Mid '80s British Super Carriers

[Lawman]

Following the skin-of-the-teeth victory in the Falklands, Britain decides that its mini carriers of the Invincible class simply aren't big enough. They decide to join with the French carrier effort, though with much more urgency, and settle on dusting off the old PA58 design, combined with a mini Kitty Hawk. The result is a conventional carrier, using gas turbines, coupled to a steam generator to run the catapults. The ship is, in effect, a modern equivalent of the converted Midway class carriers, being around 60,000 tons, and yet a crew of only 1300 ships company, and 700 aircrew. This is seen as a stretch for the UK, but necessary in light of the Invincible's shortcomings. The French are happy to go ahead and buy one of the ships, though very heavily re-equipped with French systems.

Possible engines for the carrier would be up to eight RR Olympus, which should deliver around 200,000 shp total, or possibly a smaller number of larger engines - perhaps a navalised RB-211?

The UK, lacking a suitable carrier fighter, other than the existing F-4 Phantom, and worried about the abilities of the still troubled Tornado ADV, the UK adopts a mixed approach. Firstly, the UK agrees to buy a batch of F/A-18 Hornets, and secondly upgrades its existing Phantoms, even getting some more ex-USN F-4Js. With the Tornado, the decision is made to temporarily scrap plans for the ADV, instead planning to stretch the existing IDS model's fuselage to take Skyflash missiles, and a multi-mode radar. The result is a genuine MRCA, as had originally been intended for the Tornado project. A fleet of Hornets and Tornados develops, with Hornets replacing Phantoms and Jaguars in the fighter and close support roles.

The UK ends up with two large carriers, and two smaller carriers of the Invincible class, after selling one of the Invincible class to Australia. The carrier ends up operating two Phantom squadrons and one Hornet squadron initially, transitioning to two Hornet, one Phantom, and finally three Hornet squadrons.

With the end of the Cold War, the Conservative government in the UK decides to focus on expeditionary forces, boosting Navy funding for carrier operations, and boosting Army rapid reaction force funding. The Army is encouraged to switch units over to Light Infantry and Airborne, and the Royal Marines is enlarged. The UK ends up with an entire Airborne division, and a Marine division, along with infantry and some armour. Instead of ending up with emaciated forces, the UK ends up with a number of very potent units, based in part on the experiences of the Falklands.  

[GTX]

Interesting - I was only thinking about a RN F/A-18 earlier this week.

Regards,

Greg

[Lawman]

In addition to the pair of new carriers being built, the UK decides the time has come for the UK to replace its bomber fleet, after the Vulcan's last gasp in the Falklands. As a result, the UK persuades Reagan to allow the UK to buy into the B-1B Lancer program, with the UK getting 20 aircraft in total, enough to have two full strength squadrons of 8 aircraft each, with four spares for testing or attrition.

These enter service in the late '80s, in time for service in the Gulf War, operating on strikes deep into Iraqi territory, and providing devastating fire support to British forces. With Britain's B-1Bs not being affected by the START treaty, they have the external hardpoints as well, which boosts their weapons capacity massively. They routinely carry a full bomb load internally, along with ALARM, ASRAAM and even AMRAAM missiles, allowing them to fight their way out of pretty much anything in an emergency.


For the Royal Navy, the fleet is improved with new surface combattants. Instead of the new Type 23 ASW frigates, the UK realises from its Falklands experience that all the new ships need the full range of capabilities. As such, the systems from the Type 23's design are superimposed on a new destroyer design. The new ship is increased in size, to 7000 tons, with advanced sonar, and a new VLS, based loosely on the American Mk41. The new ship is designed as a replacement for both frigates and destroyers, and is designed to be sufficienty modular to allow major upgrades, as new equipment becomes available. An initial batch of eight is ordered in 1988, and despite the end of the Cold war, the Conservative government orders a second batch of eight in 1992, to a slightly different spec. These ships initially replace older frigates, and supplement the Type 42 destroyers, since they have better systems, and a new VL-Sea Dart missile. The new ships prove a massive success, having more than enough firepower for their tasks, with a new twin 4.5in gun, based on a simplified (and doubled) Mk8, cross-bred with the older twin Mk6. They also have no fewer than 64 VLS cells on the bow, with space left for between 32 and 64 more cells amidships, filled with a mix of vertical launch Sea Dart, Sea Wolf, and a new cruise missile!

The Invincible class ships are modified to serve as ASW carriers, with secondary duties as commando carriers. In addition, a pair of new vessels are ordered, HMS Ocean, and HMS Bulwark (i.e. the real-world HMS Ocean, but with a sister ship). The resulting fleet consists of two large carriers with Hornets, two smaller carriers with Harriers for close support work, and two commando carriers with Marine helos. The Invincible class are used for secondary missions, where the large carriers aren't needed. Without the urgency for a Sea Harrier improvement (with Hornets on the way for the fighter role), the RN joins the RAF's Harrier II program. The new aircraft enter service in the '90s, but with the radar from the AV-8B+, i.e. the very same APG-65 of the Hornet. As a result, the UK has Hornets and Harriers both using the very same radar, and when the stretched Tornados (GR-1s stretched to the same length as the F-3s would have been, with more fuel etc), they needed a multi-mode radar, and surprise surprise, the APG-65 is selected! With three different types all in service, all using the same radar, the UK has more than enough reason to design a suitable replacement radar! The research that went into the Blue Vixen is thus recycled, providing a line of advanced radars, cooperatively with the US. All the radars are upgraded to APG-73 standard in the '90s, but with British avionics filling in the rear end.

The Eurofighter project is kept on track through the '90s, with the RAF and Royal Navy needing new fighters, to replace their Hornets. Since the Hornets only entered service in the late '80s and into the late '90s, they are not as desperately in need of replacement. The resulting Typhoon enters service in both air force and naval variants, starting in 2004, maintaining the pattern of using the same radar as the rest of the fleet. Even the B-1B Lancers are upgraded to use a more powerful variant of the APG-73 radar, befitting their abilities.

For the Army, despite downsizing, things are generally good, with more investment in airborne, infantry and mechanized units. The offending SA80 rifle is rapidly sidelined, with a Diemaco-built version of the AR-18, using M16 style components, but with the much more reliable gas piston of the AR-18. The Army adopts a concept of operations similar to the US Marines, with a spearhead unit of Paras or Marine Commandos, supplemented by a couple of infantry battalions, and a tank unit.  

[Zen]

B1-B lancer? No money.

Mk41? No money.
BTW seems in 1972 there was a examination of a scaled up SeaWolf for a new meduim range SAM.

IMO need VLS Sea Eagle, Submarine launched SeaEagle, and Golden Eagle preferably VLS.

Err why drop Blue Vixen?

SA80 should've had a very different history and had it had, most of its problems would've been fixed before mass production. Nothing is wrong with the basic rifle as a concept.

I rather think this scenario is a bit fancyful.

[Lawman]

It may be a bit far fetched, but so are most of the 'what ifs' on this forum, and simply rejecting this one because its expensive is a little condemnatory. All of the purchases were doable, despite the economic problems of the day, and if the government had decided they were necessary, could have been done. My scenario is far less far fetched than the suggestions of P1154s or other types mentioned on this forum. My suggestions were simply to cancel the expensive Tornado fighter program, and replace it with an off the shelf Hornet purchase, and allow the RN to get a pair of medium sized conventional carriers. None of this is greatly far fetched, and indeed getting a small batch of Lancers wouldn't have broken the bank either.

As for the SA80, as someone who has used it, among other types, I disagree with your assessment; it would have been far better to simply adopt either the FN FNC (5.56mm mini-SLR) or AR18 (as had been built in the UK by Sterling). The key to the SA80s success was always the SUSAT sight, which was capable of being fitted to pretty much any modern assault rifle, and the Swedes even use it on thei own AK5s (FNCs).  

[Zen]

Why can't people grasp the concept that it's better to design and build your own aircraft?

I don't know Wookster, but you and I must be voices in the wilderness so it seems.
All I can say is your not alone.

Lawman, Tornado is a low level strike/attack machine par excellance, F/A Hornet is a mutirole fighter for the USN, and its noware near as focused on the low level mission.

Lancer...no not by the 1980's it was just not affordable.

The economic side is complex. But the heart of it is over reach in the size and ambition of the machines desired. CVA-01, TSR.2, P1154 where too much, too fast, too far.
Two of them where at the wrong time and the wrong place to survive.
The last P1154 was flawed.

My quest has been to understand that sorry periode and to get some grasp of what might have worked.
The answer for the carrier lies in the two 50's designs, First the 1952 CV which actualy had some long lead items ordered, and the Meduim Fleet design that came after it.
From your perspective the 1952 ship is the better bet, being larger and more able to be converted for the F4 with J79's.

For the aircraft, the most possible fighters are the Hawkers P1121 and the Saunders Roe P177.
For RAF and RN in the FAW mission however a variant of the Buccaneer seems the most affordable and achievable.
In strike we got it right in the Buccaneer.

Bombers and we frankly got it wrong, starting with the death of the 'far eastern bomber', which would've avoided the whole Valient saga, and allowed us to step directly to either the Vulcan or Victor, and then numbers produced would tell for the likely lifespan of their use in service.

As for the SA80.....well I'd rather we stuck with the EM-2 instead of doing what the yanks had wanted with rounds. The 7mm was the right choice and todays talk of 6.8mm rounds is virtualy the same thing.

[ysi_maniac]

Why can't people grasp the concept that it's better to design and build your own aircraft?

The economic side is complex. But the heart of it is over reach in the size and ambition of the machines desired. CVA-01, TSR.2, P1154 where too much, too fast, too far.

I basically  agree with these 2 quotes.

I am not an expert on the long saga of british cancelled projects, but I think that a modest but practical approach (similar or parallel to French path) improving, known and proven designs (I am particularly thinking in Hunter) or new designs that use a big part from a former proven plane will give better results.

The other good approach is IMHO multinational projects, even with the inherent problems that this way entails.

Anyway, Harrier and Tornado were great acheivements. So, those years were not that bad.

[Zen]

P1121 was Hawkers and Sir Cams solution, after quite few studies of developed Hunters, its orrigin was the P1103 but it was not as superlative as the F155T requirement, though quite flexable.

Large enough to be mated with any of the large engines of the time.
Olympus, Gyron, Conway, RB.122, Medway, even foreign engines of a similar type, this reflecting Cam's cynisism towards engine manufactures and their claims.

Adaptable to take either the AI.18 or AI.23, and large enough to have room for other avionics.

Its biggest downside was the issue of the main gear doors and the flaps interfering with each other when flaps where lowered and the gear doors open. Tupalov style podded undercarridge would've solved this as in fact the variant P1123 showed.

Bar the TSR.2 the P1121 was the closest to hardware when abandoned, and you can still see peices of the prototype in a certain museum.

[jcf]

The P1121 would probably have had to have been taken away from Camm in order to develop it into an effective weapon system. He evidently had some trouble adapting to the procurement and design realities developing in the late-50s. Now before people get offended, Camm is one of my favourite designers and I have nothing but respect for the man, its purely a matter of some folks adapting to change better than others, and that period was one of massive change.
The equipment 'flexibility' you quote is actually not as good an idea as it may seem. Swapping engines and avionics is never that easy, the ripple effect through the entire design can be dramatic and expensive. Camm was old school, "here's my airframe design, power and equip it however you like", that worked OK prior to the age of electronics and high performance engines matched to aerodynamic configuration, but that time had passed by the late-50s.

Jon

[Zen]

Quite possibly your right.

In terms of sales potential variants of the Saro machine has the highest chances.

P1121 however was at least partialy completed as a prototype, so clearly the company felt it had a chance for quite some time.

[Zen]

Yeap Gyron abandoned, not so smart to rely on one engine like Cam thought, and Olympus would be with hindsight a better option. Which is was in the late offerings.



SR.177....thats always puzzled me, I've read they had the jigs ready, but I've seen nothing of them and not much mentioned about them.

SR.54 (or is it 53 I forget) had flown yes, proving the wing and tail and the general concept.

I've recently read a RAE document pdf from Secret Projects forum, shows they ran the SR177 as a windtunnel model to study the effect of blow on the flaps. Quite beneficial and quite benign take off and landing speeds, certainly well within the capabilites of HMS Hermes and possibly HMS Centaur.