A British Mirage III - what would it take?
- Thread starter Cryhavoc101
- Start date
Didn't Dassult almost buy the engine that was supposed to be for the canadian Arrow?
Thanks for the comments so far folks
So one stand out and an obvious one is the 1957 Defence White Paper
There was a lot of factors that drove the 2 main thrusts of it
ICBMs and SAMs (and this coupled with Britain's declining finances)
This lead to BAOR being treated as a trip wire force in any future central Germany conflict - i.e. the Soviets were left under no illusion that crossing the internal boarder would trigger a nuclear response. So no need for a large army.
The Airforce no longer being seen as the primary delivery method of Nuclear Bombs - so a reduction in the V force
And in an environment dominated by SAMs where a piloted aircraft cannot survive - why bother developing manned aircraft or having large numbers of fighter planes and fighter bombers?
Now my issue with all of the above is that while I can appreciate that from HMG POV they genuinely believed this to be true, I cannot help but notice that other nations such as France and the USA went on to continue the development and production of manned aircraft.
What did they see that the Mandarins of Whitehall did not when writing the 1957 DWP.
And ultimately what I guess I am asking is how to tone down or completely change said document?
So one stand out and an obvious one is the 1957 Defence White Paper
There was a lot of factors that drove the 2 main thrusts of it
ICBMs and SAMs (and this coupled with Britain's declining finances)
This lead to BAOR being treated as a trip wire force in any future central Germany conflict - i.e. the Soviets were left under no illusion that crossing the internal boarder would trigger a nuclear response. So no need for a large army.
The Airforce no longer being seen as the primary delivery method of Nuclear Bombs - so a reduction in the V force
And in an environment dominated by SAMs where a piloted aircraft cannot survive - why bother developing manned aircraft or having large numbers of fighter planes and fighter bombers?
Now my issue with all of the above is that while I can appreciate that from HMG POV they genuinely believed this to be true, I cannot help but notice that other nations such as France and the USA went on to continue the development and production of manned aircraft.
What did they see that the Mandarins of Whitehall did not when writing the 1957 DWP.
And ultimately what I guess I am asking is how to tone down or completely change said document?
Almost certainly Firestreak and Redtop IMO
AIM 7 Sparrow was introduced when Britain adopted Phantom and AIM 9 Sidewinder because it was far cheaper to adopt it than modify the aircraft to fire Redtop (and also the bean counters noted that Redtop was 4x more expensive!)
What France and USA did was looking beyond the 'either peace, or the nuclear holocaust' equation, while also acknowledging that there are dozens of countries that have not adopted that mantra. Those countries also wanted the modern and affordable combat aircraft - Sabres, Hunters and MiG-15s will not do it in the 1960s - and both USA and France delivered those (so did the Soviet Union).
I agree, the RAF and Britain in general have a tendency to want very capable hardware. They also tend to convince themselves that they can build and deploy superpower hardware with second-tier budgets.
To me the MirageIII doesn’t seem like a very RAFfable plane, at least in frontline terms. Sort of like the Gnat, it’s a bit basic. What I have sometimes wondered is how a Brit Draken would have done, it seems like it would extend a bit more into the RAFs comfort zone.
I think this keeps coming back to money. I feel one of the main drivers for the cost cutting with the 57 DWP was were Britain found itself after Suez. Could a different Suez crisis not p*ssing off the US result in the money being around for a few years longer before they have to made the hard choices. It's harder to cancelling when the thing is in production, better if someone else is also buying it.
Also could more cold war flash points in the 50s show that they need a force to deal with these, instead of the tripwire/V bomber options.
Also could more cold war flash points in the 50s show that they need a force to deal with these, instead of the tripwire/V bomber options.
Riain
Banned
And what aircraft would that be?
The prototype fighter version of the FD2 was estimated to be 30 months away from a first flight when F155 was cancelled in April 1957, and expected to reach sqn service in the late 60s, which is why the Lightning was required even if the F155 project went ahead. However this wasn't a small Mirage III class fighter, it was a big F106 class fighter
The SR177 was further progressed, the prototype was under constuction and at the time of cancellation on Christmas Eve 1957 the design of the main component jigs was 70 per cent complete while the component assembly jigs were almost 50 per cent complete. However this wasn't wanted by the RAF, it was under development for the RN and West Germany, nor was it a single engined fighter as it had a rocket as well as a jet.
Basically at the time of the 1957 DWP Britain had a single fighter prototype available, the P1B.
The mounting of the radar inside the nosecone isn't a problem if the dish is a decent size, which it was with the Lightning.
The one that Air Ministry requests by mid-1950s, that also fits the topic here, ie. a 1-engined delta-winged A/C.
Riain
Banned
I saw the Hansard for Sandys 57 DWP speech, it was oddly specific, as it said that combat aircraft would be obsolete only in the NATO context within 10 years, there would still be requirement for recce and out of area combat aircraft. While his pronouncement mean that future fighter development was halted there was an immediate requirement to equip some 20 fighter/interceptor, FGA and FR sqns for Fighter Command, RAFG, NEAF and FEAF, so the Lightning and Hunter conversions were approved.
I think the failure in vision was to foresee that the Lightning, and other Mach 2 fighters that emerged during this era broke the trend of combat aircraft types only serving for about 10-15 years and individual aircraft only for 10. If Sandys had foreseen that individual Lightnings would serve for 15-20 years and that the type overall would serve for 27 years he would have a different attitude in the 57 DWP.
Perhaps his DWP policy could be something along the lines of now having to make aircraft investments last for 15-20 years, which allows the F155 to be cancelled as it isn't required until the early 70s. However that still leaves the Lightning in the box seat, with the SR177 as the only other contender advanced enough to survive the DWP for use with the RN and West Germany (until they changed their requirement and withdrew).
That for a new-generation fighter, that can fly and climb much faster than the current generation of fighters, has an up-to-date radar, armed with two missiles and a cannon or two.
Sounds as if the Air Ministry would want a Chance Vought Crusader with a delta wing.
Something for the Royal Auxiliary Air Force? Though I admit ordering the Folland Gnat F1 to meet such a requirement is MUCH more likely.
Riain
Banned
That's F.155, which was cancelled in the 1957 DWP.
The Fairey Delta FD3/ER.103/C was the favoured contender but it was a big aircraft, likely 50% bigger than the Mirage III and in the class of the F106 which was built in similar numbers as the Lightning.
The AI23 AIRPASS was an up to date radar. It was the worlds first monopulse radar, was modified into the Blue Parrot for the Buccaneer, updated to the AI23B for the Lightning F3/3A/6 and in sold state form was the basis for the TSR2s TFR/attack radar.
Riain
Banned
The 57 DWP will kill that.
Despite getting a lot of shit, the 57 DWP was only off the mark with the declaring manned combat aircraft obsolescent. For example Australia disbanded the Civilian Air Force flying sqns at about the same time and reduced then ceased conscription, much like the British. At about the same time the US changed their tank production from a base for mass production, for WW2 style, to single efficient supplier because a mass industrial mobilisation wasn't practical when the final arbiter was thermonuclear weapons not million man armies.
This is the crux of the 57 DWP; to reorient British defence policy away from 'WW2 with a few smallish nukes' to 'WW3 will glass Europe so we need a thermonuclear deterrent, conventional deterrent/tripwire forces in NATO and the ability to fight limited wars around the world.' IMO in this scenario what the RAF needs is 20 sqns of tactical fighters that can intercept nuclear bombers heading for Britain and undertake fighter, ground attack and recce in RAFG, NEAF and FEAF, available from the late 50s.
I'm okay with any proposal that specifies the size and weight of a Mirage.
Riain
Banned
The SR.177 goes pretty close, and with the advantage of not being cancelled immediately in the 57 DWP and having prototypes under construction.
Seems like a missed opportunity. We need delta wings (to fit the thread), and deletion of the rocket engine once the more powerful engine is available, same as with the Mirage III.
Riain
Banned
It's a tailed delta, like the MiG 21.
The Buccaneer S1 had Gyron jnr engines and the S2 switched to the more powerful Spey. I'd suggest the F2 would delete the rocket, convert the rocket fuel spaces to jet fuel and use the Spey.
There are still major political hurdles to overcome to bring it into service.