Aircraft that Britain Shouldn't have had

[rickshaw]

I think projected costs helped kill off the Rotodyne. Noise certainly did IIRC.

Despite my hatred of the 'Dyne due to its noisy tests at RAF Benson when I was there, it seems they'd sorted the noise problem by the time it was cancelled. The definitive book on trhe 'Dyne lists some sound level readings they took on its test flights into Battersea Heliport and some piston engined helicopters were noisier.

What is ironic is that the V-22 is noisier, now than the Rotodyne was when development was cancelled.  They are proposing civilian tiltrotors which will be just as bad as the V-22.   The Rotodyne was a long way ahead of it's time IMHO.  As Mossie suggests, if they'd have more powerful engines, the later versions would have given the military capabilities they are only just now getting...   

[PR19_Kit]

All the more reason for builidng more Whiffed 'Dynes then. 

I've yet to hear a V-22 at close range, I'd like to compare that with my 58 year old memory of the 'Dyne.

[albeback]

F-35 surely
H P Victor. Good though it was, did we REALLY need THREE V-bombers?. Granted, the Valiant was, if I understand it more of an interim type pending the more advanced replacements. Perhaps someone can correct me here but, was it true that the reason the Vulcan AND Victor were both ordered into production was because politicians (as usual) were completely incapable of making their minds up which to choose?

Allan

[albeback]

Moving right up to date, the F-35. Too big to fail, and all that, but the whole project is ridiculous. Heads should have rolled and contracts been cancelled years ago.

I don't think any project is too big to fail. What about TSR 2? (Yes, I know the total mismanagement and other factors DIDN'T help!!) Was the C-17 programme not also in danger of failing at one point?  The F-35 could still turn out to be a complete & utter clunker in service and then we really WOULD be stuck with a failure.

Other than that,I completely agree with your comment. Personally, I think the carriers should have been cancelled along with the F-35s!!

Allan

[kitnut617]

What is ironic is that the V-22 is noisier, now than the Rotodyne was when development was cancelled.  They are proposing civilian tiltrotors which will be just as bad as the V-22. 

Have you ever heard a real Rotodyne Brian, or are you basing your comments on some film clips of the time.

All the more reason for builidng more Whiffed 'Dynes then.  

I've yet to hear a V-22 at close range, I'd like to compare that with my 58 year old memory of the 'Dyne.

Having been in close proximity of a hovering V-22 just last year, I can tell you they're not very loud, different sound but no louder than a big helicopter.  But then I've never heard a Rotordyne to compare ----

[kitnut617]

Perhaps someone can correct me here but, was it true that the reason the Vulcan AND Victor were both ordered into production was because politicians (as usual) were completely incapable of making their minds up which to choose?

Allan

From what I've read from various sources , with the wing concept designs being so new and radical it was decided to build both just in case one was a flop. The Valiant was the insurance if both of the others failed to deliver.  Which was why they even produced 'scaled' versions of the wing and fitted them to existing fighter fuselages to test. 

[PR19_Kit]

Having been in close proximity of a hovering V-22 just last year, I can tell you they're not very loud, different sound but no louder than a big helicopter.  But then I've never heard a Rotordyne to compare ----

I'd imagine the V-22 sound must have a lower frequency than the 'Dyne did, with those big, slow turning blades compared to the 'Dyne's long thin ones and those SCREAMING tip jets.

When I was watching and listening to the 'Dyne at Benson it was notable that it was almost inaudible on the approach until they lit off the tip jets. Then it became DIABOLICAL! When they started up on the ground the rotor was sped up just on compressed air from the Elands to start with, and they fired up the tip jets at some particular rpm I gather. Until then it was just a big helicopter.

[kitnut617]

I'd imagine the V-22 sound must have a lower frequency than the 'Dyne did, with those big, slow turning blades compared to the 'Dyne's long thin ones and those SCREAMING tip jets.

How was it compared to a Harrier in the hover Kit ?  The rotor sound the V-22 gives off is similar to any of those MBB rescue types you see and hear buzzing around, and it drowns out the jet noise quite a bit from what I experienced.

[PR19_Kit]

I'd say the 'Dyne was louder than a Harrier in the hover.

But the tip jets gave a much higher pitched sound than a Harrier, and had a 'roaring' overlay as well. That, with the 'Whump Whump' as each blade passsed the listener, made for a unique and pretty overwhelming racket.

[kitnut617]

Well right after the V-22 did it's display flight, an AV-8B Plus did one.  The Harrier was at least four times louder than the V-22

[kitbasher]

F-35. Best thing about it is that it's not as ugly as that bloody Boeing thing that looked like a Baleen whale!
UK would be better off with the USN version not what's on order, and taken up the traps n cats options for the QE and eventually the POW. Affords tons of interoperability (with other naval types) that politicos and the military keep banging on about when talking about coalition ops. Also greater payload capacity.
Ultimately junk and F-18Es a better solution?

[Weaver]

Blackburn Firebrand anyone? I cannot for the life of me see why that thing wasn't cancelled before the end of the war and certainly immediately after it.

Shorts Seamew?

I'm another non-fan of the TSR.2. What really strikes me is how far the avionics were into the bleeding edge of the possible. It was over-ambitious for both industrial, political and inter-service reasons that had nothing to do with what we actually needed. The RAF were offered any number of developed, tailored Buccaneer versions from the late 1950s onwards and if it hadn't been for their blinkered anti-RN, supersonics-are-sexy nonsense, they could have had a highly capable strike aircraft 10 to 15 years before the Tornado.

Speaking of the Tornado, I don't really agree with it's detractors. It was a product of NATO compromise between the German and Italian desire for a shorter-range single seater and the RAF desire for a big Buccaneer replacement. The RAF ended up getting most of it's own way, and honestly, had it been any bigger and more expensive, could we have afforded nearly so many? It ended up being near perfectly tailored for WWIII in Europe, which is what the requirement was in the early 1980s when it entered service. Likewise, the F.3: it was the correct aircraft for the UK air defence requirement as defined in 1975 when the decision had to be made. If you'd told anybody back then that it might be faced with Iraqi or Serbian MiG-29s operating near to their bases, they'd have laughed in your face.

Both Jaguar and Harrier were good at the CAS/BAI mission in thier own way, and it's often forgotten just how "deployable" the Jag was, due to it's short take off, low ground equipment requirement and easy servicing. Jags were the first RAF aircraft into Saudi in 1991 and the French repeatedly used them for rapid deployments to Africa for much the same reasons (Dassault may not have been a fan of the Jaguar, but the AdA liked it just fine). The RAF should probably have bought either the Harrier or the Jaguar but not both, however this was another example of politics at it's finest. The supersonic trainer requirement went away due to cost, Flexible Response meant that far more CAS/BAI aircraft would be needed, and it was easier to convert the Jag trainer orders into strike versions that to incure the political hassle of cancelling an international programme.

For the UK to have a sensible and sustainable aircraft industry and military air capability, three things would have needed to happen from the mid-1950s at the latest:

1. Politicians would need to reach a cross-party consensus on defence/industrial policy and stopped using it as a football,

2. The industry would need to take a long, hard look across the Atlantic and realise that their lunch was going to be stolen if they didn't co-operate to share and protect it,

3. The armed services (the RAF in particular) would need to remember that they are all actually supposed to be on the same side.

Sadly, I can't evisage any of the those really happening. There was no political consensus about what Britain could or should be doing in the world, the industry was atomised into fiercely independent companies, often still run by pioneers who's dogged self-belief had become obstructive egos, and in the absence of a major war, generals, admirals and air-vice-marshals had only budgets to compare each other with.....

[rickshaw]

What is ironic is that the V-22 is noisier, now than the Rotodyne was when development was cancelled.  They are proposing civilian tiltrotors which will be just as bad as the V-22. 

Have you ever heard a real Rotodyne Brian, or are you basing your comments on some film clips of the time.

I'm basing my comments on the decibel noise levels recorded for the two aircraft.

[rickshaw]

F-35. Best thing about it is that it's not as ugly as that bloody Boeing thing that looked like a Baleen whale!
UK would be better off with the USN version not what's on order, and taken up the traps n cats options for the QE and eventually the POW. Affords tons of interoperability (with other naval types) that politicos and the military keep banging on about when talking about coalition ops. Also greater payload capacity.
Ultimately junk and F-18Es a better solution?

Except F-18Es aren't as stealthy, aren't as well equipped electronically and would be limited purely to land operations.  The reality is that the QE and the PoW (perhaps soon to be renamed Ark Royal) aren't equipped for catapult ops and can't be without massive rebuilding.  That means you're limited to the F-35 for those carriers.

[jcf]

What is ironic is that the V-22 is noisier, now than the Rotodyne was when development was cancelled.  They are proposing civilian tiltrotors which will be just as bad as the V-22. 

Have you ever heard a real Rotodyne Brian, or are you basing your comments on some film clips of the time.

I'm basing my comments on the decibel noise levels recorded for the two aircraft.

Which is largely meaningless without flightpath and noise duration comparisons. The peak noise
of the tilt-rotor in normal operation is of very short duration. Look it up, there are papers out there
dealing with the subject from extensive tests with the XV-15 looking directly at issues applicable
to civil tilt-rotor operation. Noise standards and FAA certification regulations have also already been
written and published.

BTW, based on decibel levels, the V-22 is quieter than the C-130H or CH-46.