That or maybe the F-7 with the F2Y getting a different designation.What would the Skylancer's new designation be after 1962, F-6B?
Would that not be the F-7D with the D standing for Douglas if i am correct.That or maybe the F-7 with the F2Y getting a different designation.What would the Skylancer's new designation be after 1962, F-6B?
Some good options there. As far as timeline, right now, they're trying to get a feel for what is flying right now and what may be coming. So this is more an exploratory specification than the final request. The RAAF made the fighter specification intentionally easy to meet to ensure the greatest possible number of entrants so they could choose the best one for Australia
post 1962 the constructor letter disapearedWould that not be the F-7D with the D standing for Douglas if i am correct.That or maybe the F-7 with the F2Y getting a different designation.What would the Skylancer's new designation be after 1962, F-6B?
So one aircraft that never entered service might mess up the entire designations as we know it.Essentially correct, but drop the hyphen from the old US Navy designations
- Vought F8U Crusader, new designation F-8
- Douglas F4D Skyray, new designation F-6
Subtype in the old system F8U-2 became F-8C in the new system.
To complicate things:
- F8U-2N became F-8D
- F8U-2NE became F-8E
- F8U-1D became DF-8A
Good list, so many choices to pick from.List of Offered Aircraft
Fighter Specification
United Kingdom
English Electric Lightning
Hawker P.1121
Saunders-Roe SR.177
France
Dassault Mirage IIIO
Sweden
Saab 35 Draken
United States
Republic F-105 Thunderchief
F-104 Starfighter
Vought F8U-1
Vought F8U-2
Vought F8U-3
McDonnell F4H-1 Phantom II
Convair F-106 Delta Dart
Grumman F11F-2
Bomber Specification
United Kingdom
TSR-2
Avro Vulcan
France
Dassault Mirage IV
United States
Republic F-105 Thunderchief
Convair B-58 Hustler
North American A3J Vigilante
Boeing Unnamed tactical bomber proposal (OTL F-111 proposal)
General Dynamics Unnamed tactical bomber proposal (OTL F-111 Aardvark)
Boeing B-47 Stratojet
McDonnell F4H-1 Phantom II
Vought F8U-3
Right now, Australia is worried about the equipment that Indonesia is getting as there is a very real possibility that they may end up clashing with them over their portion of New Guinea or Borneo. They're confident that they would still win because of better training, but why push it if you don't have to? It's essentially the OTL attitude kicked up one or two notches in response to earlier Indonesian upgrades and seeing that they are at least competent in the air given their recent success against the rebels. So in that vein, at the moment, they're keeping all their options on the table. That won't really change unless Indonesia does something that moves them from minimally competent threat to oh holy shit territory.The bad guys (Indonesia?) are at worst only going to get Mig 21s and Tu16s with perhaps a handful of Tu22 Blinders in the late 60s.
Australian Mirage IIIs and F105 Thunderchiefs would be my mix plus A4s for Melbourne (F8 Crusaders would be nice but you need a Centaur/Essex for them).
No paper Brit stuff could arrive much before 1968 so V Bombers are the only UK candidates and Aussie gets them free with nuclear weapons at Singapore until 1970 anyway.
Australia very nearly went nuclear in OTL. It was only some very fancy diplomatic footwork that kept them from building a bomb. And even today they are considered a nuclear capable state that could build a bomb in very short order should the need arise. It wouldn't take much of a push for them to go full nuclear in an ATLA J75 combo of F-106s and twin seat F-105s would be equally odd and fun to see.
I do wonder about the alternative actions Australia could take... Could they, should they, go full nuclear with bombs and energy? Eisenhower with his Atoms for Peace plan had nuclear desalination front and center, it could certainly help with some water woes. Depending on how dicey things get with Indonesia, ‘White Australia’ may end at a later date?
And even today they are considered a nuclear capable state that could build a bomb in very short order should the need arise. It wouldn't take much of a push for them to go full nuclear in an ATL
Yes. They had HIFAR from 1958 until it was replaced by OPAL in 2006. When HIFAR went critical in January, 1958 it used highly enriched uranium. So they had the capability to domestically produce nuclear weapons should they need to. Though their preferred option was to acquire either British or American weapons under a dual key system (at least i assume they would be operated under dual key, it's possible they just wanted to buy them outright).Does Australia , have Nuclear power station? If not how would the obtain the fissile material in short order? I know they Australian does have natural reserves of uranium, do they have the resources to refine it?
Some of the offerings are, as you've noted, little more than desperation heaves by their manufacturers to keep their programs alive. Some are just to get Australia thinking about them for future requirements. This will all play a part in how and what is purchased. Even the development programs though have value to them as it would give Australia a domestically produced aircraft that boosts their industry, keeps money at home and gives them the opportunity to market it internationally. Will that offset the development costs and delayed ISD? Stay tunedOn aircraft options. UK.
F.177 would only be an option if the UK funded it to production. That has implications for the Lightning.
This would be well into service by mid 60's for both RN and RAF.
Similar with P1121, it would need at least prototype flight, implying HSA fund that or persuade UK government to. ISD ought to be ahead of mid 60's depending on variant chosen.
TSR.2, needs funding to service for the RAF first. ISD is likely in austere form before '68, but full capability could suffer delays.
25 slots of Victor production was available. Efforts to sell that included South Africa.
25 slots of Victor production was available. Efforts to sell that included South Africa.
Australia very nearly went nuclear in OTL. It was only some very fancy diplomatic footwork that kept them from building a bomb. And even today they are considered a nuclear capable state that could build a bomb in very short order should the need arise. It wouldn't take much of a push for them to go full nuclear in an ATL
Some of the offerings are, as you've noted, little more than desperation heaves by their manufacturers to keep their programs alive. Some are just to get Australia thinking about them for future requirements. This will all play a part in how and what is purchased. Even the development programs though have value to them as it would give Australia a domestically produced aircraft that boosts their industry, keeps money at home and gives them the opportunity to market it internationally. Will that offset the development costs and delayed ISD? Stay tunedOn aircraft options. UK.
F.177 would only be an option if the UK funded it to production. That has implications for the Lightning.
This would be well into service by mid 60's for both RN and RAF.
Similar with P1121, it would need at least prototype flight, implying HSA fund that or persuade UK government to. ISD ought to be ahead of mid 60's depending on variant chosen.
TSR.2, needs funding to service for the RAF first. ISD is likely in austere form before '68, but full capability could suffer delays.
25 slots of Victor production was available. Efforts to sell that included South Africa.
Well, that sword cuts both ways.There is one constant across combat aircraft history... "if the aircraft manufacturer own country air force don't buy it, foreign countries won't buy it either"
Mirage 4000 & Northrop F-20 are two startling examples of this. Top aircraft, but their own country don't buy them, and then... they die. And there are countless other examples like this - Grumman Super Tiger, for a start. Hawker P.1081 - for Australia.
Hawker P.1121 won't break that rule, unfortunately. SR.177 even less.
*Inspects fingernails and whistles innocently*Was just looking at the Starfighter page on Wiki. First USAF squadron about to stand up (late Feb 58), grounded 3 months later because of engine and gun issues. And we have later the USAF airframe order cut from around 700 to around 100.
This timeline has the potential to be very cruel to the Starfighter.
*Inspects fingernails and whistles innocently*Was just looking at the Starfighter page on Wiki. First USAF squadron about to stand up (late Feb 58), grounded 3 months later because of engine and gun issues. And we have later the USAF airframe order cut from around 700 to around 100.
This timeline has the potential to be very cruel to the Starfighter.
I gotta admit, the Starfighter does look good in that liveryWhile you're all cheering Jacinta there are some Starfighters to look at
GTX wrote thatIf you thought the bombing koalas were frightening sit down and read this
but meanwhile in the real world Jacinta just got re elected
Woops! genius on my part. But links were all ones I liked which was why I posted them. Canada, Australia and New Zealand feature prominently in the best alternate history stuff and artwork.GTX wrote thatIf you thought the bombing koalas were frightening sit down and read this
but meanwhile in the real world Jacinta just got re elected
Thanks for the link, like the pics.If you thought the bombing koalas were frightening sit down and read this
but meanwhile in the real world Jacinta just got re elected