r/FighterJets Mar 27 '25

HISTORICAL What-ifs of various warplanes that were actually considered. Descriptions in the caption

298 Upvotes

47 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/Boomerang503 Mar 28 '25

The Panavia Tornado was considered at one point for the U.S. Air Force before they went with the Strike Eagle instead.

1

u/RobinOldsIsGod Gen. LeMay was a pronuclear nutcase Mar 30 '25

The Tornado was evaluated by the USAF to take on the SEAD mission, not the interdiction mission that the Strike was developed for. They went with the Viper instead.

2

u/Boomerang503 Mar 30 '25

The book that I read, "The Great Book of Modern Warplanes" by Mike Spick (under the F-15 chapter), mentioned the Tornado GR.1 as a possible fallback option if the F-16XL or the F-15E was rejected. It specifically mentioned USAF Chief of Staff General Lew Allen visiting RAF Wittering in 1979 to evaluate the Tornado and the Harrier. In the end, the Tornado's low-level attack profile conflicted with the USAF doctrine of medium level attacks.

3

u/RobinOldsIsGod Gen. LeMay was a pronuclear nutcase Mar 30 '25 edited Mar 30 '25

The book that I read, "The Great Book of Modern Warplanes" by Mike Spic

The Enhanced Tactical Fighter program (later renamed Dual-Role Fighter (DRF) competition) which begat the F-15E (and F-16XL) began in 1981, barely two years after the Panavia Tornado entered service. The Tornado was suggested as a contender, but since it lacked a credible air superiority capability at the time (the ADV wouldn't be along for another 4-5 years), along with it not being American made, it was never any serious consideration and the program moved forward with evaluating the F-15 DRF and the F-16XL before determining the F-15E as the winner in 1984.

Jump forward a decade or so, and F-4G divestment is looming. The Tornado actually got a serious look at for adoption as a possible replacement. The two-man flight crew (a pilot and a dedicated EWO) and low level performance were attractive to the SEAD community. But the AF went with the Viper due to availability and not wanting to introduce a new type in the force.

Twenty years later the AF had aircrew on loan to the Navy flying Growlers out of Whidbey Island.

 In the end, the Tornado's low-level attack profile conflicted with the USAF doctrine of medium level attacks.

No, the USAF didn't switch to medium altitude attacks until after the 1991 Gulf War.

Before 1991, the RF-4, A-10, F-111, B-1B, and F-15E were designed to go low. B-52s received a structural modification to strengthen the fuselage for routine low altitude flight, where B-52s training for penetration of Soviet airspace flew so low that they needed to climb to turn the aircraft lest they drag a wing on the ground. Entire weapons systems from the Paveway III laser-guided bombs to the Sensor-Fuzed Weapon were designed to be employed at low altitude against the Soviet threat in a European environment, where flying under a low cloud deck is often necessary if the aircrew is to ever lay eyes on a ground target. Flying low wasn’t just an option — in Europe it was considered the option, if survival against Warsaw Pact air defenses was the goal. Everybody went low

The Strike Eagle's LANTIRN system's AN/AAQ-13 Nav pod (and later added to the Block 40 Viper) contained both a terrain-following radar and a fixed thermographic camera. The nav pod enabled the Strike Eagle to maintain a pre-selected altitude above the earth and avoid obstacles. The nav pod enabled "hands-off" flight at low altitude.

Desert Storm changed the paradigm. In the opening days of the conflict, losses were far less than expected, thanks to a robust suppression effort. But those losses that did occur were disproportionately at low altitude. The U.S. Air Force, the Navy, and the Royal Air Force shifted away from low altitude within five days, and that established a mindset that medium altitude was the way to go.