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.Hitting Sidney Camm with club until he understands that swept wings are future would be good start.
Mirage 4000 would have been ideal for Canada’s NORAD role, plus RAF and RAAF distant patrol and intercept.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.
If the RAF had funded the Scimitar as it's heavy day fighter instead of the Swift.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.
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.
This doesn't really answer the question, but its what I'm thinking of.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?
The new generation of swept-wing fighters and bombers IOTL were the projects begun around 1948. That is: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.
But in light of the flow of more information from research. Would these designs come about?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:
These aircraft were intended to be the most advanced types that could be put into service by 1957 - The Year of Maximum Danger.
- 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.
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?
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.But in light of the flow of more information from research. Would these designs come about?
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 have seen RAF documents written before the P.1154RN was abandoned, which say that the Lightning would eventually be replaced by the P.1154RN.
I see two possibilities.
In either situation the RN is free to buy the Spey-Phantom in 1962 or a British analogue, which should be called the Spectre.
- 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.
- Make the RAF buy Harrier to begin with instead of the P.1154 RAF.
.............................. Therefore, ITTL the long term plan would be the Lightning would be replaced by the Spey-Phantom or the British Phantom analogue.
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.
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.
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.