UK/RAF buys British-only after the AFVG cancellation?

[tomo pauk]

The AFVG was a Franco-British joint project for the fast bomber/attack aircraft, cancelled in mid 1967, because French government withdrew the support.
So let's say the British say to themselves: sod this, we'll make our own aircraft from now on. So no Jaguar, no Tornado, no Eurofighter as we know them. Other aircraft are instead designed and manufactured in the UK. With variable geometry wings or not, one engine or two (new types can also be suggested), using the institutional knowledge to the fullest along with new tech of British origin.

 

[buffnut453]

The AFVG was a Franco-British joint project for the fast bomber/attack aircraft, cancelled in mid 1967, because French government withdrew the support.
So let's say the British say to themselves: sod this, we'll make our own aircraft from now on. So no Jaguar, no Tornado, no Eurofighter as we know them. Other aircraft are instead designed and manufactured in the UK. With variable geometry wings or not, one engine or two (new types can also be suggested), using the institutional knowledge to the fullest along with new tech of British origin.

Well...hang on a minute, and let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The Jaguar started out life as an advanced trainer. Ground attack requirements were progressively added until they superseded the trainer requirements (the trainer role was taken over respectively by the Alpha Jet and BAe Hawk). One of the reasons for the requirements creep was recognition that AFVG was high-risk. If AFVG survives, then it's possible that the Jaguar programme reverts back to its original purpose and it becomes an advanced, combat-capable trainer. So maybe there WAS a Jaguar...of sorts? But no Hawk or Alpha Jet?

 

[tomo pauk]

Well...hang on a minute, and let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. The Jaguar started out life as an advanced trainer. Ground attack requirements were progressively added until they superseded the trainer requirements (the trainer role was taken over respectively by the Alpha Jet and BAe Hawk). One of the reasons for the requirements creep was recognition that AFVG was high-risk. If AFVG survives, then it's possible that the Jaguar programme reverts back to its original purpose and it becomes an advanced, combat-capable trainer. So maybe there WAS a Jaguar...of sorts? But no Hawk or Alpha Jet?

Jaguar was outfitted with advanced wing, that featured abundance of high-lift devices. So it's payload capability was very good, despite wing not being of great area, and despite the engines of modest thrust. Jaguar's wing was developed in the UK.
So I'd try to 'borrow' the wing from Jag and shoehorn it on the Harrier fuselage maybe, 10 years earlier than people did it with 'original' Harrier to produce the Harrier II/Mk.5? Would've even worked without the tilting nozzles - offers the possibility for an afterburning Pegasus?

 

[nuuumannn]

So let's say the British say to themselves: sod this, we'll make our own aircraft from now on. So no Jaguar, no Tornado, no Eurofighter as we know them.

Why no Tornado or Eurofighter? France was not involved in either project. The Eurofighter was a combination of BAe research aligned with requirements for a new combat aircraft with Germany and Italy initially as the Agile Combat Aircraft, from the partnership formed with the companies involved in the Tornado development, BAe, MBB and Aeritalia were the three partners in Tornado and the ACA.

The Tornado was developed quite separate to the AFVG project, the UK deciding on the UKVG project in 1967 based on VG work done in Britain, although the intent with the UKVG project was for joint foreign investment. The original MRCA came about as a conglomerate of the UK and F-104 Starfighter operators in Europe and Canada, who formed a working group to investigate a modern strike airframe. By late 1968 Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands had dropped out, leaving Germany and Italy. This is a model of the first incarnation of an MRCA in German markings.

RAFM 24

 

[nuuumannn]

It's worth noting that BAe did a vast amount of research into combat aircraft in the 1970s independent to European collaboration, many designs of which were ordered but were later cancelled in defence reviews, such as AST.403, which was described as an Offensive Aircraft to Replace Harrier and Jaguar, but was cancelled in 1981. This was replaced by the ACA, which was a joint project based on independent research done by BAe as mentioned above, which became hardware in the form of the BAe EAP, which was a test bed for the EF2000 project and was jointly developed with Aeritalia assistance, the Germans, in the form of MBB pulling from the project. This led to a peculiarity in that Aeritalia's left hand wing and the BAe right hand wing were built to different CAD programmes! The EAP at the RAF Museum, Cosford, which also has a Kestrel developed from the P.1127 V/STOL research aircraft.

DSC_0311

The Harrier underwent a lot of configurations throughout its research career, some of which were quite exotic in design, and were done completely independent to European collaboration. Some of these followed from the P.1127 V/STOL testbed, such as the Kestrel and Harrier and some from the original P.1154 supersonic Harrier cancelled by both the Royal Navy and RAF. This is a wind tunnel model of the HS.1179, which was a single seat strike aircraft dated from 1968 incorporating advances from the P.1154 programme, although there was a two-seat variant proposed.

HS.1179L

This is an odd one, the P.1216, which was developed at Kingston as a supersonic V/STOL project in the late 1970s and early 1980s and powered by a PCB vectored thrust engine much like the BS.100 fitted to the P.1154.

NAM 82

The BS.100 engine at the FAA Museum at Yeovilton equipped with PCB for the P.1154.

BS100 i

A model of the P.1154 single-seat variant in navy colours, although the navy variant was a two-seater. The P.1154 was cancelled at the same time as the TSR.2 in early 1965.

P.1154

There's quite a lot of research info on Harrier development projects out there on the net, as well as BAe combat aircraft studies, including this oddity for a potential stealth fighter.

NAM 63

 

[nuuumannn]

So I'd try to 'borrow' the wing from Jag and shoehorn it on the Harrier fuselage maybe, 10 years earlier than people did it with 'original' Harrier to produce the Harrier II/Mk.5? Would've even worked without the tilting nozzles - offers the possibility for an afterburning Pegasus?

So this idea was toyed with back in the late 60s and 1970s for a big wing Harrier by HS and later BAe, stemming from research done into the P.1154, one example being the HS.1184 produced in 1970, but all kinds of configurations were tried well before McDonnel Douglas got involved, the Brits decided to reject BAe research and go with the US Harrier development path because it was cheaper than pursuing its own path. Various wind tunnel experiments such as this one with a W shaped wing were trialled, this wind tunnel model having interchangeable wings reversing the W configuration.

Harrier W Wing

The afterburning Pegasus was developed, as the BS.100 above for the P.1154, using PCB in the forward nozzles, but this proved extremely difficult to do, despite extensive testing carried out following the cancellation of the P.1154. PCB or Plenum Chamber Burning is igniting the exhaust in the orifice or plenum chamber before the nozzle opening and on the BS.100 this was done from the cold exhaust exiting the bypass fan at the front. There's plenty of stuff about PCB and the issues that the Brits had with it out there, the basic problem being regulating the temperature between the two nozzles, which proved very difficult.

 

[Graeme]

Why no Tornado or Eurofighter? France was not involved in either project.

Hi Grant.
I was never a big fan of the "Back to the Future" movies - but if you look closely at Tomo's scenario above - we just told everyone to "sod off."
British design ONLY. No partnerships of any kind.
So no Jaguar, Tornado or Eurofighter - don't they just disappear from the movie? Butterfly effect? Or do I need to revise Time Travel 101?

Where does that BAC P.45 project fit in this timeline?

 

[nuuumannn]

It's not so well known that Harrier GR.1s entered service with the ability to carry extra fuel in removeable extended wing tips. I don't know if they were tried on service examples in practise, but this particular Harrier, ZV744 did use them during its participation in the Daily Mail Transatlantic Air Race in May 1969, another Harrier XV741 winning the race by taking off near St Pancras Station in the centre of London and landing at dockyards close to central New York, whereas every other entrant had to start at the Post Office Tower in London and make their way to an airfield and vice versa to the top of the Empire State building at the other end.

The second participant Harrier XV744 on display at the Tangmere Military Aviation Museum without its extended wingtips.

2906 Tangmere Aviation Museum Harrier

 

[Graeme]

Looking at Jane's '66 - the British order for F-111s was still ongoing?
Tomo - we also need to cancel this and tell the USA to sod off? In a nice way though.

 

[nuuumannn]

British design ONLY.
So no Jaguar, Tornado or Eurofighter - don't they just disappear from the movie? Butterfly effect? Or do I need to revise Time Travel 101

The thing is, these aircraft were derived from British research projects anyway, so they quite probably would have evolved if there was no European participation. Following TSR.2 cancellation, European collaboration was a big thing in the UK for the simple fact that it saved money. The expense in these projects was R & D, but share production costs and the budget goes down, the cost of R&D offset by joint production. Following TSR.2 I can't see Britain not collaborating with Europe. BAe was certainly active but as has been proven, collaboration was the way ahead, with the USA if not Europe with the F-111K, F-4K/M, the Harrier II...

 

[nuuumannn]

Looking at Jane's '66 - the British order for F-111s was still ongoing?

The F-111K was ordered following the cancellation of TSR.2 and had that happened there would have been no Tornado. At the time TSR.2 was canned, the P.1154 and HS.681 transport were also cancelled, the Brits buying Spey engined Phantoms and C-130s to offset their cancellation. This was agreed on in late 1964 following a visit to the USA by the Minister for Aviation of the newly elected Labour government, the British party being escorted around the TFX (F-111) production facilities, where they were told just how cheap the TFX was gonna be!

 

[Graeme]

I can't see Britain not collaborating with Europe.

I agree - from what I've read - but this is a "what if."
So on that thought process was there an entirely British alternative to the AFVG - as per Derek Wood or Tony Butler sortathing?

 

[nuuumannn]

Where does that BAC P.45 project fit in this timeline?

The P.45 was developed by English Electric, which hints at its age, becoming part of the British Aircraft Corporation with the development of the TSR.2. It became a BAC project but got no further than scale models in 1964. In the early 60s there were a few companies researching VG, including Folland and Vickers. These were essentially the beginnings of the UKVG and the AFVG programmes.

 

[nuuumannn]

So on that thought process was there an entirely British alternative to the AFVG - as per Derek Wood or Tony Butler sortathing?

Oh okay then...sigh...

The UKVG project without German or Italian collaboration, but this depends entirely on whether or not we allow US collabs or not, because, as I mentioned, once the TSR.2 was cancelled the F-111K was ordered and if that goes ahead, UKVG probably doesn't evolve as a strike aircraft and remains a trainer derivative of the P.45 and other company VG projects. The Brits canned the VG element for its trainer derivative of its light strike fighter in 1965.

Here's another collab the Brits invited into the fold, the Aussies via the CAC were developing an advanced supersonic VG strike trainer and jointly with BAC at Warton created a project called the AA.107 (for Anglo-Australian - see what I mean about collaboration...), but again, this amounted to nothing, largely because of the Jaguar.

You gotta go a long way to avoid collaboration following the cancellation of TSR.2...

 

[buffnut453]

So the answer's simple. UK keeps TSR.2 (which, IMHO, they should've done anyway) and the entire question about AFVG disappears in a puff of pink logic.

Now we can talk about how awesome the TSR.2 was.

 

[nuuumannn]

So the answer's simple. UK keeps TSR.2 (which, IMHO, they should've done anyway) and the entire question about AFVG disappears in a puff of pink logic.

I'd give you a Funny and a Winner, Mark!

 

[nuuumannn]

The other alternative is to avoid the whole costly mess the TSR.2 became and go with the original Operational Requirement, OR.339 Canberra replacement, from which the English Electric P.17 and Vickers Type 571 were developed. Build a combination of these two as a TSR.2 lite, which effectively becomes a 1960s version of the Tornado without VG, designed as a true Canberra replacement equipped with a terrain following radar, supersonic transit speeds and capable of carrying tactical nuclear weapons.

If this was built and had entered service, there would have been no F-111K, no AFVG, no Jaguar (strike aircraft, there might have been a joint supersonic trainer), no Tornado and its likely the RAF would not have received Buccaneers either. There would have been a Harrier though...

 

[Graeme]

Oh okay then...sigh...

There ya go - that's the spirit mate!

 

[Graeme]

You gotta go a long way to avoid collaboration following the cancellation of TSR.2...

Yes indeed!

 

[Graeme]

Have you read 'Empire of the Clouds' by James Hamilton-Paterson?

In particular, John Farley's opinion of the TSR-2 and P.1154.

John Farley (pilot) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org