British aircraft that the American military should have bought

[Snowtrooper]

Since the USN bought the Hawk (T-45 Goshawk) as it's trainer, you could make a good case for the USAF doing the same, if it decided to retire the T-38s and go subsonic for advanced training like the rest of the world. The USAF version should be easier since it wouldn't need carrier conversion, though of course, that wouldn't neccessarily mean that the USAF wouldn't find a way of making it twice as complicated and three times as expensive...

The rational way (aka never going to happen) would be to build them to same specs, economics of scale and all that, so no separate versions. Maybe you could delete the carrier gear from the USAF version (unless there were actually more costs than benefits from that), but then again, an arrestor hook that doesn't require a structural inspection after use and landing gear able to withstand higher than normal sink rates would actually be useful features even in a land-based trainer...

[McColm]

Then there's the Avro or HS Vulcan,  which turned the heads of the USAF especially when participating in the Red Flag Exercises.  Yes they had the
B-52, B-58 and B-47 at the time,  but flying at 75feet above the desert floor and blending into the clutter on a radar screen must have got the top brass thinking we need one of those and many years later they did in the form of the B-2.

Just as the Harrier,  Hawk, Canberra, Sherpa, Defender and the
Slingsby Firefly made it into service with the Americans.
Not forgetting the Hovercraft 

[Weaver]

Interesting point about the mutual aid arrangements - as noted, many Hunters, etc, were purchased by the US for European allies.  Now Lightnings for Europe would have been good, but never happening in a million years with the F-104 to flog!

Yeah, needless to say the US manufacturers wern't the biggest fans of MWDF and Offshore Procurement. I think (don't hold me to this) that their lobbying actually played a part in getting those programs wound up eventually.

[Weaver]

Since the USN bought the Hawk (T-45 Goshawk) as it's trainer, you could make a good case for the USAF doing the same, if it decided to retire the T-38s and go subsonic for advanced training like the rest of the world. The USAF version should be easier since it wouldn't need carrier conversion, though of course, that wouldn't neccessarily mean that the USAF wouldn't find a way of making it twice as complicated and three times as expensive...

The rational way (aka never going to happen) would be to build them to same specs, economics of scale and all that, so no separate versions. Maybe you could delete the carrier gear from the USAF version (unless there were actually more costs than benefits from that), but then again, an arrestor hook that doesn't require a structural inspection after use and landing gear able to withstand higher than normal sink rates would actually be useful features even in a land-based trainer...

That does indeed make a fair bit of sense, however it was the addition of those carrier features that delayed the T-45 and pushed its price up, so you could see the USAF either baling out entirely or insisting on a non-carrier one at some point. Besides, the size of a USAF order would have economies of scale all on it's own, and you know how Air Forces just hate to buy Navy aircraft...

[PR19_Kit]

See you next Tuesday?

That's the plan, yes. I'll be the one with The Hat. 

[NARSES2]

Right.

Anymore and I'm locking this thread.

Chris

Apologies for what may have seemed like a threat (since removed), I shouldn't have put it in such a way, but I'm afraid that my current medical condition can cause me to get a tad grumpy at times.

[McColm]

Okay Guys,  let's get back on the topic of what if buys the Americans could or should have bought .
Ideally the Hawk should have been a strong contender for the replacement of the T-38.
The Bristol Britannia may have been a substitute for the Lockheed Electra if the Navy hadn't selected it to be developed into the P-3 Orion.

[Mossie]

Sell back the Wessex.  A turbine powered S58 might have been useful to US forces, collaboration on the design could have been fed back by the contractor in a similar way to Harrier.  Sea King is a possibility too.

[sideshowbob9]

The BAC 1-11? It had something of a support base in the States already. Say Boeing/Douglas can't quite commit to enough C-22s/C-9s because of high civilian demand and it is purchased as a stopgap?

[NARSES2]

Right I've been in and made one of my very rare interventions and hopefully got the thread back on track, but please be careful and considerate.

Thanks

Chris

[PR19_Kit]

The BAC 1-11? It had something of a support base in the States already. Say Boeing/Douglas can't quite commit to enough C-22s/C-9s because of high civilian demand and it is purchased as a stopgap?

That may have triggered off more interest in the BAC 2-11, which was treated with disdain over this side of the Atlantic. The 1-11 wasn't really developed in the same way as the DC9 sadly.

[jcf]

The USAF had shown interest in the SR.177 when it was in development, so perhaps if the program
hadn't come a cropper at Whitehall, with the result that Germans lost interest because the cost
would have been excessive as the sole customer, things could have been very different.

The SR.177 had been, as far as the Germans were concerned, the only serious Brit contender for
their F-84F replacement search. The requirements had originally been biased towards an air defense
role, after collapse of the SR.177 program the only remaining contenders were the Mirage and the
F-104. The Germans canceled the requirement and then issued a new one for a multi-role fighter
rather than an high-altitude interceptor, the main contenders were, again, the Mirage and the F-104.

With that as a rough background here's the divergence: the UK does cancel/delay the RN version
but decide to support the slightly redesigned multi-role concept (thinner wing, R-R engine, etc.)
that was proposed to the Germans. The USAF who have finally realized they have a need for a
flexible multi-role aircraft for air defense and ground-attack (which was eventually filled by the
F-4 Phantom) decide that a properly developed SR.177 will fit nicely and join in with financial
support. Of course there would have to be production offsets and a US manufacturer would have
to be involved to build the USAF airframes (perhaps Republic as an F-105 follow-on?), with the
result that the USAF gets a multi-role aircraft without having to Go Navy, and a developed,
production aircraft is available to compete in the export market.