A-7 Corsair and F-8 Crusader

[Ed S]

I doubt that Jags travel much faster than A-7s on a typical mission. The Jag's extra power is almost all due to the Adours' afterburners and is mostly used for a quick burst over the target, or to stand a better chance of evading a fighter. Mind you, if you're making a special UK version of the A-7, there's no reason why you couldn't fit it with a simple ON-OFF afterburner for much the same effect. The wing is bigger and thicker than the Jag so it wouldn't have the same top speed, but it's the acceleration that's more important.

Why couldn't an A-7 carry a nuke? WE177s weighed less than 1000lb: everything British could carry them, including Harrier GR.3s and SHARs.

IIRC, the Navy A-7's were set up to carry nukes.  The AF didn't put in the necessary wiring for them (specifically the failsafe and arming circuitry).  The physical carriage of nukes is usually not problem.  It's the special safeguards that determine whether an A/C is nuke capable or not.

Ed

[Weaver]

Nuke capability is wiring and a small cockpit panel as far as I know, plus you have to be able to fly a suitable attack profile to deliver the thing "safely". That used to involve some seriously space-eating black boxes back in the '50s (LABS for instance), then it went to an extra mode on the HUDWAC, and now it's probably just a software tweak.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I doubt that Jags travel much faster than A-7s on a typical mission. The Jag's extra power is almost all due to the Adours' afterburners and is mostly used for a quick burst over the target, or to stand a better chance of evading a fighter. Mind you, if you're making a special UK version of the A-7, there's no reason why you couldn't fit it with a simple ON-OFF afterburner for much the same effect. The wing is bigger and thicker than the Jag so it wouldn't have the same top speed, but it's the acceleration that's more important.

Why couldn't an A-7 carry a nuke? WE177s weighed less than 1000lb: everything British could carry them, including Harrier GR.3s and SHARs.

IIRC, the Navy A-7's were set up to carry nukes.  The AF didn't put in the necessary wiring for them (specifically the failsafe and arming circuitry).  The physical carriage of nukes is usually not problem.  It's the special safeguards that determine whether an A/C is nuke capable or not.

The B61 was cleared for carriage on the A-7.  No FAILSAFE required as these were tactical weapons that were armed by the Permissive Action Link to enable and arm the weapon.  With few exceptions, all tactical aircraft could carry a nuclear weapon of one type or another depending on how long the aircraft remained in service. 

***(B61, B57, and possibly other earlier weapons that did not require a special crutch to carry the weapon)

[Ed S]

I doubt that Jags travel much faster than A-7s on a typical mission. The Jag's extra power is almost all due to the Adours' afterburners and is mostly used for a quick burst over the target, or to stand a better chance of evading a fighter. Mind you, if you're making a special UK version of the A-7, there's no reason why you couldn't fit it with a simple ON-OFF afterburner for much the same effect. The wing is bigger and thicker than the Jag so it wouldn't have the same top speed, but it's the acceleration that's more important.

Why couldn't an A-7 carry a nuke? WE177s weighed less than 1000lb: everything British could carry them, including Harrier GR.3s and SHARs.

IIRC, the Navy A-7's were set up to carry nukes.  The AF didn't put in the necessary wiring for them (specifically the failsafe and arming circuitry).  The physical carriage of nukes is usually not problem.  It's the special safeguards that determine whether an A/C is nuke capable or not.

The B61 was cleared for carriage on the A-7.  No FAILSAFE required as these were tactical weapons that were armed by the Permissive Action Link to enable and arm the weapon.  With few exceptions, all tactical aircraft could carry a nuclear weapon of one type or another depending on how long the aircraft remained in service. 

I guess things have changed a little since I was flying them back in the 70's. 

Ed

[GTX]

I guess things have changed a little since I was flying them back in the 70's. 

Ed

You an ex-A-7 driver Ed?

Regards,

Greg

[Ed S]

I guess things have changed a little since I was flying them back in the 70's. 

Ed

You an ex-A-7 driver Ed?

Regards,

Greg

Yeah, a long time ago (in the 70's).

Ed

[Mossie]

Cool!  Please share stories, anecdotes etc!

[Radish]

Got an Italeri 1/72nd A-7D "in build" for a RAF one....

scenario circa late 1990s, in Europe, probably Bosnia....

mods as it's British production....the Armstrong-Whitworth Corsair ....mine is the Corsair FG.4.

Some differences (not totally decided yet) to the airframe...bugles, thingies, etc..

More when it's built with a picture or two, and an article for Chris.
So far the fuselage is together and filled, and the seat is replaced with a cut-down one from the Italeri Hawk 100. The usual A-7 seat in the Italeri (ex-ESCI) is too small...the cockpit is too shallow but butchering the seat helps. Replaced the control stick too from the Hawk.

[sandiego89]

Just to add that the A-7 was quite nuclear capable with listed stores of the walleye (AGM-62), Mk-28, B-43, Mk-57, B-61 and B-83.  Indeed a wide array of instant sunshine.

source: Nuclear Weapons of the United States, Gibson, James N. Schiffer books 1996. 

[dy031101]

Have there been any mention to the radar fit of the two-seat version that the British were said to have once considered?

[GTX]

It funny, but what about if Greg (GTX), could do a VG-wing F-8 Crusader (as per his VG-wing Jaguar!), for French Navy service. This would possibly be both political and industrially exceptable to the French for the following reasons-
1/ Both Dassault and Vought had an agreement about the exchange of VG technology. Dassault had developed VG technology for its Mirage IIIG/G/G8 series of fighters, which it had passed on to Vought, under an industrial agreement, for Vought to use this Dassault VG knowledge on its VFX (Vought Model V-507) design submission.

2/ The Vought F-8 Crusader had already broken through the then growing and political influential 'pro-buy French only' lobbying (which is the prim reason why the French rejected the more capable, more versatile and more effective Jaguar M, over that of the 'all-French Super Etendard.
From what I have read, the Dassault VG wing design/mechanism was meant to be lighter and less complex than that of the then trend/competitors!

3/ The Vought F-8`s high-wing arrangement would be easier to adapt to VG-wing configuration (well that my theory )



M.A.D

SC beat me to it:



regards,

Greg

[ChernayaAkula]

^ OMG, how effin' cool is that?!  

[Slerski]

I've just found that while reading my favourite magazine "Le Fana de l'Aviation". Such a beautiful whiff



"An Aeronautique Navale A-7, loaded with an Exocet missile, both build by Aérospatiale. The main modification concerned the front landing gear, modified to be compatible with Foch and Clemanceau catapluts."

[Mossie]

Had to do a double take, at first glance I assumed it was a Gunfighter.

[NARSES2]

That is a lovely A-7