BAC Eagle - Fighter Version

[NARSES2]

So much aircraft for so little ordnance... 

I've often had the same thought about British aircraft projects of the period myself. Nice build 

[Geoff]

Excellent!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Chris Payne]

Cheers guys.

[kitnut617]

Very nice,   

I've got a load of Red Deans from Colin a while ago, the project I had them planned for didn't pan out the way I thought it would so the missiles will have to go somewhere else, like something along these lines ---

[darthspud]

So much aircraft for so little ordnance... 

Why not  go exotic?

I'm using the various Hasegawa sets of US / NATO ordnance, some Russian ordnance sets and JASDF/Israeli ones too. Just whiffing the markings to suit.

[albeback]

So much aircraft for so little ordnance... 

My thoughts exactly. I know the prototypes were configured for a max load of 10,000lbs but, even that seems not much for such a big, powerful aeroplane. However, (and I hope somebody can confirm/correct me here) I'm sure I read somewhere that the operational TSR 2 would have been cleared for a load of 25 - 30,000lbs?

Allan

ps - nice job though.

[darthspud]

GOR 339
States
Operational Equipment
17. The aircraft is to be capable of carrying the bomb specified in 0R.1127.
As an alternative secondary role,it is desirable that the aircraft  carry l load of 4x1000lb bombs and a minimum 6x1000lb in an overload case.
So at a rough guess that'd be in the region of 10,000lb including primary strike weapon.

[Hobbes]

25-30klbs seems rather a lot on such a small wing. I don't think it'd have enough lift for that.

[eatthis]

25-30klbs seems rather a lot on such a small wing. I don't think it'd have enough lift for that.

it used heavy surface blowing like the bucaneer and starfighter but more.
i think it was supposed to be able to take off at around 100k lb in 1000 feet!! (my memory is crap though so im not 100%)

[darthspud]

25-30klbs seems rather a lot on such a small wing. I don't think it'd have enough lift for that.

A lot for the wings, but you could get extra carriage using under fuselage pylons or maybe pylons mounted near the intakes?

[Hobbes]

Darthspud, it's not about the wing being strong enough, but about the aircraft not having enough aerodynamic lift to get airborne with that load.

[darthspud]

6,000lbs under wing should give a reasonable secondary load, and keep aerodynamic efficiency to an acceptable level.

alternatively,
why not semi-recess them in a slightly modified pannier under the fuselage, a bit like the F-14 had with those AIM54's or the Eurofighter can do with several weapon types?