Getting the best mileage from Jaguar program?

red admiral said:
Since this previous thread, then there's been more info on historical Jaguar developments (e.g. in Gibson's Typhoon to Typhoon), or in what I assume we're the source documents used for this. Variants with a single RB.199 (e.g. EAG8662) looked really attractive in terms of performance (roughly double the range, half the take off distance) and cost (similar UPC to basic Jaguar), and feasibility (potentially just rear fuselage change, built on existing jigs)

This feels like a pretty sensible answer to AST.396 (along with AIM-9L/ASRAAM and later HMS for the A2A side) and about 30 years earlier than Typhoon.
Click to expand...
As always, the RB.199 powered Jaguar spin-off gets my vote.
Should've took a lot of 'cake' from Dassault (he-he), and probably from the Americans, Soviets (India?) and Russians from the 1990.
 
red admiral said:
Since this previous thread, then there's been more info on historical Jaguar developments (e.g. in Gibson's Typhoon to Typhoon), or in what I assume we're the source documents used for this. Variants with a single RB.199 (e.g. EAG8662) looked really attractive in terms of performance (roughly double the range, half the take off distance) and cost (similar UPC to basic Jaguar), and feasibility (potentially just rear fuselage change, built on existing jigs)

This feels like a pretty sensible answer to AST.396 (along with AIM-9L/ASRAAM and later HMS for the A2A side) and about 30 years earlier than Typhoon.
Click to expand...
Oh, nice! Especially half the takeoff distance.
 
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
 
Archibald said:
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
Click to expand...
HSA just entered the chat
;)
 
Archibald said:
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
Click to expand...
And of course if your engine bay will take an RB.199 it will also take an EJ200....
 
Archibald said:
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
Click to expand...

What do we know about the RB.172?
 
Originally RB.172 was a new all-RR military turbofan embodying their views on modular design as had been developed in partnership with MTU on the Anglo-German RB.153.

This was about similar power to the RB.153 but developed further.

In order to provide twin engines for the supersonic trainer, RR scaled down this design and it's this scaled version that became the Adour.
 
Archibald said:
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
Click to expand...

Sounds similar to replacing 2xJ85s with 1xF404 in the F-5E/F-20 ......
 
The proposed Honeywell F125IN for India's Jaguars shows that the Garrett TFE1042-70 (aka F125-GA-100) as developed for the F-CK-1 Ching-kuo back in the 1970s might have fit in the engine bays and have provided much improved performance over the Adours.
(The non-afterburning F124 was proposed for the Hawk LIFT/T-45 Goshawk a few times too).
 
Here's an image of the proposed revision of the Jaguar's wings.
FPBpa5J.jpg
 
JudgeKing said:
Here's an image of the proposed revision of the Jaguar's wings.
Click to expand...

Bigger wing would've been a good thing for the Jaguar, the existing wing was pretty small and thin.
Small & thin wing was good if one wants outright speed, but not so much when the good/great payload was the order of the day, and with expected use of impromptu strips in case when WP comes in knocking.
 
Smaller wing also good for low level buffeting which is a mantra that comes back repeatedly.

A much smoother ride for the crew. TSR-2 also had a small wing in the design ethos.
 
Foo Fighter said:
Smaller wing also good for low level buffeting which is a mantra that comes back repeatedly.

A much smoother ride for the crew. TSR-2 also had a small wing in the design ethos.
Click to expand...

TSR-2 have had the blown flaps to help out with taking off with great take-off weights. No such thing on the Jaguar.
 
I am talking about low level flight, not taking off and landing.
 
I'm trying to point out that TSR-2 with small wing worked because it used advanced and very efficient way of improving the lift of the wings at low speeds.
 
Warton redesigned the wing to make it thinner for higher speed because the RAF wanted supersonic performance.
But the Jaguar had decent field performance so it wasn't a big issue. The problem was air combat and insufficient lift, which the increased area wings were designed to offset (plus additional engine thrust).
Getting modified wings could have happened but other priorities came to the fore.
 
Part of Post 40.
red admiral said:
Since this previous thread, then there's been more info on historical Jaguar developments (e.g. in Gibson's Typhoon to Typhoon), or in what I assume we're the source documents used for this. Variants with a single RB.199 (e.g. EAG8662) looked really attractive in terms of performance (roughly double the range, half the take off distance) and cost (similar UPC to basic Jaguar), and feasibility (potentially just rear fuselage change, built on existing jigs)
Click to expand...
To which @tomo pauk replied in post 41 and @Scott Kenny replied in Post 42.
tomo pauk said:
As always, the RB.199 powered Jaguar spin-off gets my vote.
Should've took a lot of 'cake' from Dassault (he-he), and probably from the Americans, Soviets (India?) and Russians from the 1990.
Click to expand...
Scott Kenny said:
Oh, nice! Especially half the take-off distance.
Click to expand...
And elicited this comment from @Archibald in Post 43.
Archibald said:
And engine commonality with the Tornado fleet ! Fun fact: the Jaguar's Adour was a scaled down RB-172, also known as M45 and "AFVG turbofan". A family of engines that indirectly led to the RB.199... how about a Jaguar with a single RB.172 ?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, the advantages of standardisation with the Tornado may have been cancelled out by loosing the standardisation with the RAF's fleet of Hawk trainers which also used the Adour.

Would the RB.199 have solved Jaguar M's problems? If it did could we have seen 70-100 Super Jaguar M/Jaguar M-NG built for the Aeronavale instead of Super Etendard? My guess is that even if it did solve the Jaguar M's problems the French Government wouldn't have bought it because RB.199 wasn't French.

How about fitting French Jaguars with a single M53 engine instead of one RB.199? And if it was feasible, would it have solved Jaguar M's problems? My guess is that it would have been too expensive to buy in the numbers required even if it did solve Jaguar M's problems.
 
Yep, SNECMA being the state-owned jet engine company had a lot of influence on the French government, whatever the issues with its turbojet (Atar and... nothing else). Their tactic to replace the Atar and get into turbofan technology was cooperation... at their own conditions. With Pratt for TF30; with General Electric for the CFM56; with RR for RB.172 a.k.a M45. It was kinda messy.
 
The Jaguar developments were for AST.396 so more like very late 70s / early 80s - quite a bit later than Super Etendard or Jaguar M. Probably the only available funding for producing these would be to cut Tornado production.
 
Jaguar probably should have just been a Mirage F.1 modified with: retain the planned rough strip main wheels capability; modify F.1 wing with an additional underwing hardpoint plus wingtip mounts for missiles or fueltanks; move to fixed, square intakes; fully movable horizontal stabilizer; 30mm ADEN and DEFA options; Blue Fox, Grifo, and Cyrano/Agave options; and an RB.199 or Atar 9k50 afterburning or M53 non-afterburning option. SPJ and countermeasure options. The Euro-F16.
 
Jaguar predates F1 and Hawk though.
Dassault did make a radarless attack F1 variant but it didn't sell that well.
 
More concurrent was the F2 and F3 efforts. Followed by Mirage G etc
 
red admiral said:
The Jaguar developments were for AST.396 so more like very late 70s / early 80s - quite a bit later than Super Etendard or Jaguar M.
Click to expand...
I disagree . . .
  • 14.08.74 first flight of the Tornado with RB.199 engines.
  • 28.08.74 first flight of the Super Etendard (a converted Etendard IVM) with an Atar 9K-50 engine.
    • This was the first of 3 Super Etendard prototypes (all converted Etendard IVMs) which made their first flights on 28.03.75 and 09.03.75 respectively (as No. 3 flew before No. 2).
    • However, prototype No. 3 retained its Atar 8C engine.
  • 22.12.74 first flight of the Mirage F1 with a M53 engine.
  • 24.11.77 first flight of the first production Super Etendard.
  • 28.06.78 first delivery (of production aircraft No. 3) to the MN and the last of 71 built for the MN was delivered in 1983.
11F was the first Aeronavale squadron to convert to the type and did so between September 1978 and June 1979. 14F followed from September 1979 and 17F converted to Super Etendards in 1980. The fixed price contract for 100 Super Etendards (later reduced to 71) was let to Dassault-Breguet on 04.09.73. So the first Super Etendard squadron became operational about 6 years after the letting of the production contract and 5 years after the first flight of the prototype.

The first flights of Mirage F1-M53, Super Etendard and Tornado took place within 4 months of each other. Therefore, I think it's possible to have a Jaguar M powered by a single M53 or RB.199 engine flying by the end of 1974 and in service by the middle of 1979. Maybe it would take a year or two longer due to the M53 and RB.199 being a new engines and the Atar 9K-50 being a development of an existing engine. However, that might help as it would coincide with the end of Jaguar A/E production for the AdA, because according to my copy of the "Observer's Book of Aircraft 1981 Edition" production of the Jaguar A/E was still in progress for the AA with 185 of the 200 aircraft ordered delivered by the beginning of 1981.

It's too late for any of the 202 Jaguars built for the RAF to have either engine as the 37th Jaguar T.2 flew on 02.12.76 and the 165th Jaguar GR.1 flew on 16.12.78. However, the one off Jaguar T.2 ZB615 which flew on 23.09.82 might have had a M53 or RB.199 and probably would have had it if the Jaguars being built for export at the time had a M53 or RB.199.

It's too late for the 12 Jaguar Internationals that were delivered to Ecuador in 1977 or the 12 Jaguar Internationals delivered to Oman in 1977-78 to have either engine. That is unless, they were prepared to wait a few years. However, I think all 160 Jaguar Internationals delivered to India from December 1980 (40 by Sepecat & 120 by HAL) could have been built with either engine and so could the 18 aircraft built for Nigeria and the 12 built for Oman in the 1980s.
 
Last edited:
NOMISYRRUC said:
Therefore, I think it's possible to have a Jaguar M powered by a single M53 or RB.199 engine flying by the end of 1974 and in service by the middle of 1979
Click to expand...
Yes, if the work and decision is made earlier, but the historical early conceptual studies for Jaguar to AST.396 with 1 or 2 RB199 engines are from 1974, so it'd be multiple years for design, build and first prototype flight - hence late 70s / early 80s introduction to service. Can't accelerate it too much as you'd be waiting for one of the first RB199s to turn up to fit in the airframe.

I'm not convinced M53 would fit at all, and definitely not without much greater centre/rear fuselage redesign. Its a lot bigger and heavier than RB199. And it has about 50% higher sfc.

These historical mods with RB199 were to get much higher numbers of
longer range strike aircraft available for the 80s. Its not about making a day fighter like F-16A. That was the follow on lead into EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon which started shortly after but took 30+ years to deliver.
 
Another thread with lots of information.
I think Jaguar was the salvation of BAC.
Cancellation of TSR2 left it with only the Lightning as a combat aircraft.
Evolving the Jaguar from a sort of Euro T38 Talon into a ground attack plane for the RAF solved the Hunter replacement problem and allowed the Phantom to replace some Lightnings.
But Jaguar also served as a precursor to Tornado in RAF Germany replacing obsolete Canberras and Hunters.
When Tornado arrived in the 80s finally giving the RAF some of capabilities of TSR2, Jaguar continued to serve with three UK based squadrons in very much the roles of P1154.
In an ideal world the sort of mods described here could have been incorporated. But in the 80s it looked as if Eurofighter would take over from the Jaguar in the early 90s
 
NOMISYRRUC said:
Unfortunately, the advantages of standardisation with the Tornado may have been cancelled out by loosing the standardisation with the RAF's fleet of Hawk trainers which also used the Adour.
Click to expand...
Valid point.

But given the advantages to aircraft performance with a single RB199, I suspect that the lower standardization would be acceptable.
 
red admiral said:
Yes, if the work and decision is made earlier, but the historical early conceptual studies for Jaguar to AST.396 with 1 or 2 RB199 engines are from 1974, so it'd be multiple years for design, build and first prototype flight - hence late 70s / early 80s introduction to service. Can't accelerate it too much as you'd be waiting for one of the first RB199s to turn up to fit in the airframe.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Although I think RB.199 engines for the prototypes won't be a problem as ITOL 2 Tornado prototypes were flying by the end of 1974, which increased to 6 by the end of 1975, 8 by the end of 1976 and 12 were flying by January 1978.
red admiral said:
I'm not convinced M53 would fit at all, and definitely not without much greater centre/rear fuselage redesign. Its a lot bigger and heavier than RB199. And it has about 50% higher sfc.
Click to expand...
Maybe (apart from the extra cost) that's why it wasn't done IOTL. Though the Indian Air Force might have bought Jaguars with M53 engines (if it had been feasible) to standardise with their Mirage 2000s.
red admiral said:
These historical mods with RB199 were to get much higher numbers of longer range strike aircraft available for the 80s. Its not about making a day fighter like F-16A. That was the follow on lead into EFA/Eurofighter/Typhoon which started shortly after but took 30+ years to deliver.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
 
Archibald said:
Yep, SNECMA being the state-owned jet engine company had a lot of influence on the French government, whatever the issues with its turbojet (Atar and... nothing else). Their tactic to replace the Atar and get into turbofan technology was cooperation... at their own conditions. With Pratt for TF30; with General Electric for the CFM56; with RR for RB.172 a.k.a M45. It was kinda messy.
Click to expand...
After I wrote Post 60 I remembered that the Atlantique & Transall used Tyne engines and the Br.120 (Breguet's rival to Mirage G for the DAFNE requirement) was to have had a pair of Speys. Going back further Dassault had a licence on the AS Viper and Hispano-Suiza had licences on the RR Nene & Tay. Finally, as others have written up-thread the RT.172 Adour that the OTL Jaguars used was a joint project between Rolls Royce and Turbomeca (hence the RT designation) which began as the all-Rolls Royce RB.172.

Therefore, the idea of French Jaguars with RB.199 engines (built by RR & Turbomeca designated RT.199) may not be that far fetched.
 
For RB.199 - the earliest design studies of Jags with RB.199 date to circa 1971-72.
Against RB.199 - RR did everything they could to deny Turbomeca access to RB.199 technology, they were even worried that the RTM.322 could lead to a leakage of technical secrets.

I've seen Jags with General Electric YJ101 and Pratt & Whitney F100 - albeit not Jags as we know them, but heavily modified around the back end.

NOMISYRRUC said:
Is that the wing that was being fitted to the Jaguar M-05 prototype when Jaguar M was cancelled?
Click to expand...
No that is BAe's 'Big Wing' proposal.
 
Why was the Adour selected for the Jaguar in the first place? Why didn't they use a single Spey engine built jointly by Rolls Royce and Turbomeca?
 
Hood said:
For RB.199 - the earliest design studies of Jags with RB.199 date to circa 1971-72.
Against RB.199 - RR did everything they could to deny Turbomeca access to RB.199 technology, they were even worried that the RTM.322 could lead to a leakage of technical secrets.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

Though the "against" puts paid to the suggestion I planned to make that getting "RT.199" onto Jaguar PDQ would lead to Turbomeca pitching the engine as an alternative to M53 for the Avion de Combat Futur, "Deal of the Century" Mirage F-1, Mirage 2000 and Mirage 4000.

E.g. reversing what I wrote earlier in the thread, if India bought Jaguar Internationals with RT.199s ITTL they might want their Mirage 2000s to have it too in the interests of standardisation.
 
NOMISYRRUC said:
Why was the Adour selected for the Jaguar in the first place? Why didn't they use a single Spey engine built jointly by Rolls Royce and Turbomeca?
Click to expand...
The Adour was the marrying of the RB.172-45R and the Turbomeca T-260 Tourmalet.

Most of the French ECAT designs had RB.172 or Tourmalet and it best fitted that airframe size and thrust requirements. UK designs to AST.362 mostly had RB.153 (scaled down Spey).
But even if you selected P.45 instead of Br.121 that would make the engine more French and a Spey even more unlikely because all the leads and workloads evened up so that each nation led one aircraft and one engine.
ECAT - Breguet leads, BAC partner
Adour - Rolls-Royce leads, Turbomeca partner
AVFG - BAC leads, Dassault partner
M45 - SNECMA leads, Bristol Siddeley partner

Now if you reversed that:
ECAT - BAC leads (P.45 VG), Breguet partner
ECAT engine - Turbomeca leads, Rolls-Royce partner - would need to define a new RB.153-class turbofan, or a hybrid but not sure Turbomeca has anything with enough grunt to put on the front end or back end. Might be better with a SNECMA-RR partnership?
AVFG - Dassault leads (Mirage G), BAC partner
AVFG engine - Bristol Siddeley, SNECMA partner - this would alter the M45 programme somewhat, perhaps M45 parts married with Olympus or BS.100 fan?
 
NOMISYRRUC said:
Why was the Adour selected for the Jaguar in the first place? Why didn't they use a single Spey engine built jointly by Rolls Royce and Turbomeca?
Click to expand...

Bargaining chips, basically. Between France and Great Britain, that day of May 1965. AFVG & ECAT were kinda of mirrored (from memory).

Remember Concorde, where every single bit of SST was though-bargained, 50-50 between the two partners ? AFVG-ECAT was similar, except squared since there were two aircraft. Sweet geez.

It was a complicated dance between BAC, Dassault, Breguet (airframe) Turbomeca, SNECMA and Rolls Royce (engines). Frack me, I can't even remember how were the two cakes sliced up.
From memory
AFVG: BAC leadership on the airframe, Dassault minor / RR leadership on the engines, SNECMA minor
ECAT: Breguet leadership on airframe (the 121) / Turbomeca leadership on the Adour, RR minor

Turbomeca had a previous experience with turbojets: the Gabizo from the previous decade. Just like Dassault taking a Viper licence, these smallish turbojets were for SNCASO Trident first, then a whole bunch of LWF, NATO or not: Breguet TAON, Dassault Etendard. The Gabizo however was a miserable failure. Turbomeca usually had a King Midas touch, but on this one they blundered.

Well, silly me, @Hood ninja'd me.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom