So……….. inspired by the discussion of CV01 vs. CVV

FANTASY FLEET 1960s

[Aside: since this Fantasy revisionist history this fleet is funded by a combination of handwaving, not wasting money on cancelled programmes, signing fixed price contracts and not meddling with them and social and economic policy not wasting money either]

5 Fleet Carriers CVA01 – Queen Elizabeth, Duke of Edinburgh, Prince of Wales, Princess Royal, Empress of India

Hmmm… the RN was only really planning on 3, to replace Victorious, Eagle, & Ark Royal. Maybe you could get a 4th to replace Hermes, but I can’t see any way to 5 (they were not planning a replacement for Centaur).

F/A14 for Strike AND Air Superiority with Active Skyflash
(RAF opts for the same)
(RR develops a better turbofan which USN adopts and avoids F14 losses and aviator deaths)
(due to size of F/A14 and increased commonality with USN the FAA decides to deck park more F/A14s)

The TF41* should do nicely… it would slot neatly into the TF30’s space**, and it produced 15,000 lb thrust (non-afterburning), while the TF30s used in the F-14 only produced 12,350 lb non-ab thrust.

With a comparable afterburner, the TF41 would max out at ~25,000-25,500 lb in afterburner, compared to 20,900 for the TF30.

Of course, there was a more powerful TF30 (the F-111F had a 15,000 lb (25,100 lb) version from 1972), but the USN didn’t put those in the F-14, and it would likely still have had compressor stall issues.

* improved Spey for the A-7D/E Corsair II, jointly built by Allison (US) & Rolls-Royce (UK)

** the J79>Spey conversion for the F-4 was a nightmare because the base diameter for the J79 was 31.6″ and that of the Spey was 37.5″, not to mention the need to increase the intakes for the increase in air-mass-flow from 170 lb/sec to 210 lb/sec.

The TF41 diameter was smaller than the TF30… 37.5″ vs 42.06″, and the air-mass-flow was nearly identical. TF41 core length was 102.6″ vs 125″ for TF30.

This thread on his passing is now on page 10 here…

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=100330

Sea + Fury = FJ-4

:p

Now where’d I put that jacket….
😀

Actually, the wariness vs France is quite understandable, considering the rising of numerous Fascist groups in France in the 1920s & 30s.

Google:
Action Francaise
Jeunesses Patriotes
Faisceau
Cagoulards
Croix de Feu
Parti Populare Francais

Add in the fact that the Cartel des gauches {French for Left-wing Coalition} (the governmental alliance between the Radical-Socialist Party and the socialist French Section of the Workers’ International (SFIO)) twice won general elections (in 1924 and in 1932) placing France under the control of a potentially hostile, borderline communist government.

Thus, the constitutional monarchy of the UK saw France as a definite possible opponent, if either extremist faction became firmly in control of the country.

hindenberg, your link gets me this:

Invalid Attachment specified. If you followed a valid link, please notify the administrator

2008 presentation where… Fanboy Magazine?

The C-17 is significantly smaller than either the C-5 or the An-124.

There are some loads that only one of those two aircraft can move… this is why there is discussion of these aircraft.

And MadRat… what are the airfield requirements of a loaded An-225 compared to that of either the An-124 or C-5?

A couple of years back I read they were lengthening it forward (not here, in a news article), but of course I can’t find it now, having taken a half-hour to search the net.

So either they are, and no one is talking about it any more, or that was an incorrect report.

I don’t know which… but it would be a logical thing to do, and not as hard as some people would make it out to be.