snipped-for-privacy@spam.spam (Martin) wrote in <dqnq5r$hbe$3$8300dec7
@news.demon.co.uk>:
Had that happened, the repercussions would still have been
noticeable today. Had Britain been a leader in postwar aviation
technology, their aircraft industry might not have been is such a
sorry state these days.
The US could have had supersonic aircraft during WW2 as well:
<http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Lockheed-L133/L133.htm
If you're interested in exploring this subject, visit
<http://www.whatifmodelers.com/ .
Alternate history (and building the models to match) is fun.
--
Harro de Jong
remove the extra Xs from xmsnet to mail me
snipped-for-privacy@xxxxmsnet.nl.invalid (Harro de Jong) wrote:
---snippage---
This is the UK SIG? If so, I met you guys in Telford last year and had a
great time. I'm from Seattle where our last big 'what if' was the 1949
Schneider event. The organizer, Tim Nelson, wrote the article and i took
most of the pictures in there. It was a great deal of fun!
Right now in the early stages of April Fool's planning. It's becoming a
tradition here to do a spoof model for April Fool's day.
Have fun!!
--- Tontoni
I finally got my copy of FSM (and I can see what the discussion centered
on as to the cover plane) but I loved that Schneider Cup exercise.
There were some very good models shown.
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
Britain was a leader in postwar aviation technology but it's own government
failed to understand that. Hence the cancellation of the TSR.2 and similar
projects and their replacement by inferior, less reliable and more costly
imported alternatives. The US governemnt and aircraft industry knew all too
well and did their combined utmost to sabotage Britain's adanced avaition
projects leaving western europe at the mercy of Soviet air power for years
to come.
This very scenario was explored in the TV programme "Planes That Never Flew"
(which is also available on DVD and which is where I first saw it). The
programme presents a computer animated sequence in which Lockheed's L133's
flying bomber escort duties go after the Me262 leaving other allied fighters
to deal with slower German intercerptors.
(kim)
Two points here. One is that prior to the deployment of the F-15 in europe,
NATO had absolutely no way of countering reconnaissance missions by Soviet
Foxbats that were able to overfly western europe with total impunity. The
other is that the US adminstration was haranguing europe to do more to
defend itself whilst at the same time doing it's level best to put europe's
indigenous defence industries out of business.
You can't have it both ways. You either have a europe which is strong and
can defend itself or you have a europe which is totally dependent on US
military aid. US industry of course would prefer the latter as it creates
more business for them.
(kim)
How does that equate to "...leaving western europe (sic) at the
mercy of Soviet air power for years to come."?
There was only one US administration during the entire Cold War?
Instead of riding on the coattails of US defense expenditures to
pour its money into social programs. Seems to me Europe got a pretty
good deal, and it *still* has neither the will nor the means to defend
itself.
--
Al Superczynski, MFE, IPMS/USA #3795, continuous since 1968
My "From" address is munged - use 'modeleral (at) swbell (dot) net' to respond
There was a gap bof many years between the cancellation of the TSR.2 and
similar projects and the deployment of F-15's in europe to (partially) fill
that gap. During thiose years europe was extremely vulnerable to any hostile
Soviet actions.
We outside of the US think of it as being oinetinuous adminstraiton whereas
you within the US see it as being several separate administrations.
By "europe" I mean of course Great Bitain since that was the only european
country within NATO which had an advanced aerospace industry. It was
exaggerated claims by US manufacturers such as McDonnel and General Dynamics
for the performance and cost of its aircraft which persuaded Britain to
abandon its own defense projects. The ultimate cost to the UK taxpayer was
actually far higher than if those programs had continued. The USA also
suffered in that it did not have those projects to turn to when it's own
aircraft proved inadequate for the tasks they were designed for.
As an independent observer I can assure you the UK at least has both the
means and the will to defend itself against any likely aggressor.
(kim)
I bet there are some people in France who would have some pretty
interesting replies to that statement. :-) Flying Frog, where are you
when we need you??
Crap! It was the British socialist idiots who were pissed
at the aircraft industry and did their own industry in out of spite.
IIRC the thing that ran the Phantom project through the roof was
re-design to use the Spey engine, which was a change insisted on by the
British Government after the fact. Your own government screwed you,
as usual.
And just which aircraft did you have in mind?? Enlighten us.
This sounds like the chest thumping we were hearing after the breakdown
of the Soviet Union when we were being bombarded with talk about the
"New European Union" and it's new combined military. Then this sociopath
Milesovich surfaced in Yugoslavia and all we started to hear was "When
are the Americans going to do something about him"??
Bill Shuey
I'm not blaming the USA as a whole. What I'm saying is that there were two
powerful corporate lobbies in the US (J.S. McDonnell and General Dynamics)
who were more interested in winning large overseas contracts than in
disseminating accurate information to potential buyers. The US taxpayer was
just as much a victim of false information supplied by certain defence
contractors as UK taxpayers were.
(kim)
Probably right but isn't that what most corporations do? I'm darn sure
that BAe has never been completely forthcoming when one of their
projects comes a-cropper.
Speaking of the thread title, has anyone her tried making an F-111K?
Bill Banaszak, MFE Sr.
there is a yahoo group which does this kind of thing that you may enjoy
looking at.
http://groups.msn.com/thewhatifandoddballmodelpage
its a uk group but does that realy matter, we all have the modeling bug or
we would not be here.
Gondor
During the time period being referred to, France did not have an 'advanced'
aerospace industry, that came later. Besides which France was not a full
member of NATO. The Luftwaffe was interested in buying TSR.2 to replace the
F-104G and had they done so it is likely many other NATO air forces would
have done the same.
If you examine the records you will that the previous Conservative
government had already cancelled many projects and was considering
cancelling TSR.2 before the general election which brought the Labour Party
into office. The aerospace trade unions who were overwhelmingly socialist
marched in support of keeping the project going.
The order for the bastardised Phantom was placed only after an order for the
F-111K was abandoned. The latter was only abandoned becuase of rising costs
and delays. Had the UK proceeded with the F-111 order in the same way as
Australia did it would eventually have been delivered ten years late and ten
times over budget. It was exaggerated claims by J.S. McDonnell for the radar
capabilities of the Phantom which persuaded the Conservative UK government
to abandon all development of Britain's own fighter-interceptor aircraft as
far back as 1962.
When the U2 was shot down over Russia the USAF was forced to buy the
Canberra from Britain in order to fill a gap in its reconnaissance
requirements, albeit disguised as the "Martin RB-57". The US Marines were
forced to buy Britsh developed Harrier fighters for close support as there
was no US plane suitable for the role. During Gulf War 1 the allies had to
rely on RAF Tornado bombers to carry out low level strikes on AAA sites as
there was no US design suitable for the job and if Britain had proceeded
with the TSR.2 project the USAF would eventually have bough that too for the
same reasons it earlier bought the Canberra.
I specically used the phrase "defend itself". Serbia was no threat to UK,
european or US interests and anyone who's studied the sad history of
Yugoslavia will tell you that intervention by foreign nations has seldom
been good for the people who live there. Just for the record it was United
Nations forces under Boutros Boutros Galli who first intervened in the civil
war in Bosnia not the European Union.
(kim)
Utter BS. The B-57 was purchased as a replacement for the
Douglas B-26 as a light bomber in competition with the Martin XB-51,
North American B-45 Tornado, North American AJ-1 Savage, and
Avro-Canada CF 100. Its development for the reconnaissance role was
an afterthought, not the primary reason for its procurement by the
USAF.
--
Al Superczynski, MFE, IPMS/USA #3795, continuous since 1968
My "From" address is munged - use 'modeleral (at) swbell (dot) net' to respond
Polytechforum.com is a website by engineers for engineers. It is not affiliated with any of manufacturers or vendors discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.