Alternative single fighter for UK in 1960s

The Phantoms were bought because they were ‘cheap’ and the carriers were supposed to be gone within 10 years.
The decision to buy the Spey-Phantom for the FAA was made in 1964.

The decision to cancel CVA.01 and to withdraw the existing strike carriers wasn't made until 1966.
 
True but they did try to go smaller with Taildog and SRAAM.
But considering the potentially greater range they could squeeze out of something the size of Red Top and the fire-and-forget capability it offered. It does seem like a waste not to take this further.

I wonder how much of this was to do with the decision to buy the AIM9 with the Phantom, which was set up for small AAMs? IIUC taildog was a self defence AAM, rather than what could be considered an 'offensive' AAM like the Red Top, R530 and Sparrow.

AFAIK the squadrons on Ark Royal, Centaur and Victorious had 12 aircraft each, but the squadrons on Hermes had 8 aircraft each. Therefore, Centaur was operating 12 fighters in one squadron while Hermes was operating 16 aircraft in two squadrons and the other two ships were operating 24 fighters in 2 squadrons.

No. 805 Squadron in the RAN was still operating Sea Venoms, but would disband at the end of June 1963.

IIUC the Hermes had a 12 Sea Vixens and 7 or 8 Buccaneer/Scimitar and the Centaur had 16 Sea Vixens in its sqn.

The RAN replaced the Sea Venom with A4 Skyhawks in 1967, the Sea Venoms were still flying until then.
 

Zen9

Banned
I wonder how much of this was to do with the decision to buy the AIM9 with the Phantom, which was set up for small AAMs? IIUC taildog was a self defence AAM, rather than what could be considered an 'offensive' AAM like the Red Top, R530 and Sparrow.
Very possibly so.
Certainly Taildog was aiming for a very compact low drag system able to be carried in multiples and treated as almost a replacement for the gun.

It would have made a reasonable PDM for vessels and vehicles.

I forget how great the ranges of 70's generation IR sensors were. But I dimly recall something over 50km under the right conditions.?
 
The RAN replaced the Sea Venom with A4 Skyhawks in 1967, the Sea Venoms were still flying until then.
Not by 805 Squadron. It disbanded on 30th June 1963 and it didn't reform on Skyhawks until 10th January 1968.

However, 816 Squadron which had been operating Gannets since August 1955 added a flight of Sea Venoms in July 1964. It disbanded on 25th August 1967. It was reformed on Trackers on 10th January 1968.
 
IIUC the Hermes had a 12 Sea Vixens and 7 or 8 Buccaneer/Scimitar and the Centaur had 16 Sea Vixens in its sqn.
Those might have been the aircraft in the squadrons, but there were never that many embarked aboard the ships.

This is the projected air group for Centaur in the early 1960s as projected in 1956
12 Sea Vixen
8 Gannet ASW
4 Skyraider AEW
2 SAR helicopters

26 total

This is the projected air group for Hermes as projected in 1956
8 Scimitar
9 Sea Vixen
8 ASW helicopters
4 AEW Gannets
2 SAR helicopters

31 total

I have some more notes, but I'll have to do some real life first.
 
Leo Marott in RN Aircraft Carriers 1945-1990 wrote that in May 1962 Centaur's air group was 893 Scimitars, 807 Scimitars, 849A Gannets and 824 Whirlwinds.
With the introduction of larger front-line aircraft the light fleet carriers were too small to carry a worthwhile air group. By the time a standard detachment of anti-submarine helicopters and AEW aircraft was embarked, together with a squadron of air defence fighters, there was hardy enough room to accommodate a reasonable number of strike aircraft such as Scimitars (and certainly not the Buccaneer, which was too heavy). Normal fixed wing complement, by 1962, had fallen to 20 aircraft plus the helicopters.
Then in the next paragraph
The ship re-commissioned in November, 1963, but the introduction of the larger Wessex helicopter for ASW duties made even greater demands on hangar and flight deck space so the Scimitars were dispensed with and the air group now consisted of the Wessex ASW helicopters of 815 Squadron, the usual flight of Gannets from 849 Squadron, and an enlarged 892 Squadron equipped with 12 Sea Vixens.
Enclyclopaedia of the FAA by Paul Beaver gives the compliment of Hermes as:
6 Scimitars (804 Squadron)
10 Sea Vixen FAW 1 (890 Squadron)
3 Gannet AEW 3 (C Flight 849 Squadron)
8 Whirlwind HAS 7, later 8 Wessex HAS 1 (both 814 Squadron)​

Leo Mariott in RN Aircraft Carriers 1945-1990 wrote that Hermes carried only 21 fixed wing aircraft (Sea Vixens, Scimitars and Gannets) plus helicopters when she was completed. He didn't give the number of aircraft per squadron, but the squadrons were Nos. 804 Scimitars, 849C Gannets and 890 Sea Vixens. He didn't give the number of the helicopter squadron.

Hermes continued to operate an air group of Sea Vixens, Scimitars, Gannets and ASW helicopters until she paid off for her 1964-66 refit. When she re-commissioned in September 1966 her air squadrons were, 809 Buccaneers, 826 Wessex ASW helicopters, 849B Gannets and 892 Sea Vixens.

He didn't give the number of aircraft per squadron but as the Buccaneer and Scimitar were about the same length and span when folded the total couldn't have been more than 16-17 Buccaneers and Sea Vixens.
 

Zen9

Banned
Hmmm.... if only Camm had started the P1103 earlier....

Gyron was first run in.'53.
Olympus ran in '50...

Red Dean by '51...
AI.18 ?

So it's theoretically possible to conceive of a P1103 like aircraft by say 1952. A full 2 years ahead of OTL.

F.153 was when?
 
Last edited:
Can the RAf and FAA standardize on a single multirole fighter-bomber in the early 60s ?
Rather than lightning , javelins , sea vixen, hunter, scimitar, sup swift etc
This compliments Post 300.

On 31st March 1959 the RAF had 35 fighter squadrons of all types as follows:
2 Meteor Night Fighters
2 Swift Fighter Reconnaissance
3 Venom Fighter Bombers
13 Javelin All Weather Fighter
15 Hunter Fighters

There were also 5 Bloodhound SAM squadrons​

On 31st March 1962 this had declined to 25 fighter squadrons of all types as follows
1 Venom Fighter Bomber
2 Hunter Fighter Reconnaissance
3 Hunter Fighter
3 Lightning Fighter
6 Hunter Fighter Ground Attack
10 Javelin All Weather Fighter

There were also 11 Bloodhound SAM squadrons​
 
Having thought about it, that timetable is too optimistic.

I think it would take the British aircraft industry at least 10 years to develop from the Operational Requirements Branch writing the operational requirement to the formation of the first squadron. Therefore, it is necessary to start in the early 1950s and preferably around 1950.

As an example F.23/49 for an Interceptor Fighter with Supersonic Performance to OR.268 was dated 4th April 1950 and issued to English Electric on 10th April 1950. No. 74 Squadron received its Lightning F Mk 1s on 29th June 1960.

I think a single aircraft to combine the FAW, SRDF, DF/GA and FR roles for the RAF is a non-starter.

The best that can be done for the RAF is a Mach 2 twin-engine heavy fighter for the FAW role to replace the Javelin and a Mach 2 single-engine light fighter to replace the Hunter in the DF/GA and FR roles.

We need a different Spec. F.23/49 to produce the heavy fighter.

I think we already have the basis of the Mach 2 single-engine light fighter to replace the Hunter in the Fairey Delta 2, which was built to Specification ER.103 issued on 26th September 1950.
The Mach 2 Heavy Fighter developed instead of the OTL Lightning.
  • It needs to be at least as fast as the OTL Lightning.
  • It needs to have the same range or better as the OTL Lightning.
  • It probably needs a two-man crew.
  • It needs a more powerful radar than the OTL Lightning. I don't know much about radar, but I get the impression that to be more powerful it needs a bigger dish and that would mean repositioning the air intakes at the side of the fuselage.
  • It needs to be armed with four Firestreak or Red Top missiles instead of two.
I'm guessing that it will require more powerful engines than the Avons fitted to the Lightning in OTL. Could more powerful engines be developed and put into production in time?
 

Zen9

Banned
Tough call....

Hawkers P.1051 naval medium bomber. Twin AJ.65.
Potential for a fighter all weather version.... '46

Hawkers P.1057 FAW to F.44/46 OR.227.
Viewed as the best design from a radio and radar perspective. It came down to a choice between this and DH110. DH won on turning circle/ wing loading.
Though had there been more pressing need the Hawker design was expected to complete six months earlier.
They wanted to keep both designs going with three prototypes each. Comittee cancelled Hawkers contract in '47.

June 1949 Gloster P.293 large supersonic fighter bomber.
Needed engines of 12000lb dry with reheat 50% increase. Estimated speed mach 1.2
Essentially a big Delta wing and tail with the fusilage disappearing into the wing. Much like a big and sexy version of the later Javelin.

A smaller fighter version P.291 drawn March '49 had 8 cannon 4 in each wing.
35" scanner
2,000gal
L 65ft
Spam 50ft
All-up Weight 33,000lb

Hawker P.1077 CAP fighter

AWA.165 in Nov '52. Twin Sapphire swept back wing.

EE P.10E 1954-56 ramjet wing powered shortened version of P.10.
Twin RB.123 (10,000lb dry, 16,000lb reheated) for take off and acceleration to ramjet light up speed.
With 36"scanner, and weapon bay for two 10ft long AAMs.
Mach 3 speed, ceiling well over cruising altitude of 70,000ft. Enormous capacity to sustain supersonic flight. As cruising flight used only 25%:eek:f available thrust.
P.10 was the most radical new design of the times but was of serious interest to the Ministry.and was Avro's only serious contender to OR.330 R.156T issued 23 July 1954.
 
Last edited:

Anderman

Donor
Another question is how do we get the RN and RAF to agree on common general operations requirement? I guess the RN wants something with a long range and the RAF is more interesting in the rate of climb etc.
 

Zen9

Banned
Another question is how do we get the RN and RAF to agree on common general operations requirement? I guess the RN wants something with a long range and the RAF is more interesting in the rate of climb etc.
For a while they did agree on FAW hence the plan for DH110.

Actually climb mattered to both .
CAP endurance really comes to the fore later.
 
Another question is how do we get the RN and RAF to agree on common general operations requirement? I guess the RN wants something with a long range and the RAF is more interesting in the rate of climb etc.

The change in Defence Policy in 1957 to an extent drove new requirements for the RAF. It wouldn't be difficult to come up with a specification for a fighter applicable for the 'limited wars, east of Suez' defence policy of 1957-68 that would also be useful for RAFG and Fighter Command in Europe and suitable for the RN-FAA.

The big issue is that in 1960 the Lightning is a brand-new, mach 2, all-weather, AAM-equipped fighter with significant development potential and a service life of at least a decade; the RAF doesn't need a fighter until 1970.
 

Zen9

Banned
The change in Defence Policy in 1957 to an extent drove new requirements for the RAF. It wouldn't be difficult to come up with a specification for a fighter applicable for the 'limited wars, east of Suez' defence policy of 1957-68 that would also be useful for RAFG and Fighter Command in Europe and suitable for the RN-FAA.

The big issue is that in 1960 the Lightning is a brand-new, mach 2, all-weather, AAM-equipped fighter with significant development potential and a service life of at least a decade; the RAF doesn't need a fighter until 1970.

And if they had come up with the side-by-side engine layout for a military version of the research machine, then the history of the Lightning would be much more in tune with it being the solution for the RAF.
 
Last edited:

MatthewB

Banned
Would it make more sense to develop a Carrier Fighter then remove the Carrier specific equipment for the RAF?
Outside of the Phantom and the Hornet (both later than the window of this thread) has that ever happened for another carrier fighter?
 

SsgtC

Banned
Outside of the Phantom and the Hornet (both later than the window of this thread) has that ever happened for another carrier fighter?
Wildcat, Corsair (both the F4U and A-7D), the Skyhawk, the Rafale (technically it was concurrently developed), the A-3 Skywarrior. And those are just off the top of my head
 
Top