Alternative single fighter for UK in 1960s

And it would have been the best thing Canada could have done as well.
But that's water under the bridge at this point LOL...
 
Hitting Sidney Camm with club until he understands that swept wings are future would be good start.
To be fair to Sydney Camm I think you have to look at his first designs like the Cygnet and the Tomtit, and then consider just how much of the future he had already navigated his way through by the time he was working in the jet age.
 
In 1930 open cockpit biplane Fury going 200mph was state of the art, in 1951 the Hunter was transonic. Camm did well enough with the information he had.
 

MatthewB

Banned
Something that might be noteworthy, and mentioned somewhere a while back. From 1963 to 1973 the RAAF had 4 Mirage squadrons, and had a two flying programmes: 2 sqns would do a ground attack programme and the other 2 an air to air programme. While the Mirage III is ostensibly a multi-role fighter the RAAF thought it necessary to train pilots specifically in one of the roles. I imagine this is true of single seat fighters in the 60s, although possibly less true in the case of a two seater.

Given the multiple (and quite disparate) requirements of the RAF and RN, the difficulty in conducting several of these roles with a single seater and the need for multi-role single seaters to have pilots specialise in a single role I'd suggest the British single fighter would have to be a big 2 seater along the lines of the Phantom.
Mirage 4000 would have been ideal for Canada’s NORAD role, plus RAF and RAAF distant patrol and intercept.
 
Mirage 4000 would have been ideal for Canada’s NORAD role, plus RAF and RAAF distant patrol and intercept.

The Mirage 4000 was an 80s fighter, but its biggest problem was that it wasn't adopted by the manufacturer's national airforce.

Designing an aircraft and flying at prototype is easy, the difficulty is ensuring political commitment to amortise the development costs and provide a broad enough base to make sustainment costs reasonable is the hard part. If Britain, Canada and Australia had pooled their fighter requirements for the 80s it would create a market for 375 aircraft, which probably makes it worthwhile to develop a ACUK fighter. The difference between the ACUK and the M4000 is that it will be designed specifically for what ACUK industry can do rather than the M4000 which was designed around what Dassault can do.
 

Khanzeer

Banned
Since we are already off topic may I ask

How does the early model mirage 2000 [ let's say of 1984] compare with mig25PD as an interceptor?

The PD has some lockdown capability and I've read its radar is powerful and fairly resistant to jamming

Obviously in WVR role 2000 is far superior
 
How can it be made so that instead of the Hunter replacement being lumped with the Sea Vixen the Lightning is instead?
 
If the RAF had funded the Scimitar as it's heavy day fighter instead of the Swift.

Can you play this out? IIUC the Swift and Scimitar came from different development streams at different time in an era where the service life of a fighter was less than 10 years.

It was only in the very late 50s and early 60s that fighters were developed that could last 15+ years in service, and governments and airforces didn't know this until the mid to late 60s.
 
How can it be made so that instead of the Hunter replacement being lumped with the Sea Vixen the Lightning is instead?

If the RAF had funded the Scimitar as it's heavy day fighter instead of the Swift.

Can you play this out? IIUC the Swift and Scimitar came from different development streams at different time in an era where the service life of a fighter was less than 10 years.

It was only in the very late 50s and early 60s that fighters were developed that could last 15+ years in service, and governments and airforces didn't know this until the mid to late 60s.
This doesn't really answer the question, but its what I'm thinking of.

What became the Scimitar was begun at about the same time as the Hunter, Javelin and DH.110. At that time what became the Scimitar was intended to enter service in 1954.

If the RN said that it wanted a twin-Avon fighter with swept-wings and a conventional undercarriage in the first place, it might be selected by the RAF as the backup aircraft to F.4/48 instead of the Gloster G.A.5 which became the Javelin.

Four additional Supermarine N.9/47 prototypes are ordered for the RAF instead of the 4 G.A.5 prototypes originally ordered, but in common with OTL it's cut back to 2. However, another 6 prototypes would be ordered for the RAF after the Korean War breaks out. That is 4 in place of the 4 extra Javelin prototypes and 2 in place of the 2 pre-production Swifts.

Supermarine doesn't have the design capacity to develop the Scimitar night fighter for the RAF and turn the Supermarine Type 510 into the Swift. Therefore, more Hunters are ordered from the Hawker Siddeley Group (i.e. Armstrong-Whitworth and Gloster) instead of the Swift and Supermarine is ordered to concentrate on the two-seat Scimitar. Production contracts for the Scimitar night fighter are placed in 1952, but it doesn't enter service with the RAF until 1956.

Meanwhile all 3 N.9/47 prototypes ordered for the RN were built to Type 525 standard. IOTL the RN ordered 3 pre-production Type 544 and 100 Scimitar F Mk 1 aircraft to Naval Staff Requirement NRA.17 and Specifications N.113D and P in December 1952. ITTL they ordered 103 two-seat Sea Scimitar FAW Mk 20s equipped with AI radar. These were navalised versions of the RAF Scimitar FAW Mk 1 developed to Spec. F.4/48 instead of the Javelin. This would enter service in 1958 in place of the OTL Scimitar F Mk 1.

The next step would be the Sea Scimitar FAW Mk 21 armed with Firestreak missiles. The first 78 would be ordered in 1955 in place of the OTL order for the first 78 Sea Vixens to Specification N.139 and the first squadron would commission in 1959. The 1952 contract for 100 Mk 20 aircraft would be amended so that as many as possible could be completed to Mk 21 standard. All other things being equal 248 Sea Scimitars would be built (not including prototypes) in place of the 76 Scimitars and 148 Sea Vixens that were built IOTL.

There's no Supermarine Type 545 ITTL because there's no Swift. Therefore, the Hawker P.1083 probably survives until at least March 1956, which is when the Type 545 was cancelled IOTL.

As there's no Javelin ITTL the RAF orders a thin-wing Scimitar in place of the thing-wing Javelin to Specification F.153. Instead of the OTL single prototype and 18 pre-production thin-wing Javelins there are 2 prototypes and 18 pre-production thing-wing Scimitars. The second prototype takes the place of XH451 the two-seat Scimitar with AI radar of OTL, which was cancelled when the RN decided to turn the DH.110 into the Sea Vixen. However, the thin-wing Scimitar would be cancelled ITTL when the thin-wing Javelin was IOTL.
 
Last edited:
How can it be made so that instead of the Hunter replacement being lumped with the Sea Vixen the Lightning is instead?

I think you mean, "How can the Lighting replacement be lumped together with the Sea Vixen replacement, instead of the Hunter replacement being lumped together with the Sea Vixen replacement?"

I see two possibilities.
  1. Develop the Fairey Delta 2 into a single seat FGA/FR aircraft instead of the OTL conversions of Hunter F6 to FGA9/FR10 standard. ITTL the part of Fairey that built the FD2 becomes part of Hawker Siddeley and an improved FD2, possibly with Spey engines is built in place of the P.1154 and Harrier.
  2. Make the RAF buy Harrier to begin with instead of the P.1154 RAF.
In either situation the RN is free to buy the Spey-Phantom in 1962 or a British analogue, which should be called the Spectre.

I have seen RAF documents written before the P.1154RN was abandoned, which say that the Lightning would eventually be replaced by the P.1154RN. Therefore, ITTL the long term plan would be the Lightning would be replaced by the Spey-Phantom or the British Phantom analogue.
 
This is Wood's Scenario 1945 from Project Cancelled
Scenario 1945

Let us turn the clock back to 1945, and see what might have been done. Instead of the Ministry of Supply, a small compact ministry is set up to deal purely with aviation: it has strong and clearly defined ties with the operational requirements and planning branches of the Services and good links with the airlines. The fiat goes out that teams must be strengthened and the number of companies reduced – otherwise no contracts. Hawker Siddeley, in particular is told to stop internal competition among its teams and present one joint design to any particular specification. Firms are urged to specialise and stop trying their hands at everything from bombers to light aircraft. The Services are informed that they must consider the civil market and exports in any transport specification they issue.

Britain is far behind in high speed aerodynamics and there is a complete lack of understanding of what is transonic and what is supersonic. Pocketing its pride, the Government, calls for the assembly of one key high speed research/design team from Germany. It is brought to Britain with its facilities and put to work alongside a group of British companies and the Royal Aircraft Establishment with the intention of producing a transonic Derwent-powered prototype of a swept-wing aircraft on which to base future military types. The Miles M.52 straight wing Mach 1.5 research aircraft is well down the road and must be continued to the flight test stage. It is therefore, decreed that the programme be accelerated and the technical back-up reinforced. Arrangements are made for Miles to amalgamate its M.52 team with one of the larger companies, one condition being that it retains its identity as a division within that firm. M.52 contracts are guaranteed and the 5,000lb (2,268gk) thrust Rolls Royce Nene engine is specified.

Numerous technical problems are encountered and the first prototype is written-off in a heavy landing. All lessons learned are incorporated into the second M.52 which flies with a Nene incorporating aft-fan and burners in the exhaust duct. In the early summer of 1947, this aircraft successfully flies "through the barrier" in level flight, months ahead of the USA's rocket-powered Bell X-1. As a result of the German team's work at RAE, three test-bed prototypes of a transonic aircraft are built to give vital aerodynamic knowledge. This is applied to a new generation of swept-wing fighters and bombers. The team is ultimately absorbed into one of the new unified industry groups.
The new generation of swept-wing fighters and bombers IOTL were the projects begun around 1948. That is:
  • The Hunter and Swift single-engine day fighters,
  • The DH.110 and Javelin twin-engine night-fighters
  • The Scimitar twin-engine naval day fighter
  • The Sperrin, Valiant, Victor and Vulcan four-engine medium bombers.
These aircraft were intended to be the most advanced types that could be put into service by 1957 - The Year of Maximum Danger.

If the second and third paragraphs of Wood's Scenario 1945 been carried out, would these aircraft have had fewer development problems and been in service sooner?
 

Zen9

Banned
If we have the Thin Wing Scimitar move ahead and both fully blown wing, tail and full area ruling.....
Then this is the natural option for the RN.
It also sustains the Red Dean and Red Hebe efforts.
It furthermore drives a continuation of the RB.106 Thames as the Avon successor.
And drives the earlier improvement of AI.18.
Thus by '63 there is no urgency on face of the Soviet threat and the answer is further upgrade to look-down shoot-down radar missile system. AI.18 can deliver this while work on the new FMICW set continues.
However the desire for more endurance might switch efforts to the scaled Medway a.k.a as the Spey.
 

Zen9

Banned
This is Wood's Scenario 1945 from Project CancelledThe new generation of swept-wing fighters and bombers IOTL were the projects begun around 1948. That is:
  • The Hunter and Swift single-engine day fighters,
  • The DH.110 and Javelin twin-engine night-fighters
  • The Scimitar twin-engine naval day fighter
  • The Sperrin, Valiant, Victor and Vulcan four-engine medium bombers.
These aircraft were intended to be the most advanced types that could be put into service by 1957 - The Year of Maximum Danger.

If the second and third paragraphs of Wood's Scenario 1945 been carried out, would these aircraft have had fewer development problems and been in service sooner?
But in light of the flow of more information from research. Would these designs come about?
 
But in light of the flow of more information from research. Would these designs come about?
There would be an aircraft called the Hunter to F.3/48. There would be aircraft called the DH.110 and Javelin to F.4/48. There would be an aircraft called the Scimitar to N.9/47. There would be aircraft called the Sperrin to B.14/46, Valiant to B.9/48 and Victor & Vulcan built to B.35/46.

Whether the prototypes and early production aircraft would have been more refined versions of the OTL designs or that the specifications would be more demanding ITTL leading to completely different aircraft with the same names being designed and built is a different matter.
 
I think you mean, "How can the Lighting replacement be lumped together with the Sea Vixen replacement, instead of the Hunter replacement being lumped together with the Sea Vixen replacement?"

Yes, because this.....

I have seen RAF documents written before the P.1154RN was abandoned, which say that the Lightning would eventually be replaced by the P.1154RN.

They're both radar-equipped, missile-carrying, all-weather interceptors so it makes sense that their replacement can be a common type, the gap between the LOTs being the main issue I imagine.

I see two possibilities.
  1. Develop the Fairey Delta 2 into a single seat FGA/FR aircraft instead of the OTL conversions of Hunter F6 to FGA9/FR10 standard. ITTL the part of Fairey that built the FD2 becomes part of Hawker Siddeley and an improved FD2, possibly with Spey engines is built in place of the P.1154 and Harrier.
  2. Make the RAF buy Harrier to begin with instead of the P.1154 RAF.
In either situation the RN is free to buy the Spey-Phantom in 1962 or a British analogue, which should be called the Spectre.

.............................. Therefore, ITTL the long term plan would be the Lightning would be replaced by the Spey-Phantom or the British Phantom analogue.

For mine I'd have HS avoid NBMR3a and only offer the P1127 for NBMR3b, and then have the government avoid going balls-deep with the NBMR3a P1154 and its supporting NBMR4 because there is no British offering. As much as I don't like the Labour government 1965-66 cancel-fest they were right that Britain couldn't afford to develop 3 cutting edge aircraft types

The RAF was directed to buy the Spey Phantom in order to make the unit cost of the RN version more acceptable overall, so the same rationale could apply for the SV-Lightning replacement. As much as it cost to Anglicise the Phantom it would still be cheaper than developing a brand new fighter at the same time as the TSR2.
 

Zen9

Banned
A Scimitar variant can deliver the nuke at the heart of NMBR.3a to the range desired.
If STOL is needed quick acting blow or a fire hose catapult or RATOG will get it up and away in time.

If production was as NOMISYRRUC has outlined, then this is a very strong contender to solve that.

Ranging from early transonic mk1's to the RAF's FAW requirement through to the Thin Wing to F.153. Pushing back F.155 and it's inevitable cancellation. F.153 can do the job with the right AAM.
This sees Vickers Supermarine producing iterations of the Scimitar for upto 20 years. Continuous production and improvement.

By the same token the RN and RAF have no need of the likes of the P1154 if they can just order further improved marks of Scimitar.
Leaving NMBR.3b as you want.

Consequently, there is no crunch point for Labour at the start of '65 in this aspect of defence.

By the time the GOR.339 winner is entering service, there is spare capacity (Air Vote) and cash for the next project. A successor to the various marks of Scimitar FAW/FGR. Likely a lot like OR.346 this is where the US TFX and F111 might surface in their thinking.

As a knock on effect the continuous development of hot section reheat for the Scimitar alleviates the burden from GOR.339 and increases the ability to pursue the supersonic transport effort.

Almost as a accident of this, the UK fields it's own SARH AAM, and proceeds uninterrupted on the next generation AI set.

By the same token, there is no F4K, no F4M, no being lured down the rabbit hole of AFVG, no order for F111K and no compromise for MRCA.
The only question is does the Buccaneer survive and does the RAF get some as an interm system?

By '69 there is TSR.2, Scimitar FAW, Scimitar FGR and the P1127 Harrier.
In the future is a supersonic trainer and a possibility of a unaffordable next gen fighter.
 
Last edited:
A Scimitar variant can deliver the nuke at the heart of NMBR.3a to the range desired.
If STOL is needed quick acting blow or a fire hose catapult or RATOG will get it up and away in time.

NBMR3a was for a VTOL (not STOL) Mach 2 fighter with a fairly advanced avionics fitout. Apart from the P1154 Dassault offereda Mirage with 8 lift jets, no version of the Scimitar could do this.

I am dubious that the Scimitar could do the things you propose. It was a fairly conventional mid 50s fighter and lacked the basic design features of even a Lightning let a alone a Phantom. You know how difficult it was to squeeze Speys into the Phantom, developing a 50s subsonic, day-fighter into a late 60s supersonic, all-weather interceptor would be ASB I'd think.
 

Zen9

Banned
NBMR3a was for a VTOL (not STOL) Mach 2 fighter with a fairly advanced avionics fitout. Apart from the P1154 Dassault offereda Mirage with 8 lift jets, no version of the Scimitar could do this.

You abandon the VTOL of course. Surely that is obvious?
And abandon it they did. Because the MRI role was handed first to the F4 and then then Jaguar.
The VTOL became V/STOL and ultimately Harriers rarely used V-anything but operated in various STOL and CTOL (conventional not catapult) modes from conventional airfields.

Because lets be clear, in the end France, the UK and the US AND the USSR worked on the supersonic Fighter and Attack types and abandoned them as too costly and complex and limited.
Everyone made do with more conventional solutions.

I am dubious that the Scimitar could do the things you propose. It was a fairly conventional mid 50s fighter and lacked the basic design features of even a Lightning let a alone a Phantom. You know how difficult it was to squeeze Speys into the Phantom, developing a 50s subsonic, day-fighter into a late 60s supersonic, all-weather interceptor would be ASB I'd think.

It's a strong structure and can be made stronger.
We are not talking about the Scimitar F mk1 of OTL.
We're talking of some variant with reheat and a radar and the avionics that were developed OTL. Implimented on Jaguar and Harrier and F4K/M
Yes it won't do Mach 2, but it can do above 1.6. Good enough.

A swap from Avon to Spey was proposed for the even more troublesome structure of the Sea Vixen.
Not that it (some version of the Scimitar) would need Spey's for that sort of range. 200-300nm ROA on Avons or RB.106 and a drop tank to balance out the store.

As is variants of the Scimitar were proposed to the RAF, and a trial showed it able to carry some 10,000lb of stores when operating from a airfield.
That it lost out to NMBR.3 is a product of the desire for supersonic VTOL, a desire unfulfilled until now with the F35-B.
 
You abandon the VTOL of course. Surely that is obvious?
And abandon it they did.

Define who? NBMR3 was a whole of NATO requirement that Britain wholeheartedly embraced but other countries also had major stakes in the proposals, which is the main reason why the Mirage IIIV was named dual winner.

Because the MRI role was handed first to the F4 and then then Jaguar.

The Phantom and Harrier were the Hunter replacements, but the Phantom was as much a Canberra replacement as it was a Hunter replacement. The Hunter was well and truly gone and the requirements for the RAF changed by the time it was decided to replace the Phantom with the Jaguar in the attack role.

The VTOL became V/STOL and ultimately Harriers rarely used V-anything but operated in various STOL and CTOL (conventional not catapult) modes from conventional airfields.

The main mode of Harrier operation wasn't V/STOL, it was STOVL; Short Take Off (nozzles at 45 degree angle, airborne at 60kts in less than 400') and Vertical Landing. This gives a full gamut of payload range with a massive range of basing options. I'm a big fan of the RAF buying the 164 P1127s instead of the P1154s as planned.

It's a strong structure and can be made stronger.
We are not talking about the Scimitar F mk1 of OTL.
We're talking of some variant with reheat and a radar and the avionics that were developed OTL. Implimented on Jaguar and Harrier and F4K/M
Yes it won't do Mach 2, but it can do above 1.6. Good enough.

A swap from Avon to Spey was proposed for the even more troublesome structure of the Sea Vixen.
Not that it (some version of the Scimitar) would need Spey's for that sort of range. 200-300nm ROA on Avons or RB.106 and a drop tank to balance out the store.

As is variants of the Scimitar were proposed to the RAF, and a trial showed it able to carry some 10,000lb of stores when operating from a airfield.
That it lost out to NMBR.3 is a product of the desire for supersonic VTOL, a desire unfulfilled until now with the F35-B.

The amount of development work required to turn a Scimitar into a P1121/Phantom/F105-106 means it would be easier and cheaper to develop/buy these types and avoid working around the limitations of the mid 50s design.
 
Top