If the TRS.2 was successful, would there have been a Tornado?

[HarryPhishnuts]

One of these, pondering while washing dishes......

Attention is obviously given to the what-if around the TRS.2 if it had entered RAF service. It can be argued that this (along with I think the LWF) was a key moment in Cold War aviation. The TRS.2 might have been a very capable strike fighter with a long distinguished career similar to the F-111. However, what would have happened to British and European military aviation in general as a result. If the RAF had its needed strike platform, would it have participated in the MRCA program, and would that program have even existed without UK participation? Going down this rabbit hole what would have been the alternatives if there was never a Panavia Tornado?

RAF
If the RAF had its strike platform (and supporting industrial bases) would it have still considered the F-4 for the ground-attack role or later the Sepecat Jaguar? The FAA needed the Phantom for fleet defense, but could it have ended there? Maybe the FAA would have taken a slightly less Anglicized version of the F-4J so long as it could still work from their carriers. If we go down that path, then what does the RAF do, starting in the say early 70's to look for a Lightening replacement for air defense duties. It could just use the same Phantom as the FAA for air defense  (which they eventually did) or maybe look at the latest version of the F-4E. If they could find the budget (unlikely in the 70s) the F-15 or F-14. Maybe they could have participated in the MFPG  the European multi-national consortium that license built the F-16 for its members).  And then if any of those scenarios played out, would there have been a need/interest in something like the ECF/EAP project and subsequent Typhoon? (if the Typhoon didn't happen also branches into some interesting what-ifs).

Germany
Without the Tornado, and still needing a replacement for the F-104 in the Luftwaffe and Marineflieger I think the most likely scenario would be a more capable version of the F-4F as there was already production agreements in place for the Phantoms. The F-4F was intended to be a cheaper F-4E but if there were additional requirements a more capable version could have been considered. There may have been an interest in the MFPG and the production sharing as well depending on the timing. However if either were the case, would they still be interested in the Typhoon project starting in the late 70/80s.

Italy
Italy would be the most in a bind I think. Like Germany they needed something to replace the F-104 not only in a strike role but eventually for air-defense as well. I think the two most obvious options would again some variant of the F-4, maybe with some kind of production license with Aeritalia or they could have participated in the MFPG and become a F-16 operator (something they were forced to do later due to delays in the Tyhpoon) . About the only other options I can think of is maybe buy or maybe license build the Dassault F-1 or more interesting idea some version of the Saab Viggen.

Each of these strands can of course be followed in many wonderfully interesting directions.  With the UK, Germany, and Italy as part of the MFPG could a line of more capable F-16 line have continued made a European F-16XL). If the UK could find the cash could the North Sea have been patrolled by Phoenix wielding Tomcats. If F-1s or Viggens were license built in Italy could that have encouraged other European countries to consider them. And without the Tornado would the Typhoon have ever happened and if not, what then???

I need to start sorting though my model stash     

[NARSES2]

Interesting ponderings 

Please keep us informed about your journey down the "rabbit hole"   

[Nick]

West German F-16 for fighter role, F-4 for strike role. The Eurofighter project leans more to the French Rafale design.

[HarryPhishnuts]

West German F-16 for fighter role, F-4 for strike role. The Eurofighter project leans more to the French Rafale design.

I could see that. Would give the Germans 2 different industrial programs. They would still have to pick one for the Marineflieger. Never understood why they didn't use F-4F for that but either the F-4 or F-16 would do well in the Anti-Shipping role.

[Gondor]

I would favour the Buccaneer for the Marineflieger personally, Arm it with Kormarant rather than Martel.

Gondor

[kerick]

More Buccs and maybe F-111s for UK.

[Mossie]

It would have come later, but Hornet would have been a good option for Germany, capable of both the fighter & Maritime strike roles.  I made a model of a Marineflieger Hornet some years ago, the colours suited it.

[HarryPhishnuts]

It would have come later, but Hornet would have been a good option for Germany, capable of both the fighter & Maritime strike roles.  I made a model of a Marineflieger Hornet some years ago, the colours suited it.

I've got a couple of potential Whiffs on the shelf. including a F-18 that I've thought about doing as Marineflieger aircraft.

[HarryPhishnuts]

More Buccs and maybe F-111s for UK.

But would those options even be needed if the TSR.2 was successful? The F-111K was supposed to be the replacement when the TSR.2 was cancelled but then they saw what a dumpster fire that program was turning into. The RAF took ex-FAA Buccaneers as well as a few new builds because by the late 60's that was really all that was available to them. If they had a capable TRS.2 with, potentially by the late 60's, capabilities on par or better than the F-111A, would they be interested in participating in a program like the MRCA?

[Mossie]

I've got a couple of potential Whiffs on the shelf. including a F-18 that I've thought about doing as Marineflieger aircraft.

I did a 1/144 Revell kit in Norm 87.  It's still about, if in a bit of a sad state (my niece stayed with us for some time and damaged 90% of my models when she swiped them out of the way to make room for her stuff  ). I'll take some pictures.  It's not my best model, but it's one of my favourites as I think the Hornet just suits German service if there's been no Tornado.

[Mossie]

Found some Marineflieger F-16 flights sim skins while browsing:
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3309042/?sphrase_id=21409472

You cannot view this attachment.

[McColm]

Flying at 150 feet at Mach 2 is no easy task so a maritime strike version of the TSR.2 would be a no-no. The USAF has used F-15s during NATO exercises to attack HMS Liverpool around the coastal waters of Gibraltar, however the Buccaneer was built for such a mission. So it couldn't meet the Mach 2 speeds but was very effective when flying at low levels.
 In my opinion there would have been a VG version of the TSR.2 had it gone into production, thus ruling out the Tornado would it have gone back to the delta design with new engines and avionics is debatable.
Britain at the time had a twin engine principle, the exception was the Harrier. So the F-104 and F-16 were ruled out but it didn't stop interest for any Swedish options as a replacement for the Jaguar.
The F-15 was considered in the air defence role to replace the Lightning, had talks with president Carter had come to fruition then the RAF would have been flying B-1As and F-14s.
Even if Maggie had gotten her way with Regan then we would have the F-117 as well. Now to mention the RB-57F but that's another story.
I'm sure that there was other options other than the Tornado at the time, I know from pilots flying the Tonka at low level over the Irish Sea was very painful which is why they had to fly higher and were phased out during the time of the Tornado GR.1Bs.

[Gondor]

In answer to the original question, Always in Kansas.

Gondor

[Weaver]

It really depends on if the rest of the RAF's cancelled 1960s plan goes through with the TSR.2, and if the latter proves attractive to any other air forces.

TSR.2 was too expensive, and hence too scarce, to do all the strike tasks, especially in a protracted conventional phase. They were supposed to be done by the P.1154. I could see Germany buying P.1154 as an F-104 replacement, and possibly also other Starfighter operators like The Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark and Norway too. Italy I'm not so sure about. In the absence of P.1154, Jaguar fills the role nicely for the RAF, and it would definitely have gone ahead alnogside TSR.2 because it was originally intended to be mostly a supersonic advanced trainer (think T-38) and the programme only later morphed into mostly strike, when a)  both partners realised that supersonic advanced trainers were very expensive to run and b) the RAF realised that it didn't have enough strike aircraft to fight a prolonged conventional war after the adoption of Flexible Response by NATO.

The F-16 would be a good fit in the air defence role for the Luftwaffe & other F-104 operators. However it'd be a non-starter for RAF requirements of the 1970s since it had neither a back seater nor BVR missiles nor a big enough radar to support them (remember, we're talking about the original F-16A "cheap & austere" dogfighter here). If the RAF bought F-4K-ish Phantoms (the most likely option I feel) and put them straight into the air defence role, instead of using them for strike for a few years until the Jag came along, then their airframe lives would have been much longer and they wouldn't have needed replacement until the late 1980s. That would mean that something like Typhoon would have been needed in about the same time frame as real life, so it would probably still have happened.

Other realistic UK options were the F-14 and F-15, both seriously looked at but rejected in favour of Tornado ADV, partly because both aircraft had troubles and uncertain futures (easy to forget with 20/20 hindsight) and the RAF eouldn't have budget for a new fighter unitl the mid 1980s when the massive Tornado GR.1 buy began to tail off. In the absence of Tornado, one or the other might have been chosen. Their issues were:

F-14:
Unreliable engines.
Production might be cancelled before 1980 (only an issue in real life).
RAF standard training costs (1 live missile shoot per crew per year) would be very expensive with Phoenix.
The platform was over-specified for the job in the absence of Phoenix.

F-15:
Unreliable engines.
Production might be cancelled before 1980 in favour of the F-16 (Fighter Mafia propaganda and only an issue in real life).
Radar lacked ECCM capability.
Meeting RAF requirements would mean buying F-15Bs with a radically re-worked back seat station.

[sandiego89]

Flying at 150 feet at Mach 2 is no easy task so a maritime strike version of the TSR.2 would be a no-no. The USAF has used F-15s during NATO exercises to attack HMS Liverpool around the coastal waters of Gibraltar, however the Buccaneer was built for such a mission. So it couldn't meet the Mach 2 speeds but was very effective when flying at low levels......
 

McColm, no one is going Mach2 at low level.  Mach is highly dependent on density altitude and the air is too thick for most aircraft to get anywhere close to those kinds of speeds down low.  The Mach2 speeds could only be obtained at high altitudes where the air is much thinner.  The TSR-2 could perhaps have approached Mach 2 at altitude, but the envisioned low profile was more like .95 Mach at 200 feet or maybe up to Mach 1.15 or so briefly.   Not even a XB-70 or SR-71 could reach their high mach numbers down low.   

There have been a host of Mach2 capable aircraft (B-58, F-104, F-105, Tornado, F-4, RA-5C, Tu-160, B-1, Mirage V...) that later used a low profile, but this was usually high sub-sonic.   Their Mach2 capability was clean and up high, and rarely used.   So a high subsonic aircraft like the Buccaneer was about on par as these "Mach2" aircraft down low, and surprised more than one "fighter" down low.   The Buccaneer, F-111, F-105, A-6 excelled down low.   

If the TSR-2 worked, it would have been acceptable in low level maritime roles.