Republic F-105 "Thunderchief" Ideas and Inspiration

[elmayerle]

I can't believe there's not a thread for this one, so...

A few ideas:
- RCAF buys F-105 for nuclear response in Europe instead of F-104.  I'm thinking a two-seater with the T-stick II spine (perhaps with an Iroquois replacing the J75).
- RAF buys two-seat Thunderchief Mk.1 as a "temporary measure" until P.1154 is ready; later develops Thunderchief Mk.2 with enlarge spine, full Martel capability (four missiles with control pod on centerline), and J75 replaced by Olympus 321R (installation already proven as one Thunderchief Mk.1X flew as testbed for TSR-2 engine development).  I'm thinking that the Mk.1X in "raspberry ripple" would look quite tasty.
- Armee de l'Air F-105s to supplement Mirage IVs?

[Daryl J.]

The "half F-105/ half XF-103"  Republic project is pretty cool.

NORAD might have used a few of them.   :)

[elmayerle]

The "half F-105/ half XF-103"  Republic project is pretty cool.

NORAD might have used a few of them.   :)

Republic AP-75?  Yeah, that's a cool one and one I'm looking to model.  It's going to be quite the kitbash effort with bits from a couple Revell 1/72 F-105s, a 1/72 F-105F, a 1/48 F-105D for the intakes and center fuselage, and cloned F-103 wings and tail surfaces.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I can't believe there's not a thread for this one, so...

A few ideas:
- RCAF buys F-105 for nuclear response in Europe instead of F-104.  I'm thinking a two-seater with the T-stick II spine (perhaps with an Iroquois replacing the J75).
- RAF buys two-seat Thunderchief Mk.1 as a "temporary measure" until P.1154 is ready; later develops Thunderchief Mk.2 with enlarge spine, full Martel capability (four missiles with control pod on centerline), and J75 replaced by Olympus 321R (installation already proven as one Thunderchief Mk.1X flew as testbed for TSR-2 engine development).  I'm thinking that the Mk.1X in "raspberry ripple" would look quite tasty.
- Armee de l'Air F-105s to supplement Mirage IVs?

Quite right.  How did I miss adding a topic on my favourite aircraft?  Glad you caught the error in time and did your part by starting the topic.  :)

The idea of an F-105 in CAF/RCAF and French AdA markings gives me a warm fuzzy feeling all over :)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

There were never enough F-105 Thunderchiefs built.  So in our 'verse the production lines continue or have been restarted again (like the Navy did with the A-5 Vigilante) and more Thunderchiefs are built with additional improvements based on the experience gained from operations during the Vietnam conflict. 

In addition to the product improvement programs that kept the F-105 current with other modern combat aircraft how about some other improvements such as:

* Wing tip mounted AAM missile rails. 
* Replacing the J75 turboject with a thrust augmented turbofan if the stock intakes will support the increased air flow demands.
* Remove the weapons bay feature and replace with a fuel cell in the same space. 
* New build aircraft and retro-fit to older aircraft with the T-Stick II equipment including all of the bells and whistles in the cockpit.
* Switch to MFD/CRT displays to make it more effective and easier to operate for the pilot and weapon systems/electronic countermeasures systems operator in delivering ordnance on targets in night and adverse weather conditions. 

[The Big Gimper]

I can't believe there's not a thread for this one, so...

A few ideas:
- RCAF buys F-105 for nuclear response in Europe instead of F-104.  I'm thinking a two-seater with the T-stick II spine (perhaps with an Iroquois replacing the J75).
- RAF buys two-seat Thunderchief Mk.1 as a "temporary measure" until P.1154 is ready; later develops Thunderchief Mk.2 with enlarge spine, full Martel capability (four missiles with control pod on centerline), and J75 replaced by Olympus 321R (installation already proven as one Thunderchief Mk.1X flew as testbed for TSR-2 engine development).  I'm thinking that the Mk.1X in "raspberry ripple" would look quite tasty.
- Armee de l'Air F-105s to supplement Mirage IVs?

Quite right.  How did I miss adding a topic on my favourite aircraft?  Glad you caught the error in time and did your part by starting the topic.  :)

The idea of an F-105 in CAF/RCAF and French AdA markings gives me a warm fuzzy feeling all over :)

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

There were never enough F-105 Thunderchiefs built.  So in our 'verse the production lines continue or have been restarted again (like the Navy did with the A-5 Vigilante) and more Thunderchiefs are built with additional improvements based on the experience gained from operations during the Vietnam conflict. 

In addition to the product improvement programs that kept the F-105 current with other modern combat aircraft how about some other improvements such as:

* Wing tip mounted AAM missile rails. 
* Replacing the J75 turboject with a thrust augmented turbofan if the stock intakes will support the increased air flow demands.
* Remove the weapons bay feature and replace with a fuel cell in the same space. 
* New build aircraft and retro-fit to older aircraft with the T-Stick II equipment including all of the bells and whistles in the cockpit.
* Switch to MFD/CRT displays to make it more effective and easier to operate for the pilot and weapon systems/electronic countermeasures systems operator in delivering ordnance on targets in night and adverse weather conditions.

May I satisfy your fuzzies?




These are drawn by Spinner's Strike Fighters

[Cliffy B]

Mmmmm Thuds!!  Those are spiffy looking Maple Leaf versions 

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I can't believe there's not a thread for this one, so...

A few ideas:
- RCAF buys F-105 for nuclear response in Europe instead of F-104.  I'm thinking a two-seater with the T-stick II spine (perhaps with an Iroquois replacing the J75).
- RAF buys two-seat Thunderchief Mk.1 as a "temporary measure" until P.1154 is ready; later develops Thunderchief Mk.2 with enlarge spine, full Martel capability (four missiles with control pod on centerline), and J75 replaced by Olympus 321R (installation already proven as one Thunderchief Mk.1X flew as testbed for TSR-2 engine development).  I'm thinking that the Mk.1X in "raspberry ripple" would look quite tasty.
- Armee de l'Air F-105s to supplement Mirage IVs?

Quite right.  How did I miss adding a topic on my favourite aircraft?  Glad you caught the error in time and did your part by starting the topic.  :)

The idea of an F-105 in CAF/RCAF and French AdA markings gives me a warm fuzzy feeling all over :)
<snip>.

May I satisfy your fuzzies?
<snip>These are drawn by Spinner's Strike Fighters

A shame that Spinner's (Alf) did not want to join us here.  I miss seeing his creations. 

Would rather see the RCAF/CAF Thunderchief in the NATO camouflage scheme with subdued markings.  :)

[Litvyak]

Hmmm, may have to buy an F-105 kit and build one of those...

One nitpick, though, if you don't mind? The roundels are wrong - the roundels as present on the renderings are the new ones that were introduced with the new/current flag; back when the Red Ensign was in use, the RCAF used the Silver Maple roundel.

[The Big Gimper]

Hmmm, may have to buy an F-105 kit and build one of those...

One nitpick, though, if you don't mind? The roundels are wrong - the roundels as present on the renderings are the new ones that were introduced with the new/current flag; back when the Red Ensign was in use, the RCAF used the Silver Maple roundel.

I noticed that too. Easy to fix though in the real world. 

[The Big Gimper]

I can't believe there's not a thread for this one, so...

A few ideas:
- RCAF buys F-105 for nuclear response in Europe instead of F-104.  I'm thinking a two-seater with the T-stick II spine (perhaps with an Iroquois replacing the J75).
- RAF buys two-seat Thunderchief Mk.1 as a "temporary measure" until P.1154 is ready; later develops Thunderchief Mk.2 with enlarge spine, full Martel capability (four missiles with control pod on centerline), and J75 replaced by Olympus 321R (installation already proven as one Thunderchief Mk.1X flew as testbed for TSR-2 engine development).  I'm thinking that the Mk.1X in "raspberry ripple" would look quite tasty.
- Armee de l'Air F-105s to supplement Mirage IVs?

Quite right.  How did I miss adding a topic on my favourite aircraft?  Glad you caught the error in time and did your part by starting the topic.  :)

The idea of an F-105 in CAF/RCAF and French AdA markings gives me a warm fuzzy feeling all over :)
<snip>.

May I satisfy your fuzzies?
<snip>These are drawn by Spinner's Strike Fighters

A shame that Spinner's (Alf) did not want to join us here.  I miss seeing his creations. 

Would rather see the RCAF/CAF Thunderchief in the NATO camouflage scheme with subdued markings.  :)

Or like the 1975 green SYM markings John Lacey did for me. Change the  Roundels to the 1980 Blue/Red. All green makes for an easy paint job sez lazy Carl. 

[The Big Gimper]

A shame that Spinner's (Alf) did not want to join us here.  I miss seeing his creations. 

Would rather see the RCAF/CAF Thunderchief in the NATO camouflage scheme with subdued markings.  :)

Agreed. Alf has done some awesome work recently.

[Litvyak]

Mmm. That F-107 has inspired me - now I've got an idea of what to do with my Trumpeter kit!

[Empty Handed]

Got an EF-105J with F-4G bits that's gonna be in Hill Grey somewhere on the backburner. Also an Aeronavale anti-ship (exocet) one. Maybe some Kartveli OKB examples (codename Fuddle). RoKAF. EdA...... The list is quite extensive.

As an aside, how is human cloning coming? 

[elmayerle]

I went into the Osprey book on the F-105 and found that Republic had proposed derivatives with extended wingtips (have to work through the info and see if I can find more specific data for modelling purposes, I'm tempted to go with extended span and reduced LE sweep which could possibly allow fitment of a Sidewinder, or equivalent AAM, rail on the wingtip.  I also found that the Canadian proposal did include replacing the J75 with an Iroquois and the RAF one did include replacing the J75 with the same Olympus variant as the TSR-2 used.  There were also proposals to use an advanced J75 variant that P&W offered which had 30,000 lbt. in full burner.

I need to check the dimensions, but I think a RM-8, or a similar JT8D modification, might fit in place of the J75 and I don't believe the airflow requirements are that different, comparing F-105 and Viggen intakes.

[Jeffry Fontaine]

I went into the Osprey book on the F-105 and found that Republic had proposed derivatives with extended wingtips (have to work through the info and see if I can find more specific data for modelling purposes, I'm tempted to go with extended span and reduced LE sweep which could possibly allow fitment of a Sidewinder, or equivalent AAM, rail on the wingtip.  I also found that the Canadian proposal did include replacing the J75 with an Iroquois and the RAF one did include replacing the J75 with the same Olympus variant as the TSR-2 used.  There were also proposals to use an advanced J75 variant that P&W offered which had 30,000 lbt. in full burner.

I need to check the dimensions, but I think a RM-8, or a similar JT8D modification, might fit in place of the J75 and I don't believe the airflow requirements are that different, comparing F-105 and Viggen intakes.

Nice to know!  I was not as far off base as I had imagined with the extended wings to provide more space for additional stores pylons on the wings.  The wing tip mounted missile launch rails could also be mounted on the bottom of the wing tip which would leave your existing navigation and formation lights intact plus the ESM bumps that show up later in service life. 

[elmayerle]

Just a thought, Republic had pitched the F-105 to the Luftwaffe, but how about to the West German navy?  I could see a two-seater with T-Stick II spine and two Komoran missiles on patrol over the Baltic in Marineflieger (sp) camo.  Givent eh Thud's sea level performance, that'd make for a very difficult target for the other side to hit.

[Weaver]

One of my favorite Whiffs is "What if the F-4 never happened?". One possibility here is a tactical fighter F-105 based on Vietnam experience:

1. Fixed integral fuel cell in bomb bay
2. Pair of Sparrows on corners of 1. (yes, they WILL fit with the u/c doors)
3. Straightened inboard trailing edge for more wing area
4. Extended leading edge for more wing area: LE root extends to tip of intake. More wing area again, and balances 3.
5. Twin Sidewinder rails on each outboard pylon

Despite their size, Thuds didn't do half badly in air-to-air combat (they shot down more MiGs than they lost aircraft to them), so this version, with a little more wing area should be good.

Whatever the mods and mission, a lot of the Thud's vulnerability could be fixed by relatively minor detail work, such as duplicating electrical and hydraulic lines and running them well apart, possibly behind a modicum of armour.

[Daryl J.]

Sometime I'd love to see a top view of the extended wing proposal.

[Geoff]

RAAF in place of the F-4s, well they wanted bombers!

[elmayerle]

Sometime I'd love to see a top view of the extended wing proposal.

Well, the span was extended 4 ft. according to published data, so that's a starting point.  I'd think use the same wingtips and have a reduced sweep leading edge inboard to the next major rib.  I'll have to see what I can work up.

[elmayerle]

I was looking through some F-105 books and a couple variations struck me (figuratively, not literally).  What if the RF-105 had been chosen instead of the RF-101?  Would we have also seen RF-105Ds?  For that matter, a RF-105F with capability for not just photo but electronic reconnaisance?

[The Big Gimper]

I was looking through some F-105 books and a couple variations struck me (figuratively, not literally).  What if the RF-105 had been chosen instead of the RF-101?  Would we have also seen RF-105Ds?  For that matter, a RF-105F with capability for not just photo but electronic reconnaisance?

Evan, do you have a picture or a line drawing of the RF-105D?

[elmayerle]

I was looking through some F-105 books and a couple variations struck me (figuratively, not literally).  What if the RF-105 had been chosen instead of the RF-101?  Would we have also seen RF-105Ds?  For that matter, a RF-105F with capability for not just photo but electronic reconnaisance?

Evan, do you have a picture or a line drawing of the RF-105D?

You can find pictures of the RF/JF-105B reasonably readily (let me know and I'll scan some material if needed) and the same approach can be applied to making a RF-105D from the extended nose of the F-105D.

[The Big Gimper]

I was looking through some F-105 books and a couple variations struck me (figuratively, not literally).  What if the RF-105 had been chosen instead of the RF-101?  Would we have also seen RF-105Ds?  For that matter, a RF-105F with capability for not just photo but electronic reconnaisance?

Evan, do you have a picture or a line drawing of the RF-105D?

You can find pictures of the RF/JF-105B reasonably readily (let me know and I'll scan some material if needed) and the same approach can be applied to making a RF-105D from the extended nose of the F-105D.

I don't have any personal material on the F-105. Note to self: Need to fix this. 

Searches have provided many textual references but no images.

However I did find 5 images of a RF-105B at the Flickr Repository for the San Diego Air and Space Museum Archive

And this surviving example.

JF-105 search provided this image.
   
Did the RF-105D use the RF-105B nose or the JF-105B nose?

[elmayerle]

JF-105B is a re-purposed RF-105B with the clear panels for the cameras replaced by sheet metal panels (I should be able to scan some pics from various reference books at home).  There never was a RF-105D and I'm presuming that a RF-105D would apply similar flat surfaces and camera panels to the F-105D nose that the RF-105B did to the F-105B nose.  With the longer and larger nose, I could see the RF-105D also mounting a forward and downward looking camera.

[The Big Gimper]

That explains why I was not getting any images. Pics would be great. Thanks in advance.

This should not be too hard to do. Just need to find the right replacement nose profile. Maybe a portion from a RF-101?

BTW I have on the bench a WIP RF-102C where I took the nose off a RF-101 (the first 5/8" and a near perfect cross section fit ) and cut open windows on each side of the existing F-102 nose for two more cameras.

[elmayerle]

It may take a bit before I can scan them all, returned to work today.

I'm working on a full-up RF-101B with the RF-101C photo nose and an ELINT fit in place of the weapons bay and an antenna fairing under it.  There might be pods under the wings, too.

[The Big Gimper]

It may take a bit before I can scan them all, returned to work today.

I'm working on a full-up RF-101B with the RF-101C photo nose and an ELINT fit in place of the weapons bay and an antenna fairing under it.  There might be pods under the wings, too.

Nice. I agree the weapons bay has lots of WHIF potential.

Take your time Evan. You probably know the RF-101s were cleared to carry the ALQ-71.



On this F-106 page there is good picture, and someone who claims to be Jeffry Fontaine asking about the installation. Jeff, is this identity theft? 

[Jeffry Fontaine]

On this F-106 page there is good picture, and someone who claims to be Jeffry Fontaine asking about the installation. Jeff, is this identity theft? 

Reply posted to the Voodoo thread :)

[elmayerle]

One other F-105 version I'm going to have to doodle on is a proposed record-breaker that had "speed bulges" (like the F-102) at the back.  I need to re-read the description and see what else I'd need to modify.

[Daryl J.]

Somewhere it seems I read that a wing extension on the F-105 would have significantly improved its agility.

True?  Who knows. 

But with that in mind, take Monogram's F-105F and extend the main wing a bit, put some tip rails on it, outfit it for RAF Air to Ground strike missions possibly including antishipping.   

[elmayerle]

A couple ideas for a RAF strike version of the F-105: A bulged spine like that of the T-Stick II installation but containing British avionics for all-weather strike and, internally only, the J75 replaced by an Olympus 300R from the TSR.2 (either as a supplement/complement to the TSR.2 or as a replacement after the cancellation).

[upnorth]

A re-engine job to something less thirsty would definitely be in order.

I'd also say that four petaled tail pipe/speed brake arrangement would have to go. I imagine a lot of weight in hydraulics to move all that heavy, heat resistant metal must have been crammed in. Let the tail pipe just be a tail pipe and redesign lighter weight material speed brakes further forward of it in perhaps a similar arrangement to what the Sukhoi "Fitter" family had.

Also, would wider chord tail surfaces benefit the Thud? The fin and horizontal stabilizers always looked a bit undersize to me in relation to the rest of the aircraft.

On that matter, could the wing be reworked with higher lift devices that could reduce take off and landing roll and give improved low speed handling? Full span flaps on leading and trailing edges perhaps.

How about a later, lightened version after countermeasures reached a quality that some armor could be dispensed with and composite materials worked in?

As for foreign users....

The Thud in imperial Iran probably wouldn't have been out of the question as a forerunner and supplemental aircraft to Phantoms.

Any country that had the Canberra for strike purposes and needed to replace it; Argentina, Australia, India or New Zealand for example could have been good Thud candidates.

The maritime strike angle has been mentioned already; this could open the door to countries like Germany, Denmark, Norway and Japan.

[ChernayaAkula]

Not extended wings as per Daryl's idea, but I'm sure you could fit a rail on the end.
F-15 wings (in the same scale as the Thud fuselage! )



Or how about swing-wings? From a Su-17 Fitter and again to scale:

[elmayerle]

Not extended wings as per Daryl's idea, but I'm sure you could fit a rail on the end.
F-15 wings (in the same scale as the Thud fuselage! )

Use the square-tip wing originally flown on the prototype F-15s and you've got your spot for wingtip missile rails.

[Daryl J.]

Heh...precisely that wing was why a $5.00 Mongram 1/48 F-15A in a beater of a box came home too the other day.  But it would be only a substrate and therefore unrecognizable as to its origins.

I love raised panel line kits for this type of work.

[finsrin]

Kitbashers take note:  all those wings work well.

[dy031101]

I can't get that AP-75 proposal off my mind......

Is it possible to keep the intake configuration but use the ramjet like the one on XF-103?

[elmayerle]

If I was doing a 1/72 AP-75, and I am planning on it, I'd use a 1/48 F-105 center fuselage and intakes with cockpits from an early F-105B and a F-105F/G and use the two aft ends for the side-by-side J75s.  Mixing the AP-75's intakes with the XF-103's ramjet could be done, but 'twould be somewhat more difficult from an inlet-flow integration standpoint, the XF-103's inlet was chosen for good reasons, including ease of integration with the entire propulsion system.

[mrvr6]

why are the intakes swept like they are?

[elmayerle]

why are the intakes swept like they are?

It's one way of controlling the shock.  The Arrow Mk.III would have had similar and Vickers Type 571, which was merged with the English Electric P.17 to form the TSR.2, had similar intakes, t.

[jcf]

Somewhere it seems I read that a wing extension on the F-105 would have significantly improved its agility.

True?  Who knows. 

But with that in mind, take Monogram's F-105F and extend the main wing a bit, put some tip rails on it, outfit it for RAF Air to Ground strike missions possibly including antishipping.

An extended wing might improve air-to-air agility but it would work against low-level strike
missions as a larger wing would increase the gust loads.

Damned if ye do, damned if ye don't. 

F-105 would look cool with the flying surfaces cut to match this:

Cut off the painted bits to create curved tips.
 

[elmayerle]

Ah, Hawker-style planforms for the flying surfaces.  That would look attractive, perhaps as new end-cap elements for the existing wings and horziontal tails isntead of trimming the existing surfaces.

[Rickshaw]

Did the F-105 ever use the internal bomb bay for anything other than fuel?  Seems rather small and slim.  Fine for a nuke but not much that would be useful...

[elmayerle]

Did the F-105 ever use the internal bomb bay for anything other than fuel?  Seems rather small and slim.  Fine for a nuke but not much that would be useful...

I think some of the early ones carried tactical nukes there, but when it went conventional, external carriage of bombs made more sense.

[Kerick]

A naval strike version would be awesome! Single seat or two seater? It would be fun to watch the rivet counter's hair catch fire!

[elmayerle]

A naval strike version would be awesome! Single seat or two seater? It would be fun to watch the rivet counter's hair catch fire!

Definitely a two-seater, perhaps with a spine like that for T-Stick II.  Probably in a scheme for land-based naval aircraft as I can't see a Thud making carrier landings without a lot of mods.  Something like the Thunderchief S.2 from my first post, but with dedicated anti-ship missiles.

Hmm, same airframe in French markings and camo carrying four ASMPs for the nuclear strike role.

[Kerick]

A naval strike version would be awesome! Single seat or two seater? It would be fun to watch the rivet counter's hair catch fire!

Definitely a two-seater, perhaps with a spine like that for T-Stick II.  Probably in a scheme for land-based naval aircraft as I can't see a Thud making carrier landings without a lot of mods.  Something like the Thunderchief S.2 from my first post, but with dedicated anti-ship missiles.

Hmm, same airframe in French markings and camo carrying four ASMPs for the nuclear strike role.

The image in my mind was German Navy markings with a load of missiles. Definitely a land based version. Two seater sounds better the more I think about it.

[elmayerle]

Ah, in MFG1 or MFG2 markings with a full load-out of four Komoran missiles?  That could seriously ruin any surface combatant's day.

[Kerick]

I was just thinking about using the Wild Weasel version with two seats and all the extra lumps and bumps. Would be nice to accommodate some radar tracking and countermeasures equipment.

[elmayerle]

*snicker* That could work, particularly if some of the Komoran seekers got replaced by suitable ARM seekers (perhaps something similar to those used in ARMAT?).

[Kerick]

*snicker* That could work, particularly if some of the Komoran seekers got replaced by suitable ARM seekers (perhaps something similar to those used in ARMAT?).

Food for thought!

[GTX_Admin]

Random idea:  Japanese F-105 in scheme similar to this:

[Kerick]

F-105 meets SU-22. Inspired by a thread on another site.

[jcf]

I was just thinking about using the Wild Weasel version with two seats and all the extra lumps and bumps. Would be nice to accommodate some radar tracking and countermeasures equipment.

^ This with four Harpoon in South Korean markings. 

KPN? What KPN? 

[Cliffy B]

I was just thinking about using the Wild Weasel version with two seats and all the extra lumps and bumps. Would be nice to accommodate some radar tracking and countermeasures equipment.

^ This with four Harpoon in South Korean markings. 

KPN? What KPN? 

DO IT!!! DO IT NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Weaver]

A couple ideas for a RAF strike version of the F-105: A bulged spine like that of the T-Stick II installation but containing British avionics for all-weather strike and, internally only, the J75 replaced by an Olympus 300R from the TSR.2 (either as a supplement/complement to the TSR.2 or as a replacement after the cancellation).

A possible alternative could have an RR Conway for better fuel consumption, Red Beard in the bomb bay (Freightdog do a 1/72nd one) and lower-spec TSR.2 avionics, with a smaller radome for the TFRF and the cannon deleted to make way for the SLAR aerials.

[elmayerle]

Yes, the RR Conway is an alternate option if you needed it to get the desired range.  Really, what I'd like to have in there is an afterburning Medway for a generation newer engine technology and even better dry fuel economy.

[Weaver]

That'd be interesting. One of the perennial dilemmas in concocting British whiff histories is the Spey: do you allow BEA to go ahead and screw up the Trident by demanding it be made smaller, but in the process causing the creation of the Spey, which was ideal for many combat aircraft projects, or do you save the Trident, but then get stuck with a Medway which is to big to "save" the Buccaneer? If the RAF were going for the Thud, that would allow you to have a big Trident and a big trurbofan strike aircraft. It doesn't help the Bucc of course, but in a world where the British government is more open to buying US stuff earlier, the FAA might be on Avon-Skyhawks as per my other alt. history anyway.

[elmayerle]

I was thinking of a dry Medway going ahead for the HS.681 stol/vstol transport and the basic engine then being developed as an afterburning powerplant for other uses.  It was the engine chosen for that aircraft, so this isn't too far out.  This gives you the early Spey, which later became the Spery Jr. for commercial use, for the Buccaneer while still having the Medway for other uses.

[The Big Gimper]

Borrow, stolen, snarfed, acquired, brown envelope, on loan, it fell into my lap from Secret Projects


AP Number   Designation   Timeframe      Comments     Source

AP 63        F-105A       1954         SAC          Chart
AP 63        F-105B       1955         SAC          Chart
AP 63-5      F-105C       1955         Mockup photos in multiple sources.   SAC Chart
AP-63-10     --           --           Two place all weather F-105      Anderton
AP-63-19     --           July 1960    Proposal for British, French, German Co-production.  British offered option of Olympus B.01.22R. Anderton states F-105D.       Anderton
AP-63-19E(?) --           --           Proposal to Canada for strike attack Interceptor Day Fighter Limited All Weather F-105 with Orenda engine.  (Note: “Limited all-weather” implies that proposal is based on F-105B -or- F-105D with alternate avionics)   Anderton
AP-63-26     --           --           Proposal to Luftwaffe for F-105D version   Anderton
AP 63-31*    F-105D       1957         “All-weather” version of F-105B, revised avionics/radar.   SAC Chart
AP-63-32     --           --           Proposal to Canada : F-105 with advanced Iroquois engine   Anderton
AP 63-33     F-105E       1957-8       Two-seat, reduced fuel version of F-105D.  Anderton has photo of prototype under construction.      SAC Chart
AP-63-??     F-105F       1961-2       *SAC Chart also lists F-105F as AP-63-31 which is unlikely, may be transposed from -31RE block number?   
AP-63-36     --           Sept 1958    Proposal for SR-196 Tactical Strike – Reconnaissance System.  Fuselage stretch may have been basis for F-105F.   Anderton
AP-63-??     “F-105G”     early 1962   Conversion of F-105D to two seat, uprated engine (JT4B-24), added fuel in saddle and speedbump tanks.   Anderton
AP-63-??     "F-105H"     mid-1962     Revised fuselage, added fuel, new wing (added area; folding wingtips) and stabilator, tandem wheel MLG, uprated engine   Anderton
--           F-105G       1966         Air Force conversion of F-105F to EW Weasel – superseded tentative “EF-105F” designation.   
AP-63-??     “F-105D-35RE”  1968       Republic proposal for remanufacture of F-105D fleet with T-Stick II, more fuel, new pylons, possibly rebuilt wing.   Anderton
AP-71        RF-105B      1954         SAC Chart

Anderton also lists these miscellaneous additional AP numbers:


AP 95    Air-to-Surface ballistic Missile (to fit in F-105 weapons bay)
AP 96    Man-in-Space vehicle, proposed to Air Force
AP 99    Strategic air-to-surface ballistic missile
AP 100   VTOL fighter-bomber
AP 106   Parametric study for VTOL aircraft

[GTX_Admin]

A Luftwaffe one would be interesting in this scheme:

[kitnut617]

And the Olympus powered one for the RAF

[Kelmola]

AP 95    Air-to-Surface ballistic Missile (to fit in F-105 weapons bay)
AP 96    Man-in-Space vehicle, proposed to Air Force
AP 99    Strategic air-to-surface ballistic missile
AP 100   VTOL fighter-bomber
AP 106   Parametric study for VTOL aircrat

The what? OK, I can dig that AP95 would have fitted what became SRAM (or two) into the bay. Considering F-105 was a nuclear carrier fulfilling a similar role to F(B)-111 it would have made sense to fit it for SRAM carriage.

As for the rest...
AP96 - all other technical hurdles aside, it would have been "interesting" to thermal protect the F-105 shape for re-entry.
AP99 - does this mean the entire plane is a missile (two carried by a B-52 X-15 style)? Or just that the AP95 missile need not fit the weapons bay?
AP100/106 - just how many liftjets for how many minutes of endurance?

[tankmodeler]

AP96 - all other technical hurdles aside, it would have been "interesting" to thermal protect the F-105 shape for re-entry.

This does not necessarily imply high re-entry speeds. Man in Space is not necessarily Man in Orbit.

Virgin Galactic is planning on putting loads of people in space, but none in orbit. And their space plane has no special thermal protection.

Loads of speed range between "space" and "orbit".

Just a thought.

Paul

[GTX_Admin]

[GTX_Admin]

[GTX_Admin]

[GTX_Admin]

[GTX_Admin]

[apophenia]

Nice! The Thunderchief really suits that CAF overall green 503-322 

[GTX_Admin]

CFBV

[ysi_maniac]

Inspired by ericr

https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=37003.msg942002#msg942002

A turboprop Thunderchief is a brilliant idea that I like. :wub:

[finsrin]

Turbo prop otta help takeoff with heavy load.   Biplane version probably a crop duster.

[robunos]

'Thunderscreech II' . . .   




cheers,
Robin.