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

I've read the spec, and opinions vary. The fact that the white paper caused cancellation of anything that could meet the spec does mean that there's nothing left but Lightning which does meet some aspects of the spec.

At least, it did not have to carry Blue Circle.

I think it would be a cost benefit thing. How much money would it cost to develop and produce another aircraft to cover the gap between what a developed lightning and the full F155 spec demanded by 1962?
 
Last edited:
Money could have also been saved by not developing a huge radar-guided missile. Limited compliance with the intent of F.155 wouldn't be met until Lightning F.3A/Red Top in 1964, followed by definitive F.6 in '65.
I think it would be a cost benefit thing. How much money would it cost to develop and produce another aircraft to cover the gap between what a developed lightning and the full F155 spec demanded by 1962?
 
Money could have also been saved by not developing a huge radar-guided missile. Limited compliance with the intent of F.155 wouldn't be met until Lightning F.3A/Red Top in 1964, followed by definitive F.6 in '65.

And by then nobody cared, the threat had changed and what was possible had as well.
 

Archibald

Banned
Ok, I'm awake now.

I was thinking of the Blue Jay-Firestreak, it weighed 300lbs, a sidewinder weighed 190lbs and an R530 420lbs.

Correct me if I'm wrong but as I understand it the FD proposals were not making the small FD2 into a combat aircraft but making a bigger aircraft more along the lines of the F106? The 103B had the same wing but a bigger fuselage and the 103C used this bigger fuselage with 50% bigger wings. Certainly the Gyron and RR 106 & 122 engines are in the class of the J75 of the F105/106. So they aren't going to be Mirage alternatives, just like the Lightning wasn't.

You are right. THAT inflation of engine and specifications and size is unwelcome because it drives the cost upward. Although the Phantom sold pretty well, the F-106 did not. Dassault and SAAB avoided that, quite simply: there was no big engine available, so the Mirage and Drakken stuck with their medium size and weight.
SNECMA worked on a "super Atar" with more thrust but it was canned by 1958. So no French F-106.
Dassault wanted a twin-jet, Rafale-sized Mirage, but the French government changed it into a bomber, the Mirage IV. So no French phantom.

ER-103 C/D is probably much less expensive than an Arrow. It all depends whether it is stuck in an interceptor role (IIIC) or if a strike variant is developped as soon as possible (IIIE, V)

Somebody must step at Fairey in 1955, and at gunpoint, tell them "stick with the Avon, proven and powerful engine"
 
It's not as if British aircraft of the 60s are not exportable.

16 Buccaneer were exported to Sth Africa, 16 more were embargoed and due to Lockheed bribery some 2 wings worth were not sold to the West German Navy.
60 Lightnings were exported to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and it was in the mix for the European fighter competition that the F104 won with bribes.
110 Harriers were exported to the US and many other countries looked at it, but not really seriously.

It isn't inconceivable that almost 100 Buccaneers could be exported and 100s more Lightnings to Europe.
 

Archibald

Banned
Only 30 odd SR71 were built and none were exported, the USAF should have bought mirages instead.

I just agree wit that statement. By the way, there was a Mirage IIIR with cameras in the nose, so stupid USAF. It would have save them a lot of money. Just paint them black. Plus the Mirage IIIR does not leak half of its fuel on the ground because of stupid titanium structure. :p

I told you the Mirage could do everything. For example, no need for Harrier. Buy Balzac V or Mirage III-V instead. 8 engines to go up, 1 engine to fly horizontally, what could possible go wrong ? And unlike the Harrier, the III-V broke Mach 2 in 1966.

1962-10-18_VIC0009-1-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
How about a fighter designed around the Bristol Olympus? Sorta early SAAB Viggen in size?
The Rolls Medway was the first engine selected by Saab to power the Viggen. It was also the wrong people's choice for TSR2. An un-built engine would normally lack a certain allure, but thinking of it as a more powerful Spey might raise an eyebrow or two.
 

Wimble Toot

Banned
It isn't inconceivable that almost 100 Buccaneers could be exported

If your own Air Force doesn't want the Buccaneer S2, and only takes ex-RN ones on sufferance, don't be surprised if every other airforce buys proven French or American (or Soviet) kit.

Compare foreign sales of the Mirage, Starfighter and Super Sabre to the Lightning.
 

WILDGEESE

Gone Fishin'
I've read the spec, and opinions vary. The fact that the white paper caused cancellation of anything that could meet the spec does mean that there's nothing left but Lightning which does meet some aspects of the spec.

At least, it did not have to carry Blue Circle.

The Tonka F-3 did, for the radar nosecone though lols
 
It's not as if British aircraft of the 60s are not exportable.

16 Buccaneer were exported to Sth Africa, 16 more were embargoed and due to Lockheed bribery some 2 wings worth were not sold to the West German Navy.
60 Lightnings were exported to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait and it was in the mix for the European fighter competition that the F104 won with bribes.
110 Harriers were exported to the US and many other countries looked at it, but not really seriously.

It isn't inconceivable that almost 100 Buccaneers could be exported and 100s more Lightnings to Europe.
There were also 283 Hunter F Mk 6 aircraft rebuilt to FGA Mk 9 and FR Mk 10 standard that were exported in the 1960s and 1970s.

The RAF also acquired 128 FGA Mk 9 and 33 FR Mk 10. IMHO this is what the single-engine Mach 2 fighter should be built instead of.
 
Top