Moderator: Community Manager
[Post Reply] [*]  Page 14 of 16  [ 155 posts ]  Go to page « 112 13 14 15 16 »
Author Message
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: November 22nd, 2014, 10:28 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
Yes, for Audacious cramped hangars more Sea Kings is better idea. Two or three of these P.39M could be useful though to FAA ( one COD, one/two tankers for each carrier). I thought using the Bucc system to cut cost and use the same supply chain. Could this frame be useful for RAF or export customers?

Could this built? I see the British Mi-8/17 on this, or the equivalent of SA-321.

http://www.shipbucket.com/images.php?di ... in%203.png

What Britain could have instead of Chinook? The Rotodyne?


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: November 25th, 2014, 3:27 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
Thoughts about RN from other forum (has some ideas to evaluate) : http://warships1discussionboards.yuku.c ... HSeI2ej99Q

I ordered a book about RN to read (Bombhead suggested it to me), it will be on my hands between 3 and 8 of December.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 10th, 2015, 9:38 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
I read the book "Vanguard to Trident", says a lot about the planning of post-war RN besides politics.

But I have a question, not neccesary related:

Could Britain provide assistance to HLK in develop a single engined fighter in mid to late 1950's? Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire 7 is first in list for engine, other could work also, anything with dry thrust around 11,000-12,000 lbf in beggining of its development. Preferrably something from the thread of Never built, capable of follow an F-86 in dogfight.

You will say: Just order Hunter, but this is the easy solution.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
eswube
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 10th, 2015, 7:47 pm
Offline
Posts: 10648
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 8:31 am
Problem with that last question (and the "easy solution") is why would British help in developing a potential competitor (on export markets) to their Hunter? So IMHO they could but wouldn't.
Another thing is that if the development of said fighter were to begin in mid-to-late 1950s then such Hunter/F-86-esque aircraft would be already bit outdated and really not worth being anything more than fighter-bomber, because it wouldn't enter service before end of the 1950s - and that was already time of supersonic F-100's or Super Mysteres in their prime with F-104 and Mirage III soon to enter service. And if it were to enter service in mid 1950s then the development would have to begin in late 1940s or no later than beginning of 1950s, which makes British involvment even less probable.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 11th, 2015, 7:20 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
This guy has done a wonderful work with the SR.177, among them a what if Hellenic Air Force scheme (5 total). More previous and next.

http://s72.photobucket.com/user/Mossie1 ... 1.jpg.html

From Secret Projects:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... 186.0.html

For jet only engines there was the RB.133 Super Avon (with 13,400 lbf dry thrust) which was cancelled together with the English Electric P.8 (an improved Lighting for F.155T requirement). Probably the RB.133 coud have about 20,000 lbf with reheat (Avon 301R for Lighting went to 12,690/16/360 and Swedish RM6C had 17,110 lbf, adapting these to RB.133 we have 17,070-17,820 lbf right of the shelf). The RB.106 Thames seem to had 21,250-21,750 lbf of thrust. According to Fairey Delta III what if link in previous pages, the RB.106 thrust was increased to 25,150-25,650 lbf (wikipedia says 21,750 lbf, Fairey Delta III link 21,250 lbf).

Supposed the SR.177 gone that way, with a powerful turbojet, any suggestion for a plausible development/production timeline? The jet/rocket powered prototypes could provide data for testing up to 2.35 mach. In the text says around 1962-1964 the SR.177 could entered service with the RB106.

Probably also more under wing pylons could be added also (two more outwards-it seems these is space available) to have total 8 (three under each wing-of which inwards "wet"-plus two in fuselage). An APU could be placed in the position of the rocket engine, while the tanks for HTP replaced now with kerosene. This last mod would increase fuel capacity significantly.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 14th, 2015, 10:08 am
Offline
Posts: 7164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
The SR.177 was never anything more than a point-defence interceptor. Basically whether on land or at sea the idea was to take-off, climb as fast as possible, shoot down 1 or two Soviet bombers then home to refuel and reload and do the same again - basically a manned reusable SAM.

All talk of jet-only versions is mainly imaginary what-if stuff, after all the Lightning could do (and did) the same job just as well. The SR.177 was not a fighter bomber and not designed for that role. I guess it had a limited attack capability but I'm not sure it would be good at low level stuff.

If you want a real multi-role mud mover then the Hawker P.1121 is the aircraft to go for. The RAF didn't have that need and lost out.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 14th, 2015, 11:57 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
The Fairey Delta III? Which is "service" in another AU some pages before. Again very what-if stuff, but at least it could work. (http://www.whatifmodelers.com/index.php?topic=12289.0). I have in mind a very good au history to justify the "Mirage" style nose/canopy. And like the Mirage III and the IV, I am thinking of develop an upscale Fairey Delta by 50% with twin engines (like the Mirage IV).


The belly intake caused problems in first generation of F-16, probably the P.1121 had also same problems if entered service.


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Hood
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 15th, 2015, 9:58 am
Offline
Posts: 7164
Joined: July 31st, 2010, 10:07 am
An upscaled Fairey Delta is the Fairey Delta III...

Miraged-Delta's again are mostly what-if but there were real studies. Again the Air Ministry was not interested. They wanted interceptors to destroy Soviet bombers, not dog-fighters. It could have been done and arguably would have been the best course of action, but at the time that was the main threat to Britain.

The P.1121 did have intake issues, they would have been solved if the aircraft had flown. Part of the problem was the Gyron engine (which was shite). Had there been an RB.106 or even a Medway or Olympus then it might have worked better.

_________________
Hood's Worklist
English Electric Canberra FD
Interwar RN Capital Ships
Super-Darings
Never-Were British Aircraft


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 15th, 2015, 12:47 pm
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
So only the P.1121 could I get;


Top
[Profile] [Quote]
odysseus1980
Post subject: Re: Some Thoughts about What If British AircraftsPosted: March 16th, 2015, 7:20 am
Offline
User avatar
Posts: 3581
Joined: November 8th, 2010, 8:53 am
Location: Athens,Hellenic Kingdom
Contact: Website
A quick upscale by 1.5 factor of the Mirage-delta gives 25.2m length (from 16.76m), 12.75m wingspan and height around 5.5m (the Mirage IV had 5.4m). Wing area around 110 sq.m, weight 35-38t (assuming that The Mirage-Delta would be somehow heavier by the real Mirage III). But this twin engined variant could have load about 9-10t (Mirage IV had around 7.5t I think), much better power to weight ratio and RATO would not be necessary unlike the Mirage IV (which needed RATO for fast take off).

Since I made the Mirage IV in FD-scale (and still own one variant of it), it is quite easy to use the IV as a design base.

Fairey Delta F155T: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/i ... pic=3083.0

Comparing the "Mirage-Delta" with the Dassault Mirage III of real life, the English variant would be much faster in acceleration and climb rate, especially with the RB.106 engine. 1130nm combat radius (stat or nm) with internal fuel only is not bad at all, Mirage III is credited only 746nm. With two 1,700 lt drop tanks (or twin 1,300lt which were certified for supersonic speed) the Mirage-Delta perhaps would reach 1,400nm and being refueled by Victor K1/K2 or ideally VC.10 it could stay airborne for several hours.

Summing up all RAF and export machines from the text behind the Mirage-Delta number goes up to 1000 machines, imagine Supermarine, Gloster and perhaps Shorts as sub-constructors and Fairey doing final assembly plus some parts. Even Australia could supply some parts from its own production line.

Again, something similar could be done with TSR.2 (wish it entered service), Lighting was of course an English Electric project, but I think UK could convert all its Lightings to F.6 spec (and integrate the Blue Vesta missile as well or even licensed AIM-9). The Mirage-Delta could take Skyflash (I have in my mind to push Skyflash as earlier as possible for this scenario).

Navy would have the SR.177 as discussed some pages earlier, with RB.106 engine and main task CAP to protect the British Task Force, like in that small British AU. Refueling is a matter, since Audacious Class carriers were relatively small. Again, "SR.177 Mk3" could take Skyflash/Blue Vesta or other missiles as well. Since there is available one of the best strike aircraft ever designed (meaning of course the Buccaneer) in 12 units on each of three Audacious Carriers of this AU, RN can strike back inside USSR land or deal with Soviet surface units with Sea Eagle and Martel missiles. Submarines is a job for Gannets and Sea King/Wessex helicopters.


Last edited by odysseus1980 on March 18th, 2015, 6:09 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
[Profile] [Quote]
Display: Sort by: Direction:
[Post Reply]  Page 14 of 16  [ 155 posts ]  Return to “General Discussion” | Go to page « 112 13 14 15 16 »

Jump to: 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 42 guests


The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC


cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited
[ GZIP: Off ]