If the Ford had to include engine exhaust ducting (funnels) in the island like all the others (except Charles de Gaulle) it too would be larger.

The Ford also moves everything that doesn’t have to be in the island below-decks, where the Nimitz class still had some workspaces and equipment in the island that improving technology has now allowed to be relocated.

Hi All,
them shenanigans again seems to me they got in the way of the TSR2 :love-struck: order from the Ausies that would have partly secured it’s future :confused:
That is not to say the F-111 was not a capable aircraft but as Si says HEY!!!! 😀

Geoff.

Sorry, but that’s not even partly correct.

The TSR2 was eliminated by the RAAF fairly early on in the process… just after the Mirage IVA and the F-4C were dropped.

Here is a link to the actual classified evaluations of all 5 contenders by the RAAF (now declassified), all 101 pages (including cover pages): http://naa12.naa.gov.au/scripts/Imagine.asp?B=1533518&I=1&SE=1

The actual recommendation by the RAAF was for the A-5C Vigilante… the F-111 was second, “the ideal aircraft on performance, ignoring all outside aspects”, and “if considered in isolation should be the logical choice”. Those “outside aspects” were minor things like:

How likely was the aircraft to actually be built (TSR2 scored lowest, F-111 next-lowest, Mirage IV prototypes were flying, A-5 & F-4C were already in production)

How well and how fast could they be built and delivered (TSR2 scored lowest again, Mirage IV next-lowest, F-111 3rd. The A-5 & F-4 could start deliveries almost immediately)

Cost of the aircraft (TSR2 was much the most expensive, F-111 was next-highest, but there was a gap of “tens of millions of dollars” when the entire 24-aircraft buy of TSR2 was supposed to cost Au$122 million)

Political reliability of the producing country (France scored lowest, as they could not be relied on for any military or political aid in the Southwest Pacific. Both the UK and US were considered to be ready to lend military or political aid [this would change in 1968 when EoS was dropped by the UK])

Likelihood of providing nuclear weapons for the chosen aircraft (in the late 1950s and early 1960s Australia was actively seeking nuclear weapons… and had even begun developing the ability to design and make them themselves! France would not provide them, neither would the UK… but the US was still not committing itself either way)

Here is the memo from Sir Robert Menzies explaining his decision in favor of the F-111:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]218409[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]218410[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]218411[/ATTACH]

From what I have read of American analysis on the Lightning, they thought the aircraft performance and handling qualities were in advance of all other contemporary fighters when it was first tested. It did however, have inadequote range, inadequote radar and systems in their eyes.

…..

I have always thought that a single re-heated Avon-type engine powered Lightning could have been a good design. Yes, you would have had less acceleration potential than with a twin engined aircraft, but think of all of that extra space for fuel and better radar/avionics. It would also have been a supersonic design – think of performance somewhere between that of a Hunter and a Lightning. The Lightning also has to package a lot of internal intake ducting, that wastes a lot of internal space. The following generation of aircraft addressed this by placing the intakes away from the fuselage: F15 Eagle, F14 Tomcat, etc.

Its called the F-8 Crusader.

The Crusader’s single reheated J57-12/14 (as fitted in the F-8A/B/C from 1955 on) produced virtually identical thrust as a single reheated Avon mk.302 (10,000 lb dry and 16,900 lb reheated vs 12,690 lb dry and 16,360 lb reheated*), and the J57-20 (as fitted in the F-8D/E & modernizations of earlier versions from 1960) increased that to 10,700 lb dry and 18,000 lb reheated, with the J57-420 (RF-8G from 1965) reaching 11,650 lb dry and 19,600 lb reheated.

SFC was .85 (1.85 reheat) for the Avon 200 & 300 series, and .83-.90 (2.35 reheat)

The Crusader’s single intake duct left plenty of room in the fuselage for fuel tanks, avionics, and for a compact main gear set in the lower fuselage. The wings were fitted with with stores pylons only from the F-8D on… earlier models had only the two fuselage-side weapons stations and a rocket pack carrying 32 2.75-inch folding-fin rockets (which was lowered with the speed brake) could be fitted underneath the fuselage.

The F-8 still reached Mach 1.67 in the F-8C (1.86 for the F-8D & 1.72 for the F-8E), although with a lower acceleration and climb rate than any Lightning. The F-8C and earlier had a combat radius of 370nm, and the F-8D & later increased that to 450nm (ventral rocket pod replaced with fuel tank)

* The Lightning F.1 (1959, Mach 2.1) used the Avon 211, which produced 11,250 lb dry and 14,430 lb reheated… the F.3 and later marks (Mach 2.27) used the Avon mk.302 from 1962 on.

With the Swedish afterburner in the Draken, the Avon 29 mk67 produced 12,690 lb dry and 17,640 lb reheated.

At the time the various nations are making their decision between F-104, F11F-2 Super Tiger, Mirage II, Draken, etc the Spey is still under development, and no one has begun even theoretical planning for a supercharger for it.

Are you sure? The Spey was not exactly just drawing board material in the 1960’s.

The first nation to order the F-104 was Germany. The F-104G was declared the winner of the contest on November 6, 1958, in an announcement made by German Federal Defense Minister Franz Josef Strauss in Bonn.

Canada was the second NATO country to select the F-104G as its next generation combat aircraft, on July 2, 1959.

The Netherlands completed a licensing agreement on April 20, 1960.

On June 20, 1960 Belgium signed a similar agreement.

On March 2, 1962 Italy announced that it too would participate in the Starfighter program. By now the Starfighter was the Free World’s premiere fighter aircraft, and the project became known as the “aircraft deal of the century”. In December of 1960, licensing agreements were concluded with Lockheed for international co-production on a major scale.

According to Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft engine section, design of the RB.163 (civil Spey) began in September 1959, and it was first run on a test stand in December 1960. Flight trials began on 12 October 1961, and approval for installation in the HS Trident airliner was granted by the aeronautics authorities in July 1962.

Design of the RB.168 Mk 101 (military Spey) started in November 1960. First flight of a Spey-powered Buccaneer was on 17 May 1963.

Design of the afterburning Mk 201 Spey was begun in 1964, when the Phantoms were ordered for the RN, and they were flying in a Phantom in 1966.

So you see that it would be a giant leap of faith for any alternative to the F-104 to be specified with the Spey in 1958-60, when the main NATO orders were placed and the international manufacturing agreement was agreed upon.

The Spey would only be available for a theoretical later improved model or for a mid-life modernization program.

The same series of tests that included the PBJ-1H also had a P-51D, a P-38, a P-39, and a P-61.

I suspect it’s just the angle of the photo, but it looks like the island will barely make it under that bridge even though it’s just on a barge!

Try this angle (note that the tug/barge/island will pass to the left of the suspension tower): [ATTACH=CONFIG]218162[/ATTACH]
http://www.flickr.com/photos/qeclasscarriers/9127780366/sizes/c/in/photostream/

Yes, the Mirage III powered by a J79 turbojet and armed with Sidewinders would have been a better jet than the F-104,

I would have been just as happy with a J79-powered Saab Draken derivative as the basic jet for NATO in the early 60’s.

No… the Avon in the Draken was better than the J79 in all but weight.

There was a Mirage III flown with an Avon as well… that is what should have been bought (thrust with afterburner ~5,000 lb greater than the Atar and ~3,000 lb greater than the J79).

Dassault Avon powered Mirage IIIO prototype
Request for Dassault RR Avon Mirage IIIO Pictures drawings
Dassault Mirage IIIA RR Avon powered prototype City of Hobart

flightglobal pdf archive 1961/1961 0228

Obligatory, Working on that premise maybe what was need was a Joint Avionics/Systems program with each service still pursuing it’s own airframe requirements?

That was the ATF/NATF premise… the USAF (YF-22 & YF-23) would prove the avionics system and the USN would build its own airframe to house the avionics suite.

We saw how well that worked… the USN got the F/A-18E/F/G Super Hornet instead.

ANY such split in the F/A-18>F-16>AV-8B replacement program would see the USAF/International version enter production, and the USN & USMC versions canceled.

The USN & USMC simply cannot buy enough airframes to keep the development costs within the “Congressional tolerance zone”.

The F-35B & F-35C have survived ONLY by being inextricably linked to the F-35A, hiding their development costs in… er… rolling their development costs into those of the more-numerous version.