Rest of the World without the UK's 1965 cancellations

Y

Yellow Palace

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
5 May 2007
Messages
1,469
Reaction score
2,812
The possibility of the UK avoiding the 1965 aircraft cancellations has been discussed ad nauseam. I don't propose to get into it here - assume a collective delusion of the UK government, the discovery of a massive gold deposit, or intervention from extra-terrestrial intelligences, as you see fit.

What I don't think has been discussed, particularly, is the impact on the rest of the world. The cancellations led to some new types, which wouldn't come into being in this scenario.

A surviving TSR.2 is, it's safe to assume, a dead duck on the export market. Nobody else would buy the thing; the only vaguely plausible export candidate was Australia, and they preferred the F-111 even before the cancellation. But if the UK is building TSR.2, it probably doesn't have any interest in the Multi-Role Aircraft consortium being put together by NATO countries to replace the F-104. That means the UK isn't there as a driver for the bigger, more complicated Tornado we know. There's a reasonable chance that keeps the Netherlands in the project. It might keep Canada in. It probably won't keep Belgium in. Export sales of the alt-MRCA could go either way: the Saudi contract is probably dead (no idea what they're buying!) but it might get some more F-104 replacement orders in place of the F-16.

A surviving P.1154 similarly kills the Jaguar. France gets its supersonic trainer and light attack aircraft without the RAF driving up the size and complexity. Best guess for the export orders is a couple more notches on the Mirage 5's belt. It also kills the Harrier as we know it. A Sea P.1154 (probably still Harrier, but clarity is needed) might come about for the INVINCIBLE class, but that's a bigger, heavier type again. Might be a more difficult sell politically. If it does come along, the Indian Navy might still buy them. Would the USMC be interested in a supersonic STOVL aircraft, noting that it's considerably bigger than the A-4? If not, the Spanish and Italian Harriers won't happen. We can probably rule Thailand right out. Maybe the USMC keeps looking, maybe it keeps the A-4 going, maybe it buys the A-7.

The HS.681... might make a few impressive displays at airshows. But I doubt very much it's going to meaningfully impact anything. Anyone with any sense is still buying C-130s.
 
A surviving P.1154 similarly kills the Jaguar. France gets its supersonic trainer and light attack aircraft without the RAF driving up the size and complexity. Best guess for the export orders is a couple more notches on the Mirage 5's belt.
Click to expand...

1-Don't forget this also screws AFVG. And as you said: no Jaguar. The latter will remove a massive financial burden on the Armée de l'Air, 1968-1974. Dassault will still eat an ailing Breguet circa 1967-1971.

2-No change to the Mirage F1, as VG / TF30 types are unacceptable (Mirage G : US engine, not very manoeuverable, and expensive) while G4 / G8 / ACF will remain too expensive, even without the Jaguar.

3-Who knows, maybe the AdA put a M53 in the Mirage F1 much earlier than OTL July 1972 (and the ACF high-end being started).
This may catch Belgium orders before The Netherlands starts the Deal of the Century in spring 1974.

4-More generally: F1-M53 could become a low-end to either the G8 or the ACF. Except they are so damn expensive ! And Mirage IVs are "fresh" since the 62nd and last to roll out of the production line was in October 1968.

5-In turn, a F1-M53 may interest the Aéronavale, since no Jaguar-M. Mirage F1-M53 could then pull a Rafale and carry both services - AdA & Aéronavale. No Super Etendard and no Mirage 2000 in this case. No 4000 either, because ACF. Dassault can certainly put the 2000 analog FBW on a Mirage F1.

6-Much like the Rafale did OTL three decades later, F1-M53 can massively standardize and rationalize France fast jets fleets. No Jaguar no S.E no Mirage 2000, for a start. As for the older Mirage IIIs, they can be dumped to export markets. Crusaders would get the axe too.

7-And maybe - maybe - such colossal savings could eventually "fund" the AdA dreamed twin-jet heavy fighter. Either in the shape of the Mirage G8, or the ACF. Not sure the 4000 exists ITTL.
 
Last edited:
In world terms I think the P1154 given the Sea Harrier treatment would be a game changer. A supersonic aircraft with reasonable range and payload able to use ski jump stovl carriers would put powerful carrier Aviation in the hands of more countries. The much beloved medium-small carrier would actually be effective in high threat situations.
 
The planned RAF re-equpment assumed that the three aircraft involved could be built and ordered in quantities similar the aircraft they replaced.
In my nursery world (uk 75) this happened together with a VG fighter for the RN/RAF planned to enter service in 1974 which I call Cutlass and is sort of Vickers 583 ish. CVA01 is built as a single carrier replacing one of Eagle/Ark Royal and joining Hermes which also gets the Cutlass.
Archibald has explained in some detail what this allowed France to do.
Sadly the UK types were too specialised and expensive to operate.
The US Marines looked at the P1154 and decided Phantoms and Corsairs were cheaper and homegrown.
South Africa was eager to get TSR2s but by 1970 no British Government was keen to sell them military kit.
India looked seriously at TSR2 and P1154 but again cost and complexity plus some swift Soviet offers of Tu22 and Mig23/27 at bargain prices.
The incoming Thatcher government in 1979 took one look at the now nationalised Aerospace and Shipbuilding industries and declared that "featherbedding British industry" was out and lowest compliant off the shelf bid would be demanded in Whitehall.
By 1991 the three famous aircraft had been replaced by US types bought under this system and saving millions of Pounds. The F18K replaced the P1154 and TSR2 The C130J replaced the 681.
The RN fared little better Its two remaining carriers and airgroups were sold to Australia and India.
Lord Carrington succeeded in negotiating a leasehold arrangement for the Falklands Islands that allowed the withdrawal of the British garrison and joint policing and exploitation of the Islands. Generous resettlement terms were worked out with New Zealand for those Kelpers who disliked the new arrangements. A new democratic government in Buenos Aires followed a fail coup in March 1982 against Galtieri.
 
There's probably some quite far reaching impacts on European military collaboration as UK was one of the main pushers for these projects, and also brought expertise and "confidence" which likely helped to lower the perceived risk in other countries (e.g. Germany)

Maybe a simpler Tornado survives (smaller, single seat, single US engine?); sort of a Western MiG 27 but with a terrain following radar (Texas Instruments); maybe there's even a later AD variant like MiG 23?; or maybe it's too much risk and a more collaborative project with a US company progresses (e.g. Boeing as per previous German NKF work); or maybe the whole thing falls apart as now none of the partners have experience of collaborative engineering programmes.
 
So, for the Tornado replacement, the five MRA nations are all replacing the F-104 Starfighter, though for somewhat different roles. The Germans and Italians are primarily replacing it as a tactical striker, having the F-104S and F-4F to provide air combat capability. Their replacement was the Panavia Tornado IDS. The Dutch, and presumably also the Belgians, wanted a simply, highly maneuverable aircraft with more of an air combat focus, but still primarily a strike role. Both would buy the F-16. Canada, meanwhile, was the odd duck out - even in 1964 during what became the CF-5 procurement process the Canadians were looking at replacing the F-101 and F-104, and while the latter fits in with their needs the F-101 doesn't. Frankly, I'd expect the Canadians to drop out again, especially given their contentious procurement politics of the time.

Honestly, it probably wouldn't be overly hard to find an aircraft to meet their specifications, though while they intended to develop a plane without a prime contractor like the UK involved I think modification of an existing plane, or one under development, would be more likely. That means, IMO, the three candidates are the Viggen, the Mirage F1, and the P-530.

Why those three? Well, two of them were offered IOTL when the competition for the F-16 was conducted, and at this stage in their development can be more easily modified to fit the needs of the MRA group. As for the P-530, well, it fits the bill, and is surprisingly refined even in 1968. Certainly it's further along than what would become the F-16.
 
What if the P530 steps in and fills both roles ala Mig-23/27? You have a A-17 for Germany and Italy and a F-17 for the Dutch, Belgians, and Canadians. Does the X-27 Lancer sneak into all this?

Question, what fills the Tornado ADF role? Do we get an interceptor version of TSR.2? Or British Tomcats?
 
strangely the USAF show interest in TSR.2 as replacement for B-57
but British government not beliefe in TSR.2 and other projects and cancel them and destroy the hardware...
 
Without the UK Germany and Italy would steer towards a single seater fighter bomber like the original MRCA 100.
The Luftwaffe would then urge an F4 buy.
Italy already has the F104S.
The 70s Sale of the Century still pits the F16 against the Mirage F1 for Belgium, Denmark, Netherlands, and Norway.
Hard to see Canada, Australia, Spain and Switzerland not choosing some variety of F18.
Saudi Arabia would have to opt for French aircraft instead of BAe Tornados.
The absence of a strong European Panavia consortium in the 80s means no Eurofighter Typhoon. Dassault Rafale is Europe's sole twin jet fighter for the 90s competing with Saab's single engined Gripen
 
Michel Van said:
strangely the USAF show interest in TSR.2 as replacement for B-57
but British government not beliefe in TSR.2 and other projects and cancel them and destroy the hardware...
Click to expand...
It would take a miracle for the TSR2 to meet any part of the B57 replacement requirement.
 
As you will see the TSR2 is pitched in a gap between the B57 and the B52. Lockheed might well have licence built TSR2s if F111 had failed badly.
 
Archibald said:
-Don't forget this also screws AFVG.
Click to expand...
Or rather, avoids the distraction of AFVG, maybe giving one of the big Dassault strike Mirages a chance.

But yes, it's probably a great opportunity for the French aviation industry.
CV12Hornet said:
As for the P-530, well, it fits the bill, and is surprisingly refined even in 1968.
Click to expand...
The P-530 is very promising for the MRA - not least because Northrop was fully expecting to do a co-production agreement. I don't think you get Belgium, but Canada and the Netherlands is very doable.
 
There's several possibilities with P1154 variants.
Sweden does come to mind and like with earlier Hunter Purchases a possible supplement or rival to their domestic efforts.
As it was HSA and SAAB met, and each tried to interest the other in their new product.

We can envision a possible French AN buy piggybacking on the FAA.

India may be a candidate here.

USMC may opt in, after all the alternatives be all conventional and it still delivers greater basing flexibility.

TSR.2.... chances be slim but not impossible. India and Iran seem the strongest cases.

HS.681.....
It all depends on what is actually put into service in the UK.
 
Desertfox said:
What if the P530 steps in and fills both roles ala Mig-23/27? You have a A-17 for Germany and Italy and a F-17 for the Dutch, Belgians, and Canadians. Does the X-27 Lancer sneak into all this?

Question, what fills the Tornado ADF role? Do we get an interceptor version of TSR.2? Or British Tomcats?
Click to expand...
I'd honestly forgotten about the CL1200. It's certainly a possibility, given it could reuse F-104 production machinery.
 
Somewhat simplified, MRCA. as initially envisaged was intended as a F-104 replacement, hence initial interest from Belgium, Netherlands and Canada as well as Germany and Italy. The UK. very much needed a Hunter/Canberra replacement (after cancellation of TSR.2/F-111K/AFVG./UKVG.) which also drove the Jaguar being ordered by the UK. as a strike aircraft instead of an advanced trainer as initially planned (an ideal Hunter replacement ?)
 
Last edited:
In this scenario its possible that the CL-1200 Lancer might have more traction if Lockheed can big up the commonality aspects with the F-104Gs - though balancing that the bribery scandals might squash any hopes Lockheed has.

The selection of the F-16 was a drawn out affair and with differing needs and opinions. I certainly believe that an MRCA would not proceed in Tornado form, possibly Germany and Italy might go it alone, but its equally possible that the Dassault G8 forms the basis of a Franco-German interdictor. It's more than possible that Germany simply orders more F-4Gs to equip the strike Geschwader, given the Phantom is a known load-lugger.

As to the Benelux nations? Well the loss of Tornado ultimately means nothing to them as they never bought it and would probably go for P.530 or F-16 as historical.

The French were keen to pursue ECAT on their own, Jaguar would likely still be built. But when Dassault takes over Breguet its game over in terms of sales (as historical for the French Jaguar A).

It's hard to gauge the possible impact of the P.1154 on the export market. The Harrier was a neat trick but never sold, apart from niche naval roles. P.1154 is more complicated, larger and has all the PCB deck burn issues that mean that operating it from a 20 year-old Majestic-class carrier is probably not that attractive.

Britain faces an uncompetitive 1970s, no BAC Jaguar International, no P.1127 Harrier, no Tornado, just Hawk. Hawker Siddeley might push Buccaneer developments to countries like Egypt who want long-range strike, but takers are not very likely. It's possible that whatever AST.396 is in this scenario, leads to a suitable supersonic multi-role fighter for the early 1980s, but that's a long wait. Realistically the US and France are going to sweep up what few export orders Britain obtained in the 70s.
 
Sure, Breguet 121 could be done alone. But France could also said "screw supersonics" and do the Alpha Jet with the germans, except a few years earlier.
 
Or rather, avoids the distraction of AFVG, maybe giving one of the big Dassault strike Mirages a chance.
Click to expand...

Fact is that, according to Libébert & Buyck, Mirage G started in 1964-65, even before the AFVG (so much for those who think it was created to throw a wrench into AFVG and piss the british - it was not).

Mirage G best hope would be with the French aéronavale, as they never got issues about using american jet engines (unlike the AdA). And now I've just remembered that AFVG had a naval variant for the Clems carriers. D'oh. Mirage G may get accelerated in that role, flying earlier than November 1967. Meanwhile the USN VFAX 1.0 screams for the Mirage G as a sidekick to either F-111B or Grumman G-303, what was it called... ?
 
Hood said:
It's hard to gauge the possible impact of the P.1154 on the export market. The Harrier was a neat trick but never sold, apart from niche naval roles. P.1154 is more complicated, larger and has all the PCB deck burn issues that mean that operating it from a 20 year-old Majestic-class carrier is probably not that attractive.
Click to expand...
There's still the >100 Harrier Is for the USMC? I could still see them ordering P.1154s instead to gain experience of operating a VTOL aircraft. It already gives them the greater range-payload that they wanted from Harrier II.

But maybe in pratice it'll just be really difficult to fly and operate for everyone
 
Hood said:
The Harrier was a neat trick but never sold, apart from niche naval roles.
Click to expand...
There were quite a few potential sales that were foiled by politics and/or economic disasters (not to mention the occasional dubious backroom deal). Ironically, for example, Argentina nearly bought both the Harrier and, later on, the Sea Harrier on at least two occasions!
 
Michel Van said:
strangely the USAF show interest in TSR.2 as replacement for B-57
but British government not beliefe in TSR.2 and other projects and cancel them and destroy the hardware...
Click to expand...
I mean, the TSR.2 basically was a Canberra replacement, so...

============

As to the P1154, I suspect the Marines would want them. Not because it's supersonic, but because it means that they can put half a squadron or more onto an LHA and not have to drag a carrier group with them for air support. It makes the MEU and ARG even more self-sufficient by having supersonic fighters with Sparrow-class missiles on it.
 
Michael Pryce is the expert on P1154 so can comment on export prospects.
I am increasingly sure that it would not have taken off or landed vertically but used short rolling take offs and landings.
This happened even with P1127 Harriers in most operations.
 
@uk 75

Rolling Take Offs became normal for Harriers as the increased lift from the wing meant that greater payload could be carried. But I think it was pretty much always vertical landings (easier to stop and then land, than the other way around).

From the available trials across multiple things then short rolling landings (i.e. with <<100kts approach speed) are possible, and largely ameliorate HGI and ground erosion issues. But it's harder, and just pretty unknown whether it would be acceptable for the general pilot population. I think I might favour derivatives of the 1154RN design with the much wider track landing gear if RVLs are the standard procedure.

Accident rate with Harrier I was high; probably higher with 1154. Maybe this pushes it over the edge and any fleet is short lived.
 
From the OP it seems that the two-seat naval P.1154 still dies in 1963 but that some kind of Sea Harrier for the Invincibles is developed in the early/mid-70s.
Actually this might have worked out better - far more commonality and presumably any niggles on the 1154 Harrier FGR.1 have been ironed out and/or workarounds implemented. With radar already in the airframe, it might actually be a true multi-role fighter - could even have Skyflash maybe. Sweet but expensive.

But the timing would probably kill off USMC interest/ USN kills off USMC interest to protect F/A-18.
But if it did go ahead - imagining the McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II could be very tasty once you put US F/A-18 avionics in it, a new carbon composite wing, LERX etc. Probably means no JSF as we know it, when we know it.

Grey Havoc said:
Ironically, for example, Argentina nearly bought both the Harrier and, later on, the Sea Harrier on at least two occasions!
Click to expand...
Yeah in this AU some fool sells them Supersonic Harrier which then whacks out HMS Hermes and the RN gets pissed off at the MoD Sales Department!
 
Archibald said:
1-Don't forget this also screws AFVG. And as you said: no Jaguar. The latter will remove a massive financial burden on the Armée de l'Air, 1968-1974. Dassault will still eat an ailing Breguet circa 1967-1971.

2-No change to the Mirage F1, as VG / TF30 types are unacceptable (Mirage G : US engine, not very manoeuverable, and expensive) while G4 / G8 / ACF will remain too expensive, even without the Jaguar.

3-Who knows, maybe the AdA put a M53 in the Mirage F1 much earlier than OTL July 1972 (and the ACF high-end being started).
This may catch Belgium orders before The Netherlands starts the Deal of the Century in spring 1974.

4-More generally: F1-M53 could become a low-end to either the G8 or the ACF. Except they are so damn expensive ! And Mirage IVs are "fresh" since the 62nd and last to roll out of the production line was in October 1968.

5-In turn, a F1-M53 may interest the Aéronavale, since no Jaguar-M. Mirage F1-M53 could then pull a Rafale and carry both services - AdA & Aéronavale. No Super Etendard and no Mirage 2000 in this case. No 4000 either, because ACF. Dassault can certainly put the 2000 analog FBW on a Mirage F1.

6-Much like the Rafale did OTL three decades later, F1-M53 can massively standardize and rationalize France fast jets fleets. No Jaguar no S.E no Mirage 2000, for a start. As for the older Mirage IIIs, they can be dumped to export markets. Crusaders would get the axe too.

7-And maybe - maybe - such colossal savings could eventually "fund" the AdA dreamed twin-jet heavy fighter. Either in the shape of the Mirage G8, or the ACF. Not sure the 4000 exists ITTL.
Click to expand...
Mirage 4000 could be sold as a replacement to ACF in 1975 as Dassault actually tried to do, with F1-53 already covering the 2000 niche. In which case is there a Rafale as we know it? I would argue not, no reason you can't have F1s and 4000s wi5h increasingly better electronics into the 2000s. In which case the next French fighter is a single engine replacement for the repeatedly upgraded F1s starting to be designed in the 1990s... as a fifth generation machine?
 
Lascaris said:
Mirage 4000 could be sold as a replacement to ACF in 1975 as Dassault actually tried to do, with F1-53 already covering the 2000 niche. In which case is there a Rafale as we know it? I would argue not, no reason you can't have F1s and 4000s wi5h increasingly better electronics into the 2000s. In which case the next French fighter is a single engine replacement for the repeatedly upgraded F1s starting to be designed in the 1990s... as a fifth generation machine?
Click to expand...
Are any of the F1s or 4000s carrier capable?

Half the reason for Rafale was to replace the Crusaders.
 
And perhaps a bigger wing. Liébert and Buyck have a detailed explanation of the Aéronavale long range interceptor loiter requirements, also missiles. Mirage G with a TF306E could do it. Mirage F1 would need not only the M53 but also a bigger wing... like the Jaguar M in 1971, which sunk it.
 
Last edited:
Lascaris said:
Mirage F1M with M53
Click to expand...
Combined reply:
Archibald said:
And perhaps a bigger wing. Liébert and Buyck have a detailed explanation of the Aéronavale long range interceptor loiter requirement, also missiles. Mirage G with a TF306E could do it. Mirage F1 would need not only the M53 but also a bigger wing... like the Jaguar M in 1971, which sunk it.
Click to expand...
So, less effort than designing a whole new airframe, but you might want a new airframe due to other requirements...
 
Yellow Palace said:
The possibility of the UK avoiding the 1965 aircraft cancellations has been discussed ad nauseam. I don't propose to get into it here - assume a collective delusion of the UK government, the discovery of a massive gold deposit, or intervention from extra-terrestrial intelligences, as you see fit.
Click to expand...
Is the British economy performing as well as West Germany's or half as well as Japan's allowed? (The populations of West Germany & the UK were about the same and Japan's population was about double the size of the UK's).

Or are they more absurd than your suggestions?
 
Last edited:
NOMISYRRUC said:
Is the British economy performing as well as West Germany's or half as well as Japan's allowed? (The populations of West Germany & the UK were about the same and Japan's population was about double the size of the UK's).
Click to expand...
That's linked to what is actually happening in the UK economy though; the macro economic view of the 50s and 60s is that UK economic growth is being reduced to due excessive military spending and excessive R&D spending. Hence the government efforts to move people between sectors into more productive ones, and then increasingly taking a laissez faire / market dynamics approach rather than government intervention.
 
red admiral said:
That's linked to what is actually happening in the UK economy though; the macro economic view of the 50s and 60s is that UK economic growth is being reduced to due excessive military spending and excessive R&D spending. Hence the government efforts to move people between sectors into more productive ones, and then increasingly taking a laissez faire / market dynamics approach rather than government intervention.
Click to expand...
So they are more absurd than the OP's suggestions.

Edit: Changed to from "your suggestions" to "the OP's suggestions" because I didn't read the sender's name properly. I thought @Yellow Palace was replying to what he wrote in the OP. Sorry @red admiral.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
Fact is that, according to Libébert & Buyck, Mirage G started in 1964-65, even before the AFVG (so much for those who think it was created to throw a wrench into AFVG and piss the british - it was not).
Click to expand...
Oh, I'm aware of that. I just wonder whether, without the distraction of AFVG, one of the Mirage Gs might progress further/faster and actually make it into French service. I'm not sure what the split of resources was between the two, though, and whether any resources freed up would actually be useful.
red admiral said:
Accident rate with Harrier I was high; probably higher with 1154. Maybe this pushes it over the edge and any fleet is short lived.
Click to expand...
Hood said:
From the OP it seems that the two-seat naval P.1154 still dies in 1963 but that some kind of Sea Harrier for the Invincibles is developed in the early/mid-70s.
Click to expand...
Also inevitably a more complex aircraft. I just don't see it being as attractive for export customers as the 1127 Harrier. Yes, it has the cachet of being supersonic, but that brings with it a host of issues.

For similar reasons I'm not sure the 1154 does wind up on the Royal Navy's ASW cruisers. It might be just enough more complicated and expensive, and just enough too similar to having Phantoms and Buccaneers, to be politically unviable as a useful bonus to a ship primarily designed around helicopters.
NOMISYRRUC said:
Is the British economy performing as well as West Germany's or half as well as Japan's allowed? (The populations of West Germany & the UK were about the same and Japan's population was about double the size of the UK's).

Or are they more absurd as your suggestions?
Click to expand...
My point is that the setup is irrelevant, provided that the UK has enough more money to not mind continuing the projects, but not so much more as to grossly distort the global power balance. Because this isn't supposed to be a discussion about the UK.
 
Yellow Palace said:
Oh, I'm aware of that. I just wonder whether, without the distraction of AFVG, one of the Mirage Gs might progress further/faster and actually make it into French service. I'm not sure what the split of resources was between the two, though, and whether any resources freed up would actually be useful.
Click to expand...
My take would be that France is still driven to Mirage F1 due to budgetary pressures. I don't think a great deal was spent on AFVG relative to flying F2 and the various Gs and yet money still drove to the smaller, cheaper F1.
 
I am not sure if this is the right thread but as someone who enjoys the beauty and artistry of M Dassault's creations, I would like to use it to give France deserved leadership of the European Defence Industry.
The narrow victory of the Conservatives in the 1964 election led to a very different Britain from Harold Wilson's. Home's replacement in 1965 by Reggie Maudling led to a decade of sleaze and bravado unequaled until Boris Johnson. Increasingly bizarre schemes saw British forces stationed in the Gulf and Far East while forces in Europe were paired down.
President Johnson described Maudling as a son of a bitch but at least he's our bitch. By 1968 HMS Eagle had taken its turn with HMAS Melbourne and HMCS Bonaventure off Vietnam.
Meanwhile France built up its relationship with West Germany. Both had strong doubts about Vietnam and merely shook their heads at the posturing of the Maudling Government.
With F104s continuing to crash all over Germany and the Luftwaffe resisting RAF attempts to demonstrate P1154 to replace it, M.Dassault met in Munich with the heads of West Germany's aircraft companies. A few weeks later the ZKF/ACF "Future Combat Aircraft" to replace the F104s and Mirages of both countries' Air Forces was born. The "Panther" became the biggest combat aircraft programme in Europe.
 
Last edited:
Archibald said:
1-Don't forget this also screws AFVG. And as you said: no Jaguar. The latter will remove a massive financial burden on the Armée de l'Air, 1968-1974. Dassault will still eat an ailing Breguet circa 1967-1971.
Click to expand...

I'm not 100% sure it does. TSR2 was a medium range strike aircraft but MRCA (which was partly grown from AFVG and UKVG) had a battlefield interdiction role with long loiter times that I don't think TSR2 would have been suited for. Significant size difference in the two aircraft too. AFVG/UKVG might have been modified into a fighter aircraft to replace F4 (As MRCA was) and if either France or the UK (or both) had larger carriers, perhaps even a shipboard interceptor.

AFVG & TSR 2 to same scale.JPG
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom