WI: Avro 730 built in 1958

[bedibled]

In OTL, the Mach-3 proposed bomber Avro 730 was cancelled in 1957 (probably due to the creation of anti-aircraft targeting systems)

In an alternate timeline where the Defense White Paper never exists, and the 730 is constructed (and for our purposes enters production), what are the consequences for Britain and the World? Does having a supersonic nuclear deterrent before Russia or America encourage further British military development, or encourage less?

Also, how does having a bomber that doubles as a surveillance aircraft work out for the British? Would it lead to further straining tensions with the Soviets, who might mistake it for a bomber during surveillance?

I'm interested in your thoughts.

 

[Michel Van]

I have my issues with Avro 730
it got allot technical and design features that were dubious

Like retractable Periscope for pilots view
also that Pilot next flying that thing, had also keep eye on the aircraft's engineering functions also.

the design of Hull and it heat protections at mach 3 the aircraft Skin would at +300°C
Kerosin for engine would serve as "Heat sink" to keep the skin cool

also the engine configuration of 2 nacelles with each 4 engines is problematic in case engine failure.
special if the jet engine disintegrate and it shrapnel take out the three other engines
the aircraft is lost if that happen at Mach 3

Also was that a high altitude aircraft at mach 3
during 1960s the doctrin change radical to low-altitude flight toward target
and reconnaissance was made more and more by Satellites
making the Avro 730 obsolete

 

[Thoresby]

In OTL, the Mach-3 proposed bomber Avro 730 was cancelled in 1957 (probably due to the creation of anti-aircraft targeting systems)

In an alternate timeline where the Defense White Paper never exists, and the 730 is constructed (and for our purposes enters production), what are the consequences for Britain and the World? Does having a supersonic nuclear deterrent before Russia or America encourage further British military development, or encourage less?

Also, how does having a bomber that doubles as a surveillance aircraft work out for the British? Would it lead to further straining tensions with the Soviets, who might mistake it for a bomber during surveillance?

I'm interested in your thoughts.

It almost certainly goes the way of the B-58 Hustler, i.e. it serves for a relatively brief period before being retired without replacement as attrition from accidents and the sheer expense of operating such a bleeding edge aircraft means it can no longer be sustained. Meanwhile the Vulcan and Victor, like the B-52 keep soldiering on.

 

[DougM]

In order to make that thing viable you need to make sweeping changes in Air Defence systems and a few other things, if that somehow happened then the B-58 probably last longer or is at least better remembered and the B-70 probably goes into production. As much of what limited the B-58 and doomed the B-70 also would have/did effect the Avro

 

[CV12Hornet]

And what gets cut elsewhere to pay for something as eye-wateringly expensive as this?

 

[The Wooksta!]

I’ve been wanting a kit of this in 1/72 for a long time. Would look good next to the 72nd Swallow (aka Vickers Vanquish SR.2) I did a few years back.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

And what gets cut elsewhere to pay for something as eye-wateringly expensive as this?

The B.A.O.R? The nuclear submarine program? The carrier force? Raising the school leaving age to 16 and increasing the number of higher education facilities? All of them?

 

[Catsmate]

In OTL, the Mach-3 proposed bomber Avro 730 was cancelled in 1957 (probably due to the creation of anti-aircraft targeting systems)

In an alternate timeline where the Defense White Paper never exists, and the 730 is constructed (and for our purposes enters production), what are the consequences for Britain and the World? Does having a supersonic nuclear deterrent before Russia or America encourage further British military development, or encourage less?

Also, how does having a bomber that doubles as a surveillance aircraft work out for the British? Would it lead to further straining tensions with the Soviets, who might mistake it for a bomber during surveillance?

I'm interested in your thoughts.

Britain wastes vast amounts of scarce resources on a useless white elephant.

The plane is conceptually obsolete before it enters service being utterly vulnerable to Soviet air defenses, a big, RADAR reflective target flying far above ground clutter and emitting sufficient heat for thermographic detection and being unable to maneuver to evade interception.

As a bomber it would probably, due to design complexity, be slower to get airborne than the V force bombers. and hence even more vulnerable to Soviet IRBM strikes on its bases. And its intended payload, a single stand-off missile, would be preety pointless.
As a photo-recon/ELINT platform it would be just as vulnerable and pretty much useless.

It lacks capacity for heavy tactical weapons loads, so that niche won't exist either.

 

[bedibled]

Aw.

I guess there won't be a britwank nuclear supersonic bomber/recon force exemplifying British aerial superiority in Russian Airspace then.

 

[GuildedAgeNostalgia]

Did most early SAMs go faster then Mach 3?

 

[Paul_Sussex]

I’ve been wanting a kit of this in 1/72 for a long time. Would look good next to the 72nd Swallow (aka Vickers Vanquish SR.2) I did a few years back.

 

[The Wooksta!]

It’s not a good kit, their FDM plastic 3d printing is horrible to work with - a friend gave me some of his early efforts in the same medium and it was a huge amount of effort just to get a smooth surface. He also has the STL files for that kit and says there’s something off about it.

Photo shows my build of the same friend’s kit of the Swallow. That’s 3d printed resin and is BIG. He said it was at the limit of what his printers could do.

 

[I lurk therefore I am]

The Avro 730 was intended as a high speed reconnaissance aircraft fitted with a sideways looking radar to act as a pathfinder to find targets for the V bombers.

Part way through the design process, the designers realised that the radar and antenna would be far smaller than expected, so there would be room for a bomb bay for opportunistic attacks.

Main problem was, the development of the SA-2 kind of killed the whole idea, as it made high altitude attacks too dangerous. And you would worry if the V bombers couldn't find Moscow.

The only real way to keep it would be still as a pure recon aircraft with powerful cameras in the spare space, to go with the radar.

The engine arrangement was a bit of a bonkers idea, but I can see the slightly bonkers 8 engines in two quad nacelles idea (which would be fun for maintaining) replaced by two paired afterburning Olympus engines as they were above 20,000 lb thrust wet by that time, and the 300 series engines intended for the TSR2 (20K dry thrust, 30+K wet) were on the way.

With those Olympus engines, you would probably have left with a sort of SR-71/MIG-25R cross. It would have likely supercruised at Mach 2+ high up (The Lightning could supercruise, the TSR 2 showed it as well, and nothing short of a Blackbird can supercruise as fast as Concorde did with Olympus).

I doubt any fighter of the era could catch it though.

Now, could the UK afford the luxury of a blindingly fast recon aircraft, is the question. While many may cry "satellites", we couldn't really afford them either.