BAC Jaguar Projects

[PMN1]

In his BSP book, Tony Buttler has a chapter called 'Strike Trainers' which describes the background to what became the Jaguar.

In it he mentions the Folland Fo.147 and 148, the BAC (Vickers) Type 593, the BAC (English Electric) P45 (fixed and variable wing), and the Hawker Siddeley HS.1170B and HS.1173.

How do these compare to what eventually became the Jaguar?

 

[uk 75]

The various paper projects in the 1960s generally had the same problems:
overspecification
overexpensive
overcomplex

It is interesting in this regard that the Jaguar never did become a supersonic trainer for the RAF or any other Air Force. France developed the Alpha Jet and the UK the incredibly successful Hawk. Fun as they are (I am a great fan of 60s excess projects) none could have matched the Hawk for commercial and operational success.

As a strike fighter Jaguar emerged as a success in spite of events. Whether the 60s projects could have matched its low cost and flexibility of operation is doubtful.

Hope this helps
UK 75

 

[alertken]

I agree. Jaguar was RAF's first "stealthy" type.

In the aftershock of 1957 Force reduction, cheap quantity lapsed for multi-role quality, because so few platforms would be operated. So: no combat Gnat; add the strategic role to the Tactical Canberra-replacement; put NDBs in Shackleton (!!) Draft ASRs carried the kitchen sink; industry piled capability (=cost/complexity) onto any sketch, trying to multi-task.

After Healey's hacking, AFVG was the white hope; UK bought design leadership by taking junior slot on a Breguet going-concern. Most of RAF's 200 were to be B Trainer, few S Strike, and those might soon lapse. Though UK chose to put Elliott Nav/WASS in it, folk at Warton felt distinctly in Reserve if not assigned to AFVG. Then M.Dassault caused AFVG to lapse. F-4M must be liberated from Strike to replace Lightning, so Jaguar must be procured NOW! as 165/S, only 35/B. So, not much tarting about. S slipped in unobserved.

Healey then ran a competition for the missing advanced trainer (no point in buying more Bs, or Alphajet, from perfidious France). He specified no bolt-on goodies, no multi-tasking, at a fixed price. BAC did not believe him. HSAL, empty, offered one package price for 175 to that Spec, no more no less. Sold. No prototype, no meddling by Requirors piling on nice-to-haves, thus destroying the price.

It was the business success of Hawk acquisition that led to (intended)package-pricing of Tucano, Grobs, E-3D ... Define what you want, leave Supplier to deliver. Don't allow firms to play the Changes game, which they will always win.

If UK had taken junior slot on AFVG, and tried, solo, a multi-role lighter combat/advanced trainer, P.45-ish... then as it slipped and bloated, might we have taken a T-38/F-5E package?

 

[zen]

How do these compare to what eventually became the Jaguar?

Some are better, some are worse.
Those with VG are certain to be more expensive.

Of them all the HS1173 strikes me as the best bet for a supersonic trainer and light fighter/attack type.

In terms of the Jaguar's mission, which if my memory works is called MRI (medium range interdiction), then again there where better designs and worse ones, but their not really to be found in the types offered for a supersonic trainer.

 

[uk 75]

The T38 Talon was used by the Luftwaffe to train its crews in the States. Later I think the Portugese and the Turks (?) also used them.
As the RAF and RN used Phantoms, they might have done better to go in with the Luftwaffe to procure the later F4E version, without unnecessary Rolls Royce engines) and with the supporting T38 training as part of the package.
However, Hawk was the result of what actually happened and must be rated one of the most successful Post War British military aircraft exports, alongside the Hunter and the Canberra.
UK 75

 

[Caravellarella]

Re: BAC/Bréguet Jaguar

Dear Boys and Girls, here are some pictures of models showing an early configuration for both main versions of the Jaguar. The models were presented by BAC at the Farnborough 1966 show......

The article comes from the 1st October 1966 issue of Aviation Magazine International......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Re: Jaguar reconnaissance version project......

Dear Boys and Girls, here is an artist's impression of a proposed Jaguar reconnaissance project with a large ventral fairing. It is a "project" but it isn't "secret"......

The picture comes from the 1st March 1968 issue of Aviation Magazine International......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is a contemporary advertisement for the SEPECAT Jaguar; it shows an earlier type of engine inlet. I like the dayglo or international orange trim on the nose and wing-tips; it reminds me of the gorgeous Mitsubishi T-2......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[rousseau]

I've been thinking whether should I write sth to correct the preception of the Jaguar.
The picture snapped from book clearly was to show the original concept of Jaguar was an interceptor.

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is another contemporary advertisement for the SEPECAT Jaguar; it is part of a 2-page advertisement announcing the first order for 400 aircraft. I like the look of the trainer version illustrated......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is another contemporary advertisement for the SEPECAT Jaguar; it shows an earlier design of engine inlet......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is a picture with a caption in French of the full-scale mock-up of the SEPECAT Jaguar (when it was still a "project") that BAC/Bréguet exhibited at the 1967 Paris Salon. Note the design still has wedge-type engine intakes at this stage......

The picture comes from the 15th June 1967 issue of Aviation Magazine International......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is dramatic contemporary 2-page advertisement in French for the (still) BAC/Bréguet Jaguar; then still a "project" and still with wedge-type engine intakes......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Boys and Girls, here is another contemporary advertisement for the SEPECAT Jaguar; it is a 2-page advertisement announcing the first order for 400 aircraft. Did any of the trainer versions use the colour scheme illustrated?

The advertisement comes from the 15th January 1968 issue of Flight International......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[uk 75]

Terry The raf trainer dayglo and silver was worn on the Gnat trainers in 1968. Had Jags replaced them in the 70s they would have been red and white like the Hawks that did. Actual Jag trainers were camouflaged like the A and S versions. Shame as the early Jag designs also look sharper.

 

[Caravellarella]

Terry The raf trainer dayglo and silver was worn on the Gnat trainers in 1968. Had Jags replaced them in the 70s they would have been red and white like the Hawks that did. Actual Jag trainers were camouflaged like the A and S versions. Shame as the early Jag designs also look sharper.

Thanks uk 75, I was hoping that I could find a Jaguar that looks like the JASDF Mitsubishi T-2s. I always thought the T-2 looked very sharp in Light Gull Grey, Dayglo and International Orange. Never mind......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[uk 75]

Here is some lovely Jaguar artwork

 

[Alber Ratman]

The British supersonic and low level specification driven changes killed any chance of the Jaguar ever being a trainer. While it was clean with no stores, it did almost have the speed of the British specification, however the changes made to the original Breguet Br121 design and weight gain over the Adours potential development gave it some marginal handling qualities that became dangerously unpredictabble near the edges of its flight envelope. The first prototypes had trouble in roll and roll stability, the differential tail required to allow a decent rate of roll from low speed up to 450 knots, autostablisation at low level and in tubulence was essential in all three axis and stalling the aircraft was a big no no, especially the two seater as unless a spin was recovered in one cycle, the aircraft would virtually be unrecoverable from departure at any height! There was a document in June 1970 put forward to the RAF Air Staff with the recommendations of directorates of flight training costed the Jaguar to be too expensive for training and operaions that RAF equipment for use by NATO commands in Europe for the new NATO flexible response was not enough. Thats when the Government changed the order to 165 S versions + the 38 two seaters for conversion from the 90 S and 110 B variants and to pursue the HS 1184 as the Gnat/Hunter T7 replacement.

 

[CNH]

Let's see - one of the major functions of Jaguar and TSR2 was to deliver tactical nukes in the event of the Warsaw Pact rolling west.

How many Jaguars could you buy for the price of a TSR2?

 

[Alber Ratman]

Let's see - one of the major functions of Jaguar and TSR2 was to deliver tactical nukes in the event of the Warsaw Pact rolling west.

How many Jaguars could you buy for the price of a TSR2?

Hard to tell seeing it was 9 years and a lot of inflation between the TSR2 being canned and the first Jags armed with WE177s. The Jaguar tactical strike idea was first mooted in 1967 in government circles, however no Jag I believe came off the production line as nuke capable.. That was modifications that were installed and remove once in service. It is amazing that a trainer designed (sic) aircraft to train pilots for the TSR 2 and other advanced project, became the TSR 2.. However the Jag wasn't designed to carry out that role and in reality was only a stop gap until UKVG/MRCA/Tonkas came into service.

 

[toura]

DASSAULT-BREGUET advertasing as at "Le Bourget"
1981

 

[alertken]

AR #18: ECAT's pedigree from Taon to Shamsher does not deserve denigration. It was 1970s' politics of international collaboration that confined AdlA and RAF production offtake to c.200 each. France chose to move much of the E to Alphajet, much of the AT to Mirage F1; UK ditto to Hawk and Tornado not on grounds of any operational issue. The type was combat operational in NATO to 2007, in India till lord-knows-when: this is a boy, conceived in 1954, who done well, growing from combat apprentice to combat proven.

 

[Alber Ratman]

My post on the attributes of the Jaguar are stated as its orignial design use as an advanced trainer. The attributes come from official documents on the development of the aircraft from 65 to 74 that can be read at the national archives. As a low level ground attack aircraft, it was exceedingly good compared to its competition when it entered service (especially the RAF S with the navwass kit), but the aircraft did have some vices that wouldn't forgive if you made a mistake. The aircraft would suffer massive trim changes on changes of power setting and with application of flaps/air brakes. True, there were systems set up to negate these by the auto stab system, but pilots I know have told me of times were they have had to put in major inputs to negate the effects. This would be true of many high performance FJs. The aircraft might have been better still with the big wing envisaged by BAE in the 70s, but who knows.
Other aspects of the orignial joint requirement of 65 did serve the aircraft well, it was easily the most servicable aircraft of RAF FJ fleet. I was on a Jag det once with F3s.. We had a 94% servicability rate, theirs was 43. It was adored by pilots and engineers alike, the aircraft and people gelled. The last Jag sqn commander wrote of the aircraft, could do with more power, bigger wing and a radar but we knew our limitations and would always play hard to our strengths. It is little known that the RAF Jag could have lasted a little longer in service.. bar the fact that the 106s wouldn't take the wick being turned up.. That led to the end coming sooner.

 

[zen]

94%?!!!


OH 'serviceability', so not availability then?


Interesting though.

 

[Alber Ratman]

Servicablility rate.. Number of sorties flow against planned accounting for aircraft falling down from the first crew walking to cease flying.

 

[Alber Ratman]

AR #18: ECAT's pedigree from Taon to Shamsher does not deserve denigration. It was 1970s' politics of international collaboration that confined AdlA and RAF production offtake to c.200 each. France chose to move much of the E to Alphajet, much of the AT to Mirage F1; UK ditto to Hawk and Tornado not on grounds of any operational issue. The type was combat operational in NATO to 2007, in India till lord-knows-when: this is a boy, conceived in 1954, who done well, growing from combat apprentice to combat proven.

France realised the Jaguar was far too advanced and expensive to their ECAT requirement as the British realised that the same for AST 362, but operational issues of FE@R for NATO requirements was the major reason why the RAF wanted the government to change the order. As for confining the RAF and AdlA to having 200 aircraft each, true the governments had placed the orders in late 1968 and contractually it would have been more expensive to back out, but the RAF did buy more that 200, 208 to be accurate.. To hold up the numbers of aircraft FE@R to NATO until an envisaged date of 1984.. When Tornado came on stream in RAFG.. You can argue as much as you like that, but I have copies of the official RAF documents on the matter, photographed from Kew, I might know a tad more.

 

[JFC Fuller]

You can argue as much as you like that, but I have copies of the official RAF documents on the matter, photographed from Kew, I might know a tad more.

So give us the reference numbers for the documents so we can check them out ourselves, or if you have photos upload them as JPEGs or PDFs, then we can make our own determinations, but stating simply that "I might know a tad more" does not sit well.


1984 as a provisional out of service date on the assumption of a new aircraft entering service is not at all unreasonable and in no way suggests the Jaguar was a stop gap. Indeed in 1969 that would give a 15 year service life which by RAF estimations of the day was pretty reasonable, in fact about the same as the first generation RAF Harriers. Displacing aircraft from one part of the RAF and consolidating them in a smaller number of squadrons was not uncommon in the 80s, in fact it was done to Buccaneer (from 5 to 2 squadrons) and Phantom (7 to 4) as well as the Jaguar (8 to 3), and those aircraft then became the ones to be replaced by what became Typhoon. The Buccaneer was also displaced from RAF Germany by Tornado, whilst the Phantom would have been displaced from UK Air Defence duties had it not been for the decision to increase the UK AD squadrons from 7 to 9 by retaining 2 Phantom squadrons in Britain in addition to the 2 in Germany. Indeed the same thing had been done to the Lightning in the 70s when it went from 9 to 2.

 

[Alber Ratman]

AIR 20-12229 Jaguar papers Air Historical Branch part 1

Document is AF/S 212/8 The Jaguar Force. Dated late June 1970. This document was drafted while the decision to add PTR facility to the Adour to allow single engine landings possible was still under discussion with the customers and SEPECAT/RRTM.

I won't post the images as they need the resolution taking down.. however the last section of this document reads as follows..word for word.

Conclusions

25. It is concluded that the front line is seriously short of close support aircraft. The formation of 4 more Jaguar squadrons would do much to relieve this shortage. The current planned force of 5 Jaguar squadrons could be increased to 9 squadrons through switching the major part of the planned order for Jaguar trainers to the operational version.

26. The current plan to use the jaguar in the flying training organisation is not the most cost effective method of undertaking fast jet training. The aircraft is unnecessarily expensive and sophisticated in relation to the training requirement. It would be more economical to introduce a new jet trainer to take the place of the Jaguar trainer for fast jet training, extending Gnats and Hunters until the new trainer is available. This would enable the Jaguar order to be altered to 24 “B” and 176 ‘S’ version aircraft, which would enable a front line of 108 aircraft to be supported.

27. The cost of this proposal has been assessed as a net variation of an additional £12.3M against present plans,

Recommendations

28. It is recommended that the board should approve the addition of 4 x 12 UE Jaguar Squadrons to the front line, for which provision has already been made in the 1970 long-term costs as an alternate assumption.

29. The board is recommended to agree the introduction of a new jet trainer in place of the Jaguar for fast jet training

30. It is finally recommended that the board should approve the reduction of the original requirement for 226 Jaguars to 200, which is the total recognised as the UK requirement in the Anglo French agreement, and agree that the mix should be revised to 24 ‘B’ and 176 ‘S’ version aircraft.

Of course the mix was later revised to 165 ‘S’ and 38 ‘B’ and the 9 mentioned Squadrons were in reality, cut down to 8. (2(AC), 6, 14(F), 17(F), 20, 31, 41(F) and 54(F)).

Lots of the ex Germany aircraft went into storage on the stand up of the designate Tornado units, and became maintenance-training airframes (although the life used on them was way under the finite fatigue of the frames, some as low as 1500 hrs) long before the type was retired in 2007 (most, even before the Jag GR1B/96/97 programmes were envisaged). Stop gap might have been the wrong term to use, but not far off the truth, however wastage due to losses of airframes in the early years was very high, due to the low level operational training environments the aircraft was used in and it’s unforgiving nature to mistakes.. A famous aviation artist who flew the Jag in the BFG days, recently told me his photo collection from Bruggen in the air to air shots was very small, he was too busy keeping himself alive.

 

[Alber Ratman]

Alber Ratman,


Thank you for that, that largely confirms the story as we know it. Once the decision was taken for the Phantom (originally acquired to replace the Hunter FGA.9/FR.10) to replace the Lightning in the AD role (instead of using AFVG for that) there was a gap in the ground-attack role, fortuitously the Jaguar had evolved into a heavy aircraft well suited to the role and so it was adopted to replace the now diverted Phantoms. One suspects that the shortfall in aircraft that emerges later in the decade was brought about in part by the failure of the AFVG programme (which in its dying months had become a strike aircraft for the UK) as well as a general recognition that the UK needed more ground-attack/strike aircraft (interestingly planned AD squadron numbers fall from 12 to 9 in total through the 60s whilst the planned strike/recce fleet goes from 18 to 24/23 squadrons).


The Jaguar seems to have emerged as a happy accident for the RAF, but I think that is as close as we can actually get to calling it a "stop-gap", it certainly became one of the most important RAF types in the second part of the Cold War and enjoyed a long and illustrious career- as well as achieving some exports; all round it was a pretty successful type.

Exports, it would certainly have achieved more if Dassault hadn't been allowed to buy out Breguet. Jaguar was never their baby and we all know what happened. Shame the big wing Jaguar was never built, but the afterburning Adour never really was allowed to develop as it should have been for the Jaguar in RAF service, especially the 106, handicapped by its 104 core components. Remember, all the post Grandby upgrades planned in 92 were canned due to lack of cash, until the UOR for the GR1Bs was rushed out and it proved its worth in 95. The upgrades for 96/97 were also done on the cheap as SEMs, avoiding BAE as much as possible, although 106 upgrades did require airframe changes that BAE had to be involved in. Happy accident? Maybe, but as it was designed to be a trainer with some close air support capablitity, some accident. However it showed BAC the way to design a rugged and maintainable aeroplane, ideas taken on in Tornado in some respects, even thought that beast is completely different. The Jaguar being available allowed the Phantoms to be re roled to AD, depends on ones take on the matter.

The Kew files make a very interesting read on the project, I'm really looking forward to next week, when I can get my hands on some of the early files, especially the early research and development documents..

 

[northerndancer2000]

the aircraft did have some vices that wouldn't forgive if you made a mistake. The aircraft would suffer massive trim changes on changes of power setting and with application of flaps/air brakes. True, there were systems set up to negate these by the auto stab system, but pilots I know have told me of times were they have had to put in major inputs to negate the effects. This would be true of many high performance FJs. The aircraft might have been better still with the big wing envisaged by BAE in the 70s, but who knows.

I've always been interested in the Jaguar M. It was a handsome plane and the land-based Jaguars seemed to have been well-loved and successful. The reason typically given for the French Marine nationale declining the Jaguar M was its supposed poor single-engine-out handling and throttle response when landing. To some extent, many of the English-language sources on the Jaguar wondered if these were just excuses for Dassault to open the way to the all-French Super Etandard (esp. considering that the single-engine-out handling of the Super Etandard was going to be a glider). I believe that the throttle response issues were also present with the land-based prototypes and that these issues were corrected before introduction to service.


Given your comments about the Jaguar's massive trim changes, could there have been some validity to the French Marine national's complaints about the Jaguar's suitability as a carrier aircraft?

 

[Alber Ratman]

I can answer your questions about the M as well. Two carrier trials were conducted on the Clemenceau in 1970 and 1971, before PTR modifications were developed and installed to M05, It is totally biased to write that the Entenards engine out landing capability was a negative to that of the Jaguar with two engines when at that time it was impossible to land a Jag on one! SEPECAT were looking to try PTR engines on M05 or reduce drag on the airframe. There was also discussion of changing the wing planform with increased span and thicker chord.. The aircraft in its orignial form just wasn't suitable for carrier operations as it didn't meet the basic USN specifications for carrier landings the French used and certainly the throttle lag was a factor, the Adours just couldn't power up fast enough for overshoots. The French Navy had also found that the angle of the Adours reheat exhaust was damaging the deck and the catapult of the Clemenceau, and more expensive solutions would be required if the aircraft was to have to land with burners on too. The Navy were very anti PTR in the beginning as one could well understand. The aircraft was being modified to M1 standard when the French Government cancelled the order, not doubts with Dassaults lobbying.. But they didn't have to lobby very hard as the Jag just wasn't going to be a brilliant carrier bourne aircraft. M05 was then modified back towards its orignial land based flap settings and prepared for the spining trials in place of A04 for the single seater tests. Video of M05 spinning is found at the beinging of this episode of Test Pilot shown on the BBC in 1986.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycJ1m0PRYEM

Cockpit shots are from the E02 two seater trials, it was even more evil than M05 in the spin.. That is not fuel coming out of M05, but smoke from a generator in the engine exhaust to display the spin pattern to the cameras below..

You are right about the land based prototypes having problems with throttle control. The first trial assesment of E01 made it pretty clear that they were unacceptable for service use, both with the original throttle box detents and the engine mechanical cam box later on. Low speed RPM surges were also a problem later on, solved by a sub idle fuel control unit if I am correct. There is a file on Adour development problems at Kew and it's one I intend to get this week. It will propably mention reheat buzz from co planer burners and associated surges, reheat lighting issues, coking of the combustion chambers, the failure of HP compressor drums (that led to S06's demise) and other tribulations.. This is not slagging off the Adour, but it was only the second turbofan that RR had bolted a burner unit onto after the Spey 22R and a lot of the problems in development seem to have been very similar..

 

[Alber Ratman]

I totally concur bar the stiffness.. Wouldn't mind seeing them through. I would suspect that the wing stiffness wasn't an issue in reality.. Laterial control and trim changes were more down to the reaction of the aircraft to flap/slat extension and ineffective spoiler controls. The aircraft had been modified to have a greater inboard flap extension (45 degrees) and less on the outers (23) after the first land based carrier style approach tests. The French did also look to Corsairs and Skyhawks before the Super Etendard was selected. The land based varients never totally got rid of the trim change problems in service, even with autostab compensation in pitch. Different configs and speeds would produce effects outside the compensation programming range.

 

[northerndancer2000]

These posts are why this site is so good. All too often secondary sources like books and magazine articles are either written for fanboys or as sales pitches. The plane (missile, ship, etc., etc.) is all too often described as the greatest plane (etc.) since the Wright Flyer and its faults glossed over.


Thank you very much.

 

[Hood]

Here is a photo of a model of the Jaguar from Brassey's Annual 1966. It looks like an early version with some differences from the final design.

 

[hesham]

From an old Russian book about Jaguar,


a strange drawings to a single seat and two seat versions.

 

[Jemiba]

It's a drawing of the Breguet 121 ECAP proposal, which was the basis for the
later bi-national Jaguar
(drawing from Aviation Week July 1965)

 

[hesham]

Yes,that's right my dear Jemiba,


I don't know what happen to my memory.

 

[flateric]

https://www.danielsantiques.com/product/important-wind-tunnel-model-of-the-sepecat-jaguar-jet-circa-1960s/

 

[galgot]

J.M Saget performing stalls and spins in the Jaguar M , from 3:20 (before that its in a Mirage III) :

 

[kocovgoce]

J.M Saget performing stalls and spins in the Jaguar M , from 3:20 (before that its in a Mirage III) :

Quite an impressive aircraft is the Jaguar Тhe former Yugoslavia were quite impressed by the jaguar and in 1967 they started a similar project as the Jaguar but this plane was supposed tо be 2 max supersonic bomber fighter equipped with radar .But due to lack of money, they started the project together with PR Romania but both countries did not have the necessary technology and they turned to the French for help.The French from Breguet helped them with build the body of the new Romanian-Yugoslav aircraft but the problem was that this plane did not receive a jaguar-like engine from either the French or the British and because of that YUGO ROMANIAN aicraft got a Viper 632 engine of 17.79 kn

and the aircraft became a subsonic aircraft with the ability to break the sound barrier during dives