoon
 

scorp

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Mar 4, 2006
Messages
26
Reaction score
7
If the kit-bash posted last weekend is an early/proposed Tornado ADV, why was it painted dark green, and why is it depicted carrying bombs? Or am I misunderstanding something?
 

Aubi

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
241
Reaction score
320
Website
www.armedconflicts.com
Because it is an attack variant.

A Tentative Fleet Plan said:
Another aircraft based upon the Air Defence Variant designed to meet AST.396. The blunt nose contains 26" diameter ball which itself contains a Laser Ranger and Marked Target Seeker (LRMTS) and FLIR. A Terrain-Following-Radar is carried in a fairing below the nose, whilst a LLLTV set (the Visual Augmentation System originally proposed for the ADV variant) is placed immediately forward of the windscreen in the upper nose.
 

CJGibson

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2011
Messages
1,534
Reaction score
889
The ADV already had the extra fuel capacity (fin tank, fuselage extension), VAS ahead of cockpit and a gun bay wired for avionics. The intakes were fixed.

Anybody interested in a PTP on AST.396?

Chris
 

overscan (PaulMM)

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
13,004
Reaction score
5,685
AST.396? Absolutely.

The stretched ADV version was also proposed for the Wild Weasel version I think.
 

archipeppe

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 18, 2007
Messages
1,834
Reaction score
706
I wonder if the ECR version for both Italian Air Force and Luftwaffe could be regarded as new version of its own or only a mere conversion...
 

Purpletrouble

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
292
Reaction score
213
The picture of the canopy-less flight was after the loss of a GR1 where the nav ejected but the pilot didn’t and died. There was a lot of controversy as to how this had happened and I believe the flight was to rebuild confidence from aircrew that it was safe(ish). Of course the propensity of the secondary power system to catch fire didn’t help either...

Re ADV having a fin tank - so do the strikes, but generally put out of use as it was a pain in the arse (leaks).
 

Purpletrouble

ACCESS: Secret
Joined
Sep 16, 2019
Messages
292
Reaction score
213
Not many know, but a proportion of the Tornado GR1/4s were trainers. they were not combat capable as they lacked the rear seat navigators displays and systems in lieu of a 2nd stick and copy (ish) of front cockpit. They never had a different designation, and were never combat capable (as I understand it, although I only know for certain that was the case with the GR4 upgrade of them). This explains why in the 80s, the Tri-National Tornado Training Establishment, TTTE dispersed on war to augment other sqns the UK manned sqn there not forming an additional (R) Sqn like the TWCU as it was pure trainers (TWCU was like a Sqn, nearly all strikes for weapons training).

Usual Sqn allocation was ~10 strikes and 2 trainers, the latter being needed for pilot check flights and all the backseat/photo job type stuff. That's why they are always the Tonkas that got the special paint schemes as they had no chance of going anywhere. Life wise they were low on flying hours at retirement (unlike the strikes rotating ops for decades on 6+ hour sorties) but high on landings hence just as worn out.

I think the logic for never having a different designator, as with Jag/Harrier and Typhoon, relates to the 1970s/80s political issues over declarations to NATO and that this way they could all be counted as GR1 and thus part of the UK's numbers, despite not actually being useful - unlike Jag/Harrier trainers which could still drop something (and may not have been counted). The Strikes and Trainers were managed as separate fleets though reflecting tasking.
 

Similar threads

Top