carrier advice

[swin_lad]

Yeah I've seen the twin fins but the modification required would be a bit much!

I'll add a fold line or something.

EDIT:
Small Fin


Folding fin

[Blackbuck]

Unless you're going to replace the RB.199 from the get-go with something more meaty then Sea Tornado isn't going to work. All the associated weight gain on a naval fighter will kill the performance of an aircraft already marginal on power. You're looking at XG.20 or XG.40 based solutions which are both of 1980s vintage which means to get a navalised Tonka you're already into the era of F/A-18C/D orders/deliveries.
Nice as the idea is for having the Tornado on carriers, it's simply not feasible unless going at it from the design phase and then you end up with something not even remotely resembling AFVG or UKVG.

[JSB]

Why does the thrust matter so much ?

just from Wiki,
Tornado GR4 = 0.77 Thrust-to-weight ratio (61,700 lb MTO v 2x 17,270 lbf = 0.56 ? maybe .77 is at leaded weight)
Buccaneer = 0.36 ( 62,000 lb v 2x 11,100 lbf = 36)

So would it not work ?
and the F-4M (56,000 lb v 2x 20,500 lbf = 0.73) so you might have to reduce loading a bit but should it not work ?

it's simply not feasible unless going at it from the design phase

I agree restressing later on will be a nightmare and will cost to much.

[shippy2013]

Bucanneer is not a good comparison it has other lift aids to allow carrier operation, blown flaps, area ruled fuselage etc etc.

[Blackbuck]

Why does the thrust matter so much ?

just from Wiki,
Tornado GR4 = 0.77 Thrust-to-weight ratio (61,700 lb MTO v 2x 17,270 lbf = 0.56 ? maybe .77 is at leaded weight)
Buccaneer = 0.36 ( 62,000 lb v 2x 11,100 lbf = 36)

So would it not work ?
and the F-4M (56,000 lb v 2x 20,500 lbf = 0.73) so you might have to reduce loading a bit but should it not work ?

it's simply not feasible unless going at it from the design phase

I agree restressing later on will be a nightmare and will cost to much.

I don't even know where to begin with that though suffice to say what shippy2013 says is correct, in addition to which the Buccaneer has nearly twice the wing surface of a Tornado resulting in a MUCH lower wing loading.
All the extra modifications and additions necessary to the basic Tornado airframe would bump the weight up to such degree that not only would your initial useful load (armament and fuel) suffer but your bring-back load would be then become minuscule necessitating the jettisoning of stores on a routine basis.
As such I will reiterate my first sentiment. Tornado cannot be navalised in any recognisable form.

[swin_lad]

Tornado cannot be navalised in any recognisable form.

Well if you give me a big enough carrier

[Blackbuck]

To be fair, you could probably RATO them like the CAM ships of old but they'd still only be single-use

At the very least you're going to want higher-output engines, not necessarily Speys but that would mean an engine already in use. A broader lower-loaded wing, blown flaps, extensible nose-wheel strut, folding tail-fin, provision for folding nose-cone and radar, stronger and higher main undercarriage, strengthened rear fuselage area with beefier tail-hook, strengthening in other high-stress areas, corrosion proofing, life-raft provisions, naval COMMO and landing-aids and although eluding me currently, probably quite a lot more.

[KIKE92]

I agree with Blackbuck, trying to navalize the Tornado is possible but it would be very difficult and im not sure the end result is worth the effort. But maybe if you try altering the standard Tornado design to reduce some weight you might be able to make it a viable carrier aircraft. Also if what you want is just a bomb truck, an F/A-18 or an F-35C could do the job just as well and can also be used for other things. But i must admit a navalised Tornado is very interesting.

Maybe this will help Tornado problem:
http://s33.photobucket.com/user/Aeropla ... 0.jpg.html

A fixed wing Tornado with high lift devices strenghthen undercarriage and structure might work althought i still think it would need more powerful engines

[swin_lad]

Without Swing Wing it loses it's low level speed which was it's main selling point.

Personally I feel that if we had stayed as Cat and Trap you'd be looking at:

80's Bucc and Phantom

90's Still Bucc (Tornado may never be bought for the RAF) with Phantom or maybe leased F/A-18

Early 2000's - Transition to Typhoon/Rafael (Original Team including France)

2020s-30s - Common replacement

[Judah14]

Modernized Buccaneers and Phantoms would surely do up to the 2000's, because as of 2015 the F-4 is still in service in some air forces.