RAF F-18 Hornet

[jon_rose]

New Rubbish Idea- Expecting it to be shot to bits. (Especially after that balls-up I call the F-16 Alt-History! This actually incorporates some of the criticisms from that one...)

Anyway...

At the end of the Falklands war, with the Phantom, Lightning and Jaguar verging on obsolescence, and the Eurofighter program badly delayed by political problems, The MoD began to look for alternatives. Plans to Modify the Tornado to replace the Phantom were in full swing, but a Replacement for the Jaguar and the Lightning was not forthcoming. Offers came in from various companies, including Dassault's new Mirage 2000, along with the US F-15, F/A-18, F-14 and the Swedish SAAB Viggen. The SAAB and Mirage were turned down due to their single engine design, although the possibility of back stage dealing by the Americans has been suggested several times by some political commentators. The F-14 was turned down due to an initial lack of ground attack capability, leaving only the Hornet and the Eagle to battle it out for the Contract. Despite being more expensive and possessing a shorter combat range than the Eagle, the Hornet was more compatible with existing assets, such as the RAF's Tanker Force, and weapons, including the Skyflash and various ground attack munitions, as well as being a dedicated multirole aircraft, unlike the F-15, which (at the time) was purely an interceptor.

Deliveries of the F/A-18K, which was roughly equivalent to the –A model but with some British Avionics, began in 1985. Modifications included the addition of the legendary Blue Vixen radar in place of the AN/APG-65 fitted to US-Spec Hornets, and alterations (mostly to the fire control and target acquisition systems) for the carriage of Skyflash missiles instead of conventional AIM-7 Sparrows. No 16 Squadron was the first squadron to receive, and acted as the OCU with ex-USN F/A-18Bs retrofitted with the new avionics systems. The first combat Squadron to be stood up was No29, which Achieved Readiness in 1989. They, along with No17, were deployed to the Gulf to support operations there. In the Gulf, they flew air cover missions for Tornado GR1s performing sorties with Paveways and JP331s against Iraqi Airbases. In addition, 17sqn Hornets were responsible for the only Air-to-Air Kills by RAF Aircraft over Iraqi territory, where a group of MiG 29s were downed attempting to attack a formation of Tornadoes whilst they performed an Airbase attack.

Following the end of the Gulf conflict, the F/A-18s were put on QRA duties alongside the new Tornado ADVs, although problems with the radar in the Tornado F2s meant that the Hornets bore the brunt of the duties. However, as the radar problems were solved they were shifted to secondary duties, with some asking whether such a large force was justified.

However, with the outbreak of hostilities in the Balkans, the Hornet wing was sent to the area as part of Operation Allied Force; along with elements form other NATO members. It also operated alongside RAF Tornado and Harrier elements in the strategic bombing campaign.

Following the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the commencement of Operation Enduring Freedom, the Hornet wing was divided. One section would remain based in the UK to continue QRA operations to intercept and escort rouge aircraft, and the other would be deployed to support assets in the Middle East. The Deployed section was moved to Iraqi territory following the commencement of operation TELIC, but were withdrawn as the squadrons were stood down and disbanded in preparation to receive the new Eurofighter Typhoon, starting with 17 squadron, which would later serve as the Operational Evaluation Unit for the Typhoon fleet

[Zen]

I'd add the Zues ECM as used on the GR5 Harrier II.
Integration of ASRAAM will proceed and likely aid the sale to Australia and others.

[AeroplaneDriver]

Nice alt. history.  I'm thinking of building either a Monogram F-14 or F/A-18 as a British machine this weekend.  They would both exist in a timeline where the Tornado F.2/3 is cancelled due to development problems.  Instead the RAF take delivery of 70-80 F-14s for the interceptor role.  In this timeline the RN are also still in the CTOL carrier game and order 60-70 F-18s to equip two carrier wings and to maintain a shore-based QRA capability from Lossiemouth RNAS.

In this timeline the mixed F-14/18 fleet lessens the need for the Typhoon, so instead of pursuing a project that will end up being overbudget and overdue BAe pursue some of their lightweight fighter and attack proposals from the early 80s, ultimately resulting in the development of a highly successful generation 4.5 delta canard single-engine, single-seat fighter developed with cooperation from Saab; the BAe/Saab Griffon! 

[Zen]

Hmmm...why not add the Eurojet Ej200 as well into this mixture.

In fact if we're talking Hornet instead of Typhoon, then we're really talking about "Euro-Hornet", and its likely to boast a lot of Typhoon components as a sop to keep various states industries happy.
Germany will have the largest order as with the Starfighter years ago.
If the UK goes for CTOL CV's this could really put pressure on France to follow the MN's preference for the Hornet, Dassault would be hard pressed to keep the Rafale going under these circumstances.

So we could see.
BlueVixen or a developed set perhaps even the RBE2 instead?
EJ200 engines or M88.
maybe DASS
And the cockpit might be altered too with DVI.
Lets add Pirate too.

[Lawman]

The sad thing is that the F-14 was a favourite for the RAF in the original ADV competition, but seems to have been rejected due to the sheer cost of the Phoenix missiles, compared to using the already-developed Skyflash, i.e. Sparrow derivative. This seems somewhat suspicious, since the Tomcat was perfectly capable of using Sparrows/Skyflashes, and would have been an amazing platform for the RAF - carrying out routine interceptions with up to six Skyflash and four Sidewinders, or with a few minor modifications, probably four Skyflash, four Sidewinders and four ALARMs for the defence suppression role. An end pool of six Jaguar, six Harrier, six Tomcat and twelve Tornado (GR-1) squadrons would have worked very well, perhaps with a single mixed unit down in the Falklands.


On the Hornet option, it would have made some sense, particularly if the UK had 'needed to readjust our defence needs', pulling assets from NATO, with the US (i.e. Reagan) being concerned about the UK pulling assets. As a result, Reagan could therefore have done a deal with Thatcher, to ensure the UK had enough assets to devote to NATO, perhaps making an 'offer they couldn't refuse' for Hornets. Perhaps the UK is lent USS Saratoga, which was just finishing its SLEP in 1983; too late for the Falklands, but after Britain found its Harrier carriers too limited; pending construction on the new joint Anglo-French carriers, namely a 'sanitized Charles De Gaulle'. There are to be two of the new carriers, but Saratoga is felt to be all the RN can support for the interim; the carriers are to be based on a modified version of the old PA58 hull design, using four RB-211 derived marine turbines, delivering approximately 160,000hp, driving four paired cross-connected shafts (i.e. two pairs of shafts, each driven by two turbines).

The Saratoga serves through the '80s and into the '90s, alongside two Invincible class carriers, which become ASW and Commando carriers, with the third transferred to Australia, becoming HMAS Canberra. The manning requirements of the Saratoga are a source of difficulty, but prove manageable in the end, with the RN being allowed extra manpower and recruitment, and mainly operating the carrier on shorter deployments, e.g. three months, mostly in the Atlantic. To go with the Saratoga, the UK gets just over two hundred Hornets, split evenly between the RN and RAF. The RAF then operates six Hornet, six Jaguar, six Harrier and twelve Tornado GR-1 squadrons, and the RN operates six Hornet units (the Sea Harrier now being deemed unnecessary, since the RAF provides Harrier squadrons for the Invincible class carriers in the commando support role). The Eurofighter project is then modified, with both Britain and France wanting a carrier-borne fighter, and Germany not being keen - as a result, the project becomes a pretty straight UK-French project, with work contracted to Italy and Spain as well. These replace the Jaguars first, and then the Hornets, each in blocks of 140 or so aircraft, produced in four year blocks - 1996-2000 deliveries replacing Jaguar, 2000-2004 replacing half of the Hornets, and 2004-2008 replacing the other half of the Hornets.

The Hornet would then have served with both the RAF and RN in the Gulf War, both on Saratoga and from land bases in Saudi Arabia. The Saratoga is returned to the US soon after the first new carrier comes online in 1995, and Saratoga is quietly retired by 1997, seeing its final tour being the Hong Kong handover, before being delivered back to the US.

[gunfighter]

Don´t forget that the Tomcat was underrated as a bomb truck on the 80s, but with a good customer to pay the development it could also have replaced the tornado IDS, and even the Jaguar. The Hornet is mid-way between the tornado and the jaguar, but if you want to save money it can perform well in all the tasks assigned to phantoms, lightnings, jaguars, and even sea harriers. The tornado IDS is one step forward in deep strike capability, but if you want to standarise I see a beefed up F18 with CFTs and more pilons,even an earlier Super Hornet.

[kitbasher]

Here's one I did (1/72) a couple of years ago.....
McDONNELL- DOUGLAS HORNET FGR.1 ZA412 'E', 9 Sqn RAF, Solenzara 1997
Continued delays with the programme to upgrade the Tornado GR.1 fleet to GR.4 status plus the need for a more versatile and capable tactical fighter than the Jaguar GR.1 led the RAF to purchase 50 ex-US Navy F/A-18As and 10 F/A-18Bs.  These were modified to incorporate British instrumentation, communications and other electronic equipment, enhanced integration with RAF weaponry, and to allow for better interaction with UK forces generally.
Designated FGR.1 and T.2 respectively (although the two-seaters were fully combat-capable), Hornets entered service with 9 and 74 Squadrons and have been used as multi-role aircraft on deployed operations since.  74 Sqn has an additional training flight to provide type conversion training.
A typical 'ops package' will consist of tankers, early warning and ELINT aircraft.  The offensive element will consist of Tornado bombers or Harrier ground attack aircraft accompanied by Hornets operating both in the pure fighter and SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defences – popularly known as 'Wild Weasel') roles.  Alternatively, pure fighter Hornets will operate alongside attack and SEAD Hornets as a single-type offensive component.  This ensures the greatest possible degree of interoperability in offensive operations and, of course, adds additional (albeit limited) further air-to-air 'punch' beyond the attack and SEAD duties.
(Donor kits: Minicraft F/A-18A, Airfix Tornado GR.1, Italeri Tornado IDS/GR.1)

[AeroplaneDriver]

Nice Hirnet KB!  I dont remember seeing that one before.

[Zen]

Very nice

[XV107]

The Hornet was considered in the 80s as a possible contender for the Air Staff Target that eventually materialised as the Typhoon; there were also mutterings about obtaining it in the early 1990s as a replacement for some of the F3s, although the proposal to obtain F-16 ADFs instead of the F3 gained far more attention, so the idea is very much a runner.

The RAF chose not to buy the F-14 for several reasons - at the time of consideration of the F-14, the amount of maintenance required to keep the beast flying was enormous and while the USN could manage to do this, the RAF was concerned that it wouldn't have the manpower or the spares stocks to be able to keep a viable fleet in the air. Also, the cost of buying the F-14 with the AIM-54 was too high, while buying it without that capability appeared to give a marginally better capability at a substantially greater cost than the Tornado F2/F3.

Bear in mind that at the time the decision was made, analysis of the costings for the RAF made it quite clear that the 1980s would be dominated by the expense of getting the Tornado GR1 into service (this was one of the reasons why a suggested refurbishment programme for the Vulcans which would've included fitting them with ALCM never got further than the 'that would be an interesting idea' stage), and the cash wasn't really there to obtain F-14s. F-15s were rejected because there were concerns that in the heavy ECM environment expected over the North Sea/GIUK gap it was thought that having a navigator was a jolly good idea; also they'd have needed modification for probe& drogue refuelling, or we'd have had to have bought the KC-10 (which the RAF was actually very keen on). Finally, remember the state of the economy - buying a foreign aircraft with the money going out of the country was not particularly attractive, and even less so if you're a government wishing to privatise British Aerospace which needs orders on its books to be an attractive/viable proposition...

End result, buy the F2/F3 since it offered some commonality with the Tornado GR1.

It did, though, appear that there might be an opportunity to get a multi-role type into service as a possible addition to the Tornado force, and this would've been a Phantom and Jaguar replacement (UK-based Jags; the RAFG Jag units would still have re-equipped with Tornado). You'd probably have had 6, 41 and 54 as three of the F/A-18 units, but working out which of the Phantom squadrons would've received Tornado F3 and which the Hornet is a bit of a challenge. 19 and 92 might well have been given F3s to replace their Phantoms, which all the UK-based Phantom squadrons to split between F3s and Hornets, with the balance probably in favour of the F3 in terms of number of units equipped with it.

The Lightning units might well have re-equipped with the Hornet as well - given that they were the most aged aircraft in the UKADR, Hornets entering service in (say) 1985/86 (which was quite possible) it would've been an attractive proposition to retire the Lightnings at this point. That probably means that the first UK Phantom squadrons to re-equip would've picked up the F3, while the Jag units would've moved onto the Hornet at about the same time. 74 Squadron would re-equip next to get its non-standard Phantoms out of the way, followed by 56. You close Binbrook at this point and shift 5 and 11 to Wattisham, while the Hornet OCU goes to Coltishall.

That'd give an ORBAT in about 1990 (in time for Op GRANBY) of 5, 6, 11, 41, 54, 56 and 74 with Hornets, 23, 25, 29, 43 and 111 with F3s while 19 and 92 would probably have been equipped with F3s as well for patrolling the German IADZ.

[AeroplaneDriver]

Jeez XV, if you're gonna post an alt history, at least put some thought into it...



(REALLY interesting alt history actually!     )

[Zen]

There would be no Typhoon if we opted for Hornet, not even EAP would fly I suspect depending on the timing, even if that did it would'nt change the outcome. Hornet undermines the case for Eurofighter, once its chosen even in minor numbers the politicians will decide for a bulk cheap purchase of it.
Since the UK was the prime mover in getting EAP to fly (against certain governments objections including some inside the UK), Germany would cut and run for Euro-Hornet, placing an order likely that would see production over there. Once Germany falls Spain will just order more, Italy will follow suite. The best you can then hope for is various bits of technology carrying on development.
That would be the end of major warplane manufacturing in the UK I suspect. I doubt there'd be a repeat of the F4K style fitting of UK componenets, and I doubt we'd get much work if its a European prodution effort.
All we'd have left is Hawk.

France would be left alone to develope its Rafale, but the MN would be applying serious pressure to opt for the F/A18.

[Lawman]

The best bet could well be a new 'sale of the century', following the F-104s and F-16s of the '50s/60s and '70s. Britain, France and Germany could all have cooperated on joint production of a Euro-Hornet, with the entire structure being built in Europe, not just assembled. Each nation would be able to select their own avionics package - the Brits might opt for Blue Vixen, the French the RDI/RDM and the Germans the off-the-shelf APG-65 (in common with their upgraded Phantoms, which use the -65). The French would probably only buy modest numbers, given their Mirage 2000, but might buy some for the MN, and possibly a modest force for the AdlA to replace the Jaguar (which the French never seemed to be too keen on, hence no real upgrades etc...), and eventually the Mirage F-1s.


It would certainly have been interesting to see some of the 'maybes' come to fruition, e.g. F-15s being bought for the RAF in the F-15B/D model (the two-seater, but in fully combat capable version - either in boom refuelled or probe-equipped form. One possibility might have been an offset deal, whereby instead of the KC-10, the USAF would buy the Lockheed L1011, which of course relied on the RB-211, which had been rescued by the UK government. The UK could then have received a package of L1011s and F-15Bs, and the USAF effectively rescuing the L1011s fortunes - the additional sales to them could have been very useful, especially if combined with a major order from British Airways and the RAF. Alternatively of course, the 747 could have been chosen, with Britain buying them in tanker and transport forms (they had been looked at for the heavy transport role), since they were RB-211 capable (albeit the RR engine wasn't popular). A fleet of 20 747 tanker/transports could easily have supported the F-15B fleet, and also supported the Vulcans for out-of-area (i.e. read Falklands!) operations. An upgraded Vulcan with ALCMs in both nuclear and conventional form would have been formidable, and of great use in the Falklands - a hard-target penetrator through Stanley's runway would have been pretty useful!

[XV107]

IIRC, the upgraded Vulcan proposal would've been just a bit too late into service for the Falklands - ISTR that the proposal (and bear in mind that this is a recollection of a conversation I had several years ago with someone who was involved in procurement in the late 70s/early 80s who admitted that he couldn't quite remember all the details!) would've seen the upgraded Vulcans in service in about 1983/84. There would, though, have been a couple of Vulcan squadrons running along cheerfully, which would've meant no need to scrape together the BLACKBUCK force aircraft, although 'fun with refuelling probes: all you never wanted to ask' would've been repeated in 82. I suspect that the planned fitting of Paveway, possibly with an emergency integration of Pave Spike might have become a reality rather than an interesting test fit.

Anyway, back to Hornets. I'm not sure that I agree about the Typhoon not happening at all. First, the clear abandonment of a long-term future in combat aircraft would've been quite unacceptable politically, since it would've impinged upon confidence in the long-term viability of British Aerospace. Although the Hawk 60 and 200 versions were up and running as ideas, there was nothing other than EAP and what was then the Future European Fighter Aircraft (FEFA, aka Five Europeans F'ing About) in terms of long-term, cutting edge military kit once Tornado was done and dusted as a project.

The effect on BAe would've been manna from heaven for the Labour party in the run-up to the 1987 election as they portrayed the downturn in confidence in BAe as a sign that privatisation was a bad idea that would give short-term gain but which would ultimately go wrong, etc, etc, etc.

So there has to be something for BAe to be working on. Now, look at the other nations involved in Typhoon. The Spanish bought the Hornet anyway, and would be looking to replace the aircraft round about now. The UK would be looking for an aircraft to serve as a Hornet and Tornado F3 replacement, and one which could possibly reduce the number of Tornado GRs in service as well, and the political considerations above would be in play. Hornet would probably kill the Luftwaffe's involvement in the Eurofighter programme, and I suspect that its replacement of the F-104 in Italy would do the same there. But...

The four Euro F-16 operators (not Italy, which had no thought they'd ever be using them) would all be considering what they'd buy round about 1995- 2005 to replace their F-16s. The Netherlands and Norway would be concerned about issues of workshare and technology transfer - as we're seeing now with their concerns over the JSF, while the Danes would almost certainly be keen on some degree of commonality with the other F-16 group nations. The Belgians, I suspect, wouldn't be so concerned about replacements. Then, add Canada - seeking a replacement for its Hornets & Australia (ditto, plus the F-111) into the mix and you have a fair body that might be interested in a multi-role, high-performance single-seat aircraft...

If you're BAe, and if you're Margaret Thatcher, the prospect of a multi-national programme driven forward by BAe (since the Germans have excluded themselves and Dassault wants to play with its own, slightly differently designed ball) would be too good to miss. You get the Dutch and Norwegians signed up PDQ for an aeroplane programme which gives you a service entry date of 2000-2005. Rather than the whole shebang over ITAR waivers and the like, you get a programme that runs really quite smoothly since you don't have the Germans on-board to add five/six years delay to the programme, while Dassault are merrily going about their business at the same time, quite happy not to be working with anyone else.

You probably get the Germans as the first export customer (replacing their Hornets which would be running out of airframe life now if they'd bought them in the 80s), while the Turkish Air Force would be a distinct possibility as well, particularly with a deal allowing assembly in Turkey.

What you get, then, is Typhoon, probably looking similar to the real thing, but as a global project which represents a serious challenge to the US aircraft industry, since it's busy replacing F-16s and legacy-model F/A-18s, and a programme which has run rather more smoothly than the real thing did, since so many nations want the aircraft. There is one slight problem, though, since this completely alters the character of the JSF - if the Europeans have signed up almost en masse to the Typhoon programme in the late 1980s and early 1990s, and been joined by the Canadians and Australians, then your market for the F-35 is rather smaller than you were hoping for.

So you could posit a situation whereby the RAF buying Hornets in the mid-1980s in fact leads to the Typhoon becoming one of the most dominant aircraft programmes in history.

Now I know that in reality a combination of government incompetence, BAe complacency and squabbling between the partner nations makes the above unlikely.... but this is a 'whif', after all.

[Zen]

The big alternative of the times was the supersonic Harrier successor. But the trials during the 80's of PCB showed up the major flaws of PCB reheat. But they where'nt to know that before in anything like the way they did afterwards.

Thatcher was all for the private sector carrying the weight. EAP had a lot BAe money in it. The Tories hands had already been burnt idealogicaly over Rolls Royce. So its not such a clear cut thing.

Certainly the F16 could've taken more sales back then.

Of course this does open another alternative......by the late 80's early 90's LO is in the game so to speak. So planning for a Hornet/Falcon successor could open up this avenue instead.