AHC: an 1-engined Mach-2 fighter for the RAF

Archibald

Banned
Ah yes, the Sea Vixen navigator darkened pit. not good. Then again the A3D Skywarrior was nicknamed "All 3 Dead" because NOBODY had ejector seats. dear god.
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
The Vulcan had ejector seats for the pilot and co-pilot. The Nav-radar, Nav-plotter and Air Electronics Officer were supposed to die for their country.
 
The Vautour would not be better than the Javelin. The French used it as a stopgap all weather fighter and it wasn't even a match for a Canberra/B57. A Javelin wasn't able to mix it with fighters but that wasn't it's job it was a high altitude plane designed to have a long range to hunt Soviet bombers over the sea.
 
The Vulcan had ejector seats for the pilot and co-pilot. The Nav-radar, Nav-plotter and Air Electronics Officer were supposed to die for their country.
I think the real idea was from WWII where pilot's stayed at the controls to let others get out by conventional parachutes nobody got out at low level, then came along new zero zero ejector seats and they didn't now have the space for them for the rear crew....
 

Archibald

Banned
The Vautour would not be better than the Javelin. The French used it as a stopgap all weather fighter and it wasn't even a match for a Canberra/B57. A Javelin wasn't able to mix it with fighters but that wasn't it's job it was a high altitude plane designed to have a long range to hunt Soviet bombers over the sea.

Except a Canberra wasn't an all weather fighter by any mean. neither was a B-57.
 
I think the real idea was from WWII where pilot's stayed at the controls to let others get out by conventional parachutes nobody got out at low level, then came along new zero zero ejector seats and they didn't now have the space for them for the rear crew....

I believe there was an upgrade offered to add ejector seats for the others, which the Air Ministry declined to pay for.
 
The Australians built a Mirage III with the Avon engine used in the EE Lightning.

The driver was to get from Darwin to Singapore in a single flight before IFR was a thing with the RAAF, as well as commonality with the RAAF Sabre and Canberra and thus using established maintenance facilities. But the production RAAF Mirages used the Atar 9C although all the access panels etc were placed for the Avon, the worst of both worlds.
 
I would have swapped every Lightning for an Avon-Mirage or Spey Mirage/Mirage F1, every godawful Sea Vixen & Scimitar for a licence-built Etendard IV

Leaving aside that there was no Spey F1 and it wasn't introduced until 1973 what performance advantage does the Avon/Spey Mirage III have over the Lightning? It certainly isn't faster, longer ranged or have as powerful radar? Why would the RAF neglect to develop its Lightning fleet with better avionics and weapons but not neglect a Mirage III fleet?

Just add a bigger Rolls Royce engine and you hit Mach 2.

The RN looked into the 2 seat, Spey powered Crusader in competition with the Phantom and chose the Phantom because of its much larger radar, larger weapons fit, longer endurance and 2 engine safety.
 
And according to Diefenbaker, everything was going to be done by BOMARC missiles.

The solution is to have a versatile, cheap jet that can do everything but the kitchen sink. The Mirage III continuously evolved from 1955 to 1983, long after the Mirage F1 entered service, it took the Mirage 2000 to finally kill the Mirage III !
By 1979 Dassault was proposing the Mirage 50.
By 1982 a Mirage III with FBW was flying, not as a demonstrator to the Mirage 2000, but as yet another upgrade of the Mirage III !
What's more, RAAF Mirage IIIs are still flying, with Pakistan.
And Israel still has Kfir C7 for export.
That makes me wonder how the Fairey Delta could have been developed.

Had the RAF bought 160 Fairey Delta 2 powered by Avon engines instead of 160 Hunter FGA Mk 9/FR 10s could we have had a Spey powered Fairey Delta 3 in the second half of the 1960s, possibly built for the RAF instead of the Harrier and Jaguar? Could that have been followed by the Fairey Delta 4 with FBW and an RB.199 engine?
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
Why would the RAF neglect to develop its Lightning fleet with better avionics and weapons but not neglect a Mirage III fleet?

Because the Ministry of Supply/Ministry of Defence are incompetent cheapskates? No procurement decision is going to change that. The Lightning was still in service in 1973, up to 1988.

Licence-built Avon Mirage might compete better on export markets, however. How much were Kuwait and Saudi bribed to buy the Lightning....?
 
Not helped by the fact only one of the two crew can eject. British class system at work! :closedtongue:

French F-8s were in service for thirty-five years. The Sea Vixen was in service for twelve years
I think that's an unfair comparison.

The Sea Vixen may only have lasted twelve years but that was due to a combination of being replaced by the Spey-Phantom and phasing out the strike carriers.

Whereas the French F-8s had to last 35 years because the French couldn't afford to put the Mirage G into production.
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
51 dead Sea Vixen aircrew in 12 years - works out as four a year.

Added to hellish attrition rate of the Supermarine Scimitar, 51% - it's a wonder the Fleet Air Arm had any pilots left to fly the Phantom
 
Licence-built Avon Mirage might compete better on export markets

Leaving aside that the Avon Mirage was developed to pre-production but not sold in quantity how would Britain benefit from exports of the Avon Mirage? The benefits would go to France apart from the engines, which were exported in good numbers in Lightings and Hunter FGA9s.
 
Leaving aside that the Avon Mirage was developed to pre-production but not sold in quantity how would Britain benefit from exports of the Avon Mirage? The benefits would go to France apart from the engines, which were exported in good numbers in Lightings and Hunter FGA9s.
The licencing agreement might give the British export rights in certain territories. IIRC the licencing agreement that Westland had with Sikorsky allowed it to sell licence built Sikorsky helicopters in Europe (less Italy) and the Commonwealth (less Canada). AFAIK that's why Australia bought Sea Kings built by Westland instead of Sikorsky.
 
, every godawful Sea Vixen & Scimitar for a licence-built Etendard IV

You's swap a radar equipped fighter for a radarless attack aircraft?

Not helped by the fact only one of the two crew can eject. British class system at work! :closedtongue:

Not so, both crew had ejection seats on the sea vixen.

145 built, 37.93% lost (in peacetime!) and fifty-one Fleet Air Arm aircrew killed.

Simply quoting the loss rate is meaningless without context and comparison to it's contemporaries, and doesn't necessarily mean the jet was inherently bad. Other factors come in to play, like role and operating environment or procedures. Many Sea Vixens were lost conducting night attacks under flares for example, which is hazardous for any type.

Looks good at an airshow, though. Shame the only airworthy example has crashed. AGAIN.

I wasn't aware XP924/GCVIX had crashed previously in it's lifetime. At any rate, a controlled belly landing due to hydraulic failure (again, shit happening and not necessarily a fault of the particular jet) isn't a "crash", and the aircraft is repairable.

For such a terrible aircraft there seems to be an awful lot of affection for it among ex crew and others associated with it.
 
51 dead Sea Vixen aircrew in 12 years - works out as four a year.

Added to hellish attrition rate of the Supermarine Scimitar, 51% - it's a wonder the Fleet Air Arm had any pilots left to fly the Phantom

To be quite frank, 1950s and 60s jets crashed. It's what they did. It wasn't anything to do with Sea Vixen or Scimitar, it was virtually every fast jet produced in that era. Trying to land them on the small RN carriers just gave the pilots a more entertaining way to crash than a bog standard airfield.

Four a year isn't so bad, we had times when we were losing four Meteor (and often their pilots) a day.
 
Top