[1] BAC's origins can be traced to a statement issued by the British government that it expected the various companies involved in the aircraft, guided weapons and engine industries to consolidate and merge with one another.

[8] Prior to the merger, Bristol had eschewed the subsonic airliner market in favour of working on the Bristol 223 supersonic transport,[9] The effort continued under BAC and was eventually merged with similar efforts underway at the French aircraft company Sud Aviation, resulting in the Anglo-French Concorde.

BAC eventually expanded this division to include electronics and space systems and, in 1966, started what was to become a fruitful relationship with Hughes Aircraft.

[15] BAC had inherited the aerospace activities of several companies via its formation, and research into various space-related ventures continued at the new entity.

According to author Nigel Henbest, Britain was likely unable to pursue Mustard's development alone, but suggested organising a multinational European venture, similar to the conventional Europa and Ariane launchers.

However, as the programme proceeded, continuous cost rises were incurred,[19] while inter-service rivalry led to frequent challenges of its necessity.

By this point, the programme was already in the prototype phase and the aircraft had already flown, but political pressure forced development work to cease, leading to the remaining airframes and most supporting equipment and documentation to be destroyed.

[21][22] The TSR-2's last minute termination has been widely viewed as a major blow not only to BAC but the wider British aircraft industry.

[N 1][28] During May 1966, BAC and Breguet formally created SEPECAT, a joint venture company, to develop, market, and produce the Anglo-French Jaguar strike fighter.

[31] SEPECAT received various export orders for the Jaguar, overseas nations that flew the type included India, Ecuador, Nigeria and Oman.

[34] In the first half of the following year, BAC submitted its proposals for the production of two separate double-decker versions of the VC10, which was commonly referred to as the Super VC10; however, it was quickly recognised that the British government would be required substantial support for the initiative to succeed, involving "several tens of millions of pounds".

[35] According to aviation author Derek Wood, the enlarged double-decker, which was to be equipped with the proposed Rolls-Royce RB178 turbofan engine, would have had good commercial prospects, yet financing for the programme was not forthcoming and the British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC) has ultimately opted to procure the rival Boeing 747 instead.

[37] On 2 December 1970, Frederick Corfield, the Minister for Aviation Supply, announced in the House of Commons that there would be no official backing from the government for the Three-Eleven programme.

American companies seemed guaranteed to win much of this work, however, the Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) would ultimately be supplied with large amounts of British-made aircraft and equipment to fulfill their needs.

Britain then turned to a national project, the UK Variable Geometry (UKVG), for which BAC Warton was given a design contract by the Ministry of Technology.

Although BAC's parent companies were prepared to sell their shares for a reasonable price, the government proposal, in their view, undervalued the group.

By August 1967, the success of the BAC 1–11 and defence sales to Saudi Arabia made the prospect of the parent companies selling their shares less likely.

On 29 April 1977, BAC, the Hawker Siddeley Group and Scottish Aviation were nationalised and merged under the provisions of Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Act 1977.