Boulton Paul P 120 point defense interceptor.

[chrisonord]

After my near blind purchase of the P111/111a and P120, I thought perhaps they could be put in service as point defense interceptors. Possibly mixed propulsion, rocket motor to get it to altitude and either pods of unguided rockets or a pair of license built falcon missiles, on over wing pylons. I originally thought of using firestreaks, but they are to me, too big. I haven't looked in to when the Falcon missiles were brought in to service, but what if they worked right first time out and became a success story, much like the sidewinder did, and the British bought some to arm their current fighters of the time. It is totally a what if idea I know, but the size of the aircraft with an advanced nene or newer more powerful engine, it would cause havoc to a Soviet bomber formation. Just had a look and the AIM-4 Falcon come in to service in 1956, also Hughes made the AIM-26 falcon, a nuclear armed version, one or possibly two could be carried by the P120/P111.
Chris

[NARSES2]

Chris I think that's a good idea, especially as I had a similar one 

I built the AZ (Freight dog) SR 53 as an RAuxAF point defence fighter to be used to defend airfields in a last ditch scenario.

[chrisonord]

Cheers Chris,
I will look at how best to replicate the rocket motor too, as I am thinking of putting an external jettisoning pod on the lower rear fuselage. AIM-26 nuclear falcon missiles could be the way to go too.
Chris

[Weaver]

Falcon and Sidewinder entered service in 1956. Firestreak in 1957. Nuclear Falcon didn't come along until 1961.

Original AIM-4 Falcon weighed 119-135lb depending on the version
Nuclear AIM-26 Falcon weighed 203lb
Firestreak weighed 300lb
Sidewinder AIM-9B weighed 155lb
Genie weighed 822lb

The P.120 didn't have a radar, which would be needed for SARH-guided AIM-4 Falcons, Nuclear Falcons, Firestreak and Genie. Firestreak needed a radar to point the seeker at the target, and Genie needed it for precise trajectory calculations. This means that IR-guided Falcons and Sidewinders are the only realistic option. If you wanted Nuclear Falcon, you'd have to have a what-if IR-guided version.

The original Falcon wasn't a 'failure' as such in it's intended role, i.e. destroying lumbering bombers. It got a bad rap because it's first combat use was in dogfights over Vietnam where it's long cooling time (6-7 seconds), one-shot cooling (once cooled, it had to be fired within 2 mins otherwise it was dead-on-the-rail), lack of a proximity fuse and complicated controls made it a royal PITA and much inferior to Sidewinder. None of that matters, however, if you're cruising up behind a Tu-4...

Personally, given the early date and limited potential of the P.120, I'd be inclined to go for unguided rocket batteries, probably on cropped wingtips similar to the P.111.

[NARSES2]

Personally I find the idea of nuclear weapons going off somewhere over the East coast slightly frightening, mind you the alternative is perhaps even more so,

[Weaver]

Personally I find the idea of nuclear weapons going off somewhere over the East coast slightly frightening, mind you the alternative is perhaps even more so,

Well they tested a live Genie in 1957. It detonated at 18-20,000 ft and observers on the ground directly underneath it were unharmed and didn't take dangerous radiation doses either. The Genie warhead was 1.5kt whereas the Nuclear Falcon used a much smaller 0.25kt warhead, so somehow I think Hull would have been spared excessive sunburn.

I'd be more worried about:

a) An RAF interceptor crashing with one on-board in peacetime. Apparently it was discovered that it was possible to set off a Genie by dropping it hard enough. Some 'urgent modifications' ensued...

b) The results of a near-missed Soviet bomber crashing in one piece with it's nuclear bombload active. The result of a near miss would be to kill the crew with radiation in minutes, but that wouldn't stop them from arming their bomb(s) as a final act. Even if they didn't the results of a crash could have a wide range of outcomes, none of them good...

[Scotaidh]

Personally I find the idea of nuclear weapons going off somewhere over the East coast slightly frightening, mind you the alternative is perhaps even more so,

Well they tested a live Genie in 1957. It detonated at 18-20,000 ft and observers on the ground directly underneath it were unharmed and didn't take dangerous radiation doses either. The Genie warhead was 1.5kt whereas the Nuclear Falcon used a much smaller 0.25kt warhead, so somehow I think Hull would have been spared excessive sunburn.

I'd be more worried about:

a) An RAF interceptor crashing with one on-board in peacetime. Apparently it was discovered that it was possible to set off a Genie by dropping it hard enough. Some 'urgent modifications' ensued...

b) The results of a near-missed Soviet bomber crashing in one piece with it's nuclear bombload active. The result of a near miss would be to kill the crew with radiation in minutes, but that wouldn't stop them from arming their bomb(s) as a final act. Even if they didn't the results of a crash could have a wide range of outcomes, none of them good...

Not to mention the devastating effects of the EMP these days ... In the 50s it would have been an interesting side effect, but now ...

[chrisonord]

So, over wing aim-4's  should do the job. There was an infrared version that in the wiff world, should do. I can arm the P120 with those, and the P111 with unguided rockets.
Chris

[Weaver]

So, over wing aim-4's  should do the job. There was an infrared version that in the wiff world, should do. I can arm the P120 with those, and the P111 with unguided rockets.
Chris

That makes sense: switching over to missiles means the P.120 can exploit the extended wingtips for a bit more altitude performance.

There really were IR-guided AIM-4s (AIM-4B,C,D & G), it was just the AIM-26As & Bs that were radar-only. The original plan was to have IR versions of AIM-26 but they were cancelled, so it was clearly feasible.

[chrisonord]

I will have to have a look at podded unguided rockets for the 111, not sure how over wing pods of rockets would fare, so maybe, a single under fuselage pod might work.
Chris

[Weaver]

I will have to have a look at podded unguided rockets for the 111, not sure how over wing pods of rockets would fare, so maybe, a single under fuselage pod might work.
Chris

Well it's got cropped wingtips hasn't it? If so, I'd put the pods there: as far away sideways from anything in front of them as possible...

[chrisonord]

I will have a look at what was in use in the mid fifties, and  see if it is feasible, if not, I will make something bespoke for it.
Chris

[Mossie]

Fireflash? Like others it'd need radar though.  It might be possible to make a thimble fairing, like with some MiG's.
https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/PAVU72175

[chrisonord]

Fireflash looks to be quite a large missile, is it similarly sized to the firestreaks, as they are way to big for these.
Chris

[PR19_Kit]

Apparently it was discovered that it was possible to set off a Genie by dropping it hard enough.

It'd be interesting to see how they discovered that.

I suspect some of my more lurid tales of explosive tests having gone wrong would pale into insignificance by comparison!