F104G Alternatives
Discussion
Equus said:
No, the guy who designed the rocket engine for the SR.53 and SR.177 is a good friend of mine.
Quest just broadcast a program on the SR.53 and SR.177 which finished about 10 minutes before your post hence the 
I'd imagine he has some interesting/scary/funny stories from working with HTP?
Tango13 said:
Quest just broadcast a program on the SR.53 and SR.177 which finished about 10 minutes before your post hence the
I'd imagine he has some interesting/scary/funny stories from working with HTP?
Ah, OK... I actually don't own a TV (or hold a TV licence), but I assume that's one of the 'Planes that never flew' series? ... The inaccuracies of which wind my friend up something rotten, but I guess you always get 'it didn't happen like that' with any history program or dramatisation, from the people who were actually there.I'd imagine he has some interesting/scary/funny stories from working with HTP?
He regards HTP as pretty benign stuff, surprisingly (when it is stored and handled correctly) - you've just got to treat it with appropriate respect. They did run them in 'blast pens', designed using the same principles as fireworks factories, though (very heavy walls, very light roofs, so that any explosions were directed upwards).
Interesting stories about the challenges, though, certainly; the biggest issue, apparently was getting the balance right on the thickness of the motor casing, between being thin enough that the HTP could be used to cool the combustion chamber before being injected, but thick enough that it didn't melt through. That and the design of the fuel pumps, of course, which was pretty cutting-edge stuff.
Tango13 said:
Equus said:
Saunders Roe SR.177... it would have been a done deal, if Lockheed hadn't bribed their way to the contract.
Been watching the 'Quest' channel by chance? English Electric were trying hard to sell the Lightning but the UK govt didn't cooperate because they wanted to sell the SR177, which annoyed EE because they reckoned the Germans weren't seriously interested in the SR.
There was also a documentary on the F104 which referred to the German order and said there was stiff competition 'especially from the British Lightning'.
Eric Mc said:
The SR177 was doomed from the start.
The SR.177 was an answer at the time it was designed, and would have met its role requirements at that time much better than the F104G did. Which is why it was selected over the F104G, until the US Government interfered and Lockheed started bribing officials. The latter is not tinfoil-hat speculation, incidentally - it's a proven fact.It would doubtless have become obsolete fairly quickly, but that's because pure interceptors were on their way out, to be replaced by missiles and multi-role combat aircraft. European and Japanese contracts aside, it was the 1957 Duncan Sandys Defence White Paper that did for the SR.177, along with a lot of other manned aircraft.
The SR.177 had a very specific purpose - rapid response interception of Soviet bombers - but that role faded quite quickly with the introduction of ICBM's.
Eric Mc said:
The Lightning was the better aircraft compared to the SR177.
What makes you say that? The SR.177 was predicted to be (much) faster and have a (much) faster rate of climb and greater ceiling than even the Lightning, yet the hybrid powerplant actually gave it better endurance as well.To say that the Lightning was the 'better aircraft' when the SR.177 was cancelled before it ever flew is entirely speculative (and goes against the evidence of the bare performance statistics).
I appreciate that there's a lot of rose-tinted fondness for the Lightning, as the fastest and most exotic entirely British fighter to make service, but it achieved that position more by political luck than technical superiority.
But whatever the arguments, the SR.177 remains the answer to the OP's question: it is almost certain that it would have been the aircraft that fulfilled the Luftwaffe requirement met by the F104G, had the latter not been corruptly procured,
Dr Jekyll said:
Duncan Sandys reckoned it would, but the RAF are still kept quite busy intercepting Russian bombers.
Subsonic, non-stealth turbo-props, playing games. I don't think anyone believes that if it came to a serious, all-out war against the Russians, we'd be worrying much about them?Dr Jekyll said:
Maybe not, but there is a responsibility to enforce the air defence region even in peacetime.
Which we do with multi-role aircraft of relatively low intercept performance.The other thing that's changed since the days of the SR.177, of course, is that there is a much greater geographic buffer. We can see a Russian Bear plodding in over the North Sea from hundreds of miles away. Typhoon pilots probably have time to finish their game of darts, have a cup of tea, and make a leisurely stroll out to their aircraft before taking off to intercept.
The specific Luftwaffe requirement we're discussing here was predicated on the possibility of an attack launched from East Germany against West Germany, with very little warning.
Equus said:
What makes you say that? The SR.177 was predicted to be (much) faster and have a (much) faster rate of climb and greater ceiling than even the Lightning, yet the hybrid powerplant actually gave it better endurance as well.
To say that the Lightning was the 'better aircraft' when the SR.177 was cancelled before it ever flew is entirely speculative (and goes against the evidence of the bare performance statistics).
I appreciate that there's a lot of rose-tinted fondness for the Lightning, as the fastest and most exotic entirely British fighter to make service, but it achieved that position more by political luck than technical superiority.
But whatever the arguments, the SR.177 remains the answer to the OP's question: it is almost certain that it would have been the aircraft that fulfilled the Luftwaffe requirement met by the F104G, had the latter not been corruptly procured,
Rocket interceptors had an interval of usefulness of a very short time period. By the time prototypes were flying, that time had passed. The SR177 was dead before it even started. They had built the SR53 as test of concept aircraft (and crashed one of the two built) so that didn't really bode too well.To say that the Lightning was the 'better aircraft' when the SR.177 was cancelled before it ever flew is entirely speculative (and goes against the evidence of the bare performance statistics).
I appreciate that there's a lot of rose-tinted fondness for the Lightning, as the fastest and most exotic entirely British fighter to make service, but it achieved that position more by political luck than technical superiority.
But whatever the arguments, the SR.177 remains the answer to the OP's question: it is almost certain that it would have been the aircraft that fulfilled the Luftwaffe requirement met by the F104G, had the latter not been corruptly procured,
With time, effort and money MAYBE the SR177 MIGHT have evolved into a useful aeroplane. It never got the chance and really had very low expectancy of getting that chance, given the absolute turmoil in UK aviation at the end of the 1950s. I'm sure any potential foreign customers of British military aircraft of that era were looking very carefully at the chaos surrounding British military aircraft procurement that was going on at that time and at the massive efforts by the government to rationalise the industry.
Indeed, who would have built the Saro 177 if it had been authorised? Saro were effectively banned from making flying machines by the government. All they were left with was their hovercraft work. Their flying boat work was finished and they were made hand over all their helicopter work to Westland.
Eric Mc said:
By the time prototypes were flying, that time had passed
There we disagree: the SR.177 was at least as flexible as the Starfighter and Lightning, and there continued to be a role for those aircraft for some years to come. It's now generally accepted that the German government viewed it as superior to the F104G in all respects and that the only reason the Starfighter was procured was because of US government pressure and Lockheed back-handers.
Don't forget that the SR.177 was suitable for naval use, too.
Had the Luftwaffe procured it, it's almost certain that the Japanese and Fleet Air Arm would have procured it - potentially other Governments and services, too.
Eric Mc said:
Who would have built it?
Armstrong Whitworth were slated for production, I believe.And the engines (both rocket and jet) were built by deHavilliand, of course... but as an accountant, I'm sure you'd agree that even the UK Government and aircraft industry wouldn't have been so suicidal as to refuse the foreign currency from an overseas order. They'd have made damned sure that somebody built it.
Equus said:
Armstrong Whitworth were slated for production, I believe.
And the engines (both rocket and jet) were built by deHavilliand, of course... but as an accountant, I'm sure you'd agree that even the UK Government and aircraft industry wouldn't have been so suicidal as to refuse the foreign currency from an overseas order. They'd have made damned sure that somebody built it.
Messerschmitt Bolkow?And the engines (both rocket and jet) were built by deHavilliand, of course... but as an accountant, I'm sure you'd agree that even the UK Government and aircraft industry wouldn't have been so suicidal as to refuse the foreign currency from an overseas order. They'd have made damned sure that somebody built it.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff