Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Fastest British Military Jet  
User currently offlineN215AZ From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 77 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 7143 times:

What British Military jet is the fastest? Just wondering.

Thanks,

N215AZ


"Atra esterní ono thelduin, Mor'ranr lífa unin hjarta onr, Un du evarínya ono varda."
24 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineRAPCON From Puerto Rico, joined Jul 2006, 671 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7093 times:

No contest: TORNADO ADV (even faster than the TSR-2 & the Fairey Delta)


MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
User currently offlineSAS A340 From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 764 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 7090 times:

I,ts the Tornado for the time being but it will be replaced by the Eurofighter....

Tornado = 1452 mph (Mach 2.2)
Eurofighter = 1321 mph (Mach 2.1)

More here:

http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/acref.html



It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 3, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7083 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting N215AZ (Thread starter):
What British Military jet is the fastest?



Quoting RAPCON (Reply 1):
No contest:

The English Electric Lightning, actually:

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph, 2,415 km/h) at altitude
* Range: 800 mi (1287 km) combat, 1,560 mi (2,500 km) ferry
* Service ceiling: 60,000 ft (18,000 m)
* Rate of climb: 50,000 ft/min (255 m/s)
* Wing loading: 87.9 lb/ft² (428.6 kg/m²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.63

The original poster didn't specify in service.....  Wink



2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13048 posts, RR: 78
Reply 4, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 2 hours ago) and read 7066 times:

True 2H4!

Though Tornado F.3 hardly sets the world on fire at altitude, it is apparently very impressive at lower levels, beyond the IDS version.

Not that this was an issue, with it being really a 'bomber swatter'.


User currently offlineArt From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 7028 times:

I think that the "best bomber we never had", the TSR2, was potentially the fastest British military aircraft built:

"Flight 14 was XR219's trip to Warton, during which it went supersonic for the first and only time. TSR.2's performance was shown to good effect on this flight; when Beamont engaged reheat on a single engine, the chase aircraft (a Lightning T.5, a mach 2 aircraft and certainly no slouch) was left behind despite engaging reheat on both of its engines!"

Source: http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/history.html

I say potentially the fastest since I have read elsewhere that while it had the power and aerodynamics to exceed mach 2.5, the airframe was not designed to withstand the temperatures that would result from flight at such speed .


User currently offlineRAPCON From Puerto Rico, joined Jul 2006, 671 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 6984 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 3):
The English Electric Lightning, actually:
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.27 (1,500 mph, 2,415 km/h) at altitude

Wiki says that the GR4 has a maximum speed: Mach 2.34, 2,417.6 km/h (1,511 mph). And that's "wikiality".

Quoting Art (Reply 5):
", the TSR2, was potentially the fastest British military aircraft built

Nah, just a bit slower than the Tornado & Lightning.



MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8955 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 6972 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
HEAD DATABASE EDITOR




Quoting RAPCON (Reply 6):
Wiki says that the GR4 has a maximum speed: Mach 2.34

Damn. Thought I had you.

 Wink


2H4





Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineN215AZ From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 3 days 7 hours ago) and read 6870 times:

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 3):
The original poster didn't specify in service..... Wink

Fastest in service

Thanks though,

N215AZ



"Atra esterní ono thelduin, Mor'ranr lífa unin hjarta onr, Un du evarínya ono varda."
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5611 posts, RR: 45
Reply 9, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 22 hours ago) and read 6796 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting N215AZ (Reply 8):
Fastest in service

But you never said it needed a pilot....
Then that would be the Mach 2.7 Bristol Bloodhound Mk II,



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 6708 times:

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 2):
Tornado = 1452 mph (Mach 2.2)
Eurofighter = 1321 mph (Mach 2.1)

With the Typhoon's ability to supercruise, don't you think it's top end speed is higher than Mach 2.1?



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3884 posts, RR: 19
Reply 11, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 6696 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 9):
the Mach 2.7 Bristol Bloodhound Mk II

It needed to be a jet though.

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 10):
With the Typhoon's ability to supercruise, don't you think it's top end speed is higher than Mach 2.1?

Apparently not, usually Mach 2.0 is listed.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineIrish251 From Ireland, joined Nov 2004, 959 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 6670 times:

Quoting RAPCON (Reply 6):
Wiki says that the GR4 has a maximum speed: Mach 2.34, 2,417.6 km/h (1,511 mph). And that's "wikiality".

Recent discussions on www.pprune.org by people directly connected with RAF Tornado ops suggest that it would get nowhere near Mach 2.34 - more like Mach 1.4 when really pushed. Carriage of external stores and the effect of other airframe add-ons which the types has acquired during its service life has a direct impact on its speed capability as well.


User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3884 posts, RR: 19
Reply 13, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 6656 times:

I have something much better than Wikipedia - an old copy of Jane's:

Tornado IDS (GR), at altitude, Mach 2,2. Obviously without external stores.
Tornado ADV (F), also Mach 2.2 at altitude.

Peter



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineStealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5611 posts, RR: 45
Reply 14, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 6646 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Ptrjong (Reply 11):
It needed to be a jet though.

Ah but it was.. I guess that depends on your definition of a "jet"

Was it an airborne vehicle powered by an air breathing jet engine? Most certainly.

Launched with rocket boosters with Thor ramjet sustainer engines.

Chees



If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
User currently offlinePtrjong From Netherlands, joined Mar 2005, 3884 posts, RR: 19
Reply 15, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 6638 times:

Quoting StealthZ (Reply 14):
your definition of a "jet"

A jet-powered aeroplane Wink

BTW, saw a picture of a UAV accepted here the other day...  yuck 



The only difference between me and a madman is that I am not mad (Salvador Dali)
User currently offlineZkpilot From New Zealand, joined Mar 2006, 4775 posts, RR: 9
Reply 16, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 6624 times:

Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 10):
With the Typhoon's ability to supercruise, don't you think it's top end speed is higher than Mach 2.1?

Ability to supercruise is pushing it a bit... it can supercruise without weapons/fuel stores... not much point in being able to do that...except on the return home when it's trying to outrun its enemies.
The F22 can supercruise both to and from its target with weapons.



54 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
User currently offlineArt From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 6582 times:

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 16):
Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 10):
With the Typhoon's ability to supercruise, don't you think it's top end speed is higher than Mach 2.1?

Ability to supercruise is pushing it a bit... it can supercruise without weapons/fuel stores... not much point in being able to do that...except on the return home when it's trying to outrun its enemies.

"The Typhoon reaches speeds about Mach 1,2 to 1,3 without reheat and the standard weapon load (6 AAMs)."
Source: http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk...ic.php?sid=&f=1&t=808&hilit=cruise

Quoting RAPCON (Reply 6):
Quoting Art (Reply 5):
", the TSR2, was potentially the fastest British military aircraft built

Nah, just a bit slower than the Tornado & Lightning.

I doubt it. It was able to achieve in excess of mach 2 with 1 afterburner lit. This would be in spite of having to overcome the considerable extra drag involved in overcoming the yaw effect of asymmetric thrusts either side of the longtitudinal axis. Removing these losses by lighting the second afterburner and increasing thrust by ca 10.000lb would, I think, certainly result in a speed in excess of mach 2.3 ie higher than than the highest speed claimed for either the Lightning or the Tornado.

[Edited 2006-11-05 15:13:27]

[Edited 2006-11-05 15:17:04]

User currently offlineRAPCON From Puerto Rico, joined Jul 2006, 671 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6462 times:

Quoting Art (Reply 17):
I doubt it

Doubt all you want, it only hit 2.15



MODS CAN'T STOP ME....THEY CAN ONLY HOPE TO CONTAIN ME!!!
User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3365 posts, RR: 9
Reply 19, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 6450 times:

Quoting RAPCON (Reply 1):
TORNADO ADV (even faster than the TSR-2

Isn't the Tornado a sort of TSR3 anyway - incorporating many of the lessons learnt in the TSR2 design process?


User currently offlineN215AZ From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 77 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6410 times:

I just want to say WOW!  Wow!

I really didnt really expect this much feedback from a simple post. I am a new user, and I must say, I LOVE THIS SITE!  veryhappy   veryhappy   veryhappy 

N215AZ



"Atra esterní ono thelduin, Mor'ranr lífa unin hjarta onr, Un du evarínya ono varda."
User currently offlineGDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13048 posts, RR: 78
Reply 21, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6409 times:

Scouseflyer, partly true.
The RAF required a low level strike aircraft true, while TSR.2 would have been preferred, it was clear that even had it entered service, numbers would have been small-the replacement-subsequently cancelled but around the same size and price, the F-111K, only had an order of 50 machines.

Having been convinced that the only way to get an all new aircraft, one that also retained the large UK design influence-unlike a straight offshore buy-even with licenced production, was through European collaboration, they were prepared to accept something smaller in what became the MRCA, later Tornado.
Since the 'sub strategic' element of TSR-2, replacing some V-Bombers to dedicated theatre nuclear strike declared to NATO, was dropped, this would be no biggie.
It also allowed the planned new aircraft to replace a much wider range of types.

As it turned out, the RAF got 220 of the IDS Tornado, replacing German based Jaguar units, as well as Vulcans and Buccaneers.
That the basic Tornado platform could be adapted for the specialised requirement for an interceptor, for the all weather, heavy ECM enviroment, over the vast areas of UK airspace and Eastern Atlantic, only made it even more attractive.
Though this was only confirmed in 1976, two years after the prototype Tornado had first flown, after an evaluation of other, US types.


User currently offlineAreopagus From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 1368 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 5 months 3 weeks ago) and read 6392 times:

Some dusty old neurons fired to suggest the Bristol 188 as a possible Fastest British Military(-funded research) jet. But it turns out that the highest speed it achieved was, ironically enough, Mach 1.88. It must have been exciting to fly, with a takeoff speed of nearly 300mph.

User currently offlineScouseflyer From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2006, 3365 posts, RR: 9
Reply 23, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 6298 times:

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 22):
It must have been exciting to fly, with a takeoff speed of nearly 300mph.

 wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed   wideeyed 


User currently offlineArt From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2005, 3351 posts, RR: 0
Reply 24, posted (7 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 1 hour ago) and read 6205 times:

Quoting Areopagus (Reply 22):
It must have been exciting to fly, with a takeoff speed of nearly 300mph.

Interesting to land, too!


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Fastest British Military Jet
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Military Jet Desktop Wallpaper, Do You Have Any? posted Tue Oct 25 2005 05:15:17 by AnMCOSon
Russian Military Jet Crashed Last Week posted Tue Sep 20 2005 22:06:34 by Dogfighter2111
Military Jet Down At RDU? posted Fri Mar 26 2004 21:36:06 by Zionstrat
Military Jet Team Schedules For 2004 posted Tue Dec 9 2003 15:59:07 by USAir1489
Romanian Military Jet Manufacturer To Go Private posted Fri Nov 15 2002 20:00:20 by Connector4you
Fastest Non-After Burner Jet posted Tue Mar 11 2003 04:57:04 by MidnightMike
Is The U.S.C.G. Considered "Military" posted Sun Nov 12 2006 19:19:37 by UH60FtRucker
Military Flights Into BHX posted Thu Nov 9 2006 14:18:21 by DC10BHX
Fighter Jet Fly-by Question posted Mon Nov 6 2006 05:37:12 by Chi-town
Toilets On Military Planes? posted Mon Oct 16 2006 05:18:27 by LimaNiner

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format