WI: the P.1083 'supersonic Hunter' is produced

In good numbers, that is.
The P.1083 was a supersonic derivative of the Hunter family, sporting a thinner wing (7.5% max TtC ratio vs. 8.5% ), with a bit more sweep, and an afterburning Avon. What can be expected from the design? What difference can it make for the RAF, British aircraft industry, future projects etc. if it lives up to the expectations? Future versions; the Avon peaked at almost 80 kN (with afterburner) eventually. Export success, most likely costumers? Navalization (ducks for cover)?
 
In good numbers, that is.
The P.1083 was a supersonic derivative of the Hunter family, sporting a thinner wing (7.5% max TtC ratio vs. 8.5% ), with a bit more sweep, and an afterburning Avon. What can be expected from the design? What difference can it make for the RAF, British aircraft industry, future projects etc. if it lives up to the expectations? Future versions; the Avon peaked at almost 80 kN (with afterburner) eventually. Export success, most likely costumers? Navalization (ducks for cover)?

It really needed more fuel otherwise you end up with a multi-role Lightning with a worse climb rate and restricted range. It would likely have sold well to Hunter operators looking for a supersonic update but not necessarily outside the group.

Additionally not every early operator loved them. The Belgians kept theirs for about 4 years then stored and scrapped them
 
In good numbers, that is.
The P.1083 was a supersonic derivative of the Hunter family, sporting a thinner wing (7.5% max TtC ratio vs. 8.5% ), with a bit more sweep, and an afterburning Avon. What can be expected from the design? What difference can it make for the RAF, British aircraft industry, future projects etc. if it lives up to the expectations? Future versions; the Avon peaked at almost 80 kN (with afterburner) eventually. Export success, most likely costumers? Navalization (ducks for cover)?

First off, a thinner, pointier Hunter would be one of the most beautiful jet fighters ever constructed IMO- something that looks that right must be right!

With drop tanks I could certainly see a navalized version- it fits on existing carriers and is competitive with contemporaries. A land version might push back the Lightning, but I'm not surec if the geometry can support Mach 2+. However, spread less thin, the RAF could take their time in ordering proper replacements for the Super Hunter, fully incorporating lessons on what was done right and what needed improvement.

Also, what about developing the Hunter Mk.3 as a fighter?

hh1-The-prototype-Hunter-WB188-modified-to-Mark-3-standard-displayed-in-its-world-speed-record-colours-in-1976-960x673.jpg
 
First off, a thinner, pointier Hunter would be one of the most beautiful jet fighters ever constructed IMO- something that looks that right must be right!

With drop tanks I could certainly see a navalized version- it fits on existing carriers and is competitive with contemporaries. A land version might push back the Lightning, but I'm not surec if the geometry can support Mach 2+. However, spread less thin, the RAF could take their time in ordering proper replacements for the Super Hunter, fully incorporating lessons on what was done right and what needed improvement.

Also, what about developing the Hunter Mk.3 as a fighter?

hh1-The-prototype-Hunter-WB188-modified-to-Mark-3-standard-displayed-in-its-world-speed-record-colours-in-1976-960x673.jpg

I can just see a certain display team flying those instead of Gnats.
 
The 'supersonic' Hunter would actually be classed as a transonic fighter, like the F100, F101, F102, F8, Mig 19 and Super Mystere rather than a Mach 2 fighter such as the long-lived generation coming hot on its heels such as the Mirage III, Mig 21, Lightning, F104, F105, F106, F4. As such it would be quickly outclassed, which is why it wasn't pursued in the first place, as there was only 5 years between the first Hunter entering service in 1954 and the first Lightning in 1959. While the F8 had a good reputation due to its performance in Rolling Thunder air to air combat none of the other transonics are standout aircraft and likely the P1083 would be the same.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
What kind of range would be in the offing?

Carrier capable aircraft decisions live/die on range.
 
Top