AHC: TSR2/F111 class replacement.

With a PoD of 1964 have a 1000mn+ unrefueled combat radius strike aircraft replace the F111 and possibly TSR2 in service by 2000.
 
With a PoD of 1964 have a 1000mn+ unrefueled combat radius strike aircraft replace the F111 and possibly TSR2 in service by 2000.
No end of Cold war make it relatively easy at least for a US aircraft B1-B2-B21(but ITTL B3?) or even a larger A12/FB22/FB23?
 
The B1B was out of production from 1988 and the B2A cost about $600 each in the mid 90s, and in any case with only 100 and 21 built they aren't replacements for some 6-800 F111/TSR2. The closest I can think of would be the F15E, but even that falls short on range with only about 1300km combat radius.

I'm thinking that a joint project with the USAF, RAF, RAAF could fill the niche between a big tactical fighter and the strategic bomber.
 
How is this AH? Hang enough drop tanks on a Buccaneer or Mirage IV and you're there already. Reasonably sure the B58 Hustler already has that, too. The Thunderchief is close enough at 778m that a more efficient engine or conformal tanks could have achieved it. And if you were mad enough to want one, the Tu-22 Blinder was good for it from the second production run onwards. This is not a hard ask.

Stock an extra zero on it, or look for a supersonic strike radius of 1000 miles or better, then we're talking AH.
 
One interesting implication is that the TSR enters service in the first place. That or Britain takes on the F 111
 
I think a stretched version of the FB-111 was offered as a lower cost alternative to the B-1. That probably fits the fill.
 
Hellyer-map-500km.jpgHellyer-map-1000km.jpgHellyer-pt-1500km Darwin.jpg

Just to show my interest here are 3 maps showing 500 and 1000km combat radius from the bases in Australia's north and 1500km from Darwin. The RAAF had 4 probe-drogue tankers from the late 80s and now has 7 KC30 Boom and P-D tankers, so these circles represent unrefulled and refuelled CAP radius and a refueled strike from Darwin for Classic & Super Hornet and F35s..

The F111 could comfortably do 2000km from Darwin without a tanker, however these days it would be nice to be able to strike into the South China Sea while not having to have relays of tankers operating so far from home and possibly in threatened airspace. Ideally an F111 class aircraft could tank from the CAP station tanker near to Australia and get enough range to throw missiles around in the South China Sea.
 
Ok, so since you're looking for something for Australia, and something that would have been in production, that's really going to limit your options. I'm thinking maybe instead of the OTL's Hornets and Super Hornets, have Australia be willing to pay for some of the development of the F-22 Raptor and get them to operate Raptors and the proposed FB-22. The F-22As can replace their existing fighter squadrons, while the FB-22s can replace the F-111s in the strike role. This could work even better if you get the UK to actually accept the F-111K into service or continue the development and eventual acquisition of the TSR2. That gives the FB-22 a much larger proposed user base.
 
Ok, so since you're looking for something for Australia, and something that would have been in production, that's really going to limit your options. I'm thinking maybe instead of the OTL's Hornets and Super Hornets, have Australia be willing to pay for some of the development of the F-22 Raptor and get them to operate Raptors and the proposed FB-22. The F-22As can replace their existing fighter squadrons, while the FB-22s can replace the F-111s in the strike role. This could work even better if you get the UK to actually accept the F-111K into service or continue the development and eventual acquisition of the TSR2. That gives the FB-22 a much larger proposed user base.
Maybe would be different for FVEY countries but the US was pretty persnickety about foreign involvement in the Raptor. I think the Japanese were interested and that idea did not get very far.
 
@SsgtC it's not just Australia, the US is facing similar problems in the Pacific now that China had based S300-400 SAMs on islands within range of the tanker orbits needed by short range strike aircraft.

The reason I said a PoD of 1964 is because France had the Mirage IV which alongside the TSR2 and F111 was a competitor for the RAAF Canberra replacement and had a 945 NM combat radius. So France might get in on the action, perhaps an Anglo-French aircraft to replace the TSR2 and Mirage IV could be the ticket.
 
have Australia be willing to pay for some of the development of the F-22 Raptor and get them to operate Raptors and the proposed FB-22.
Have RAF buy F111 then pull out of Eurofighter (due to French gaining control/smaller aircraft) and get them to join US F22 and then have AUS buy in?
 
Last edited:
Have the AFVG (Anglo French Variable Geometry) program and also for the MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) program in the late 60s continue resulting in a larger Tonka

The AFVG intended for a 4000 KM range Variable geometry wing nuclear bomber capable of mach 2.5 dash speeds

Have the French not bail out of the project in 67 and for it to survive to completion

So the Tonka eventually arrives as an Anglo/French 4000+ KM Fighter - bomber entering service in the 80s with a Long Range interceptor version built for the RAF to patrol the North sea and G-I-UK gap

AFVG.jpg
 
Top