TSR-2 and model shop guys

[Mentalguru]

Thoght you might like to hear this-

So I'm paying a BRIEF visit to my local shop today, and happen upon a recent Tamiya mag, inside which there is a full page ad for the Airfix 1/48 TSR-2- LIMITED EDITION, of course..

Now I decide it would be a good idea to ask if they are going to be stocking this kit- so I approach my chumly mates in the shop and show them the ad.

"Whats that?" is the reply.

Its the new Airfix kit- guys THIS KIT is going to sell out in the blink of an eye- blah blah blah.." "You better get some in"

"What is it then?--

"It's the one that came after the SR-71"

"Nooooo"

"It's the RAF's new latest jet"

"Nooooooooo"

You don't know what this is- do you?"

"Ummm- it looks pretty neat"

"Etc"

"AAAAARRRGGGHHHHH"

Anyhow- I told them to lay down stocks- they are going to.

[Stebos]

I have to confess I'd never heard of the TSR.2 until I saw the one @ Duxford and even then I wasn't really aware of the history of it all. Though maybe understandable as I wasn't around back then!

[bentwaters81tfw]

Looking at the advert, it shows the pilot's canopy with one piece glazing, instead of 2 windows. I hope the final item is correct.

[Mike]

Looking at the advert, it shows the pilot's canopy with one piece glazing, instead of 2 windows. I hope the final item is correct.

I doubt Trevor would ever let that happen!

[Sten Ekedahl]

Thoght you might like to hear this-

---

"What is it then?--

"It's the one that came after the SR-71"

"Nooooo"

"It's the RAF's new latest jet"

"Nooooooooo"

You don't know what this is- do you?"

"Ummm- it looks pretty neat"

"Etc"

"AAAAARRRGGGHHHHH"

Oh, the ignorace of today's youth!

[ElectroSoldier]

The government did a pretty good job of making sure nobody really remembers the TSR.2.

The whole thing was a travesty on the governments part, it is no wonder people dont know of the TSR.2, I must admit that despite living next to an airbase that housed the TSR.2 closest rival the F-111F I didnt know of the TSR.2 until I saw her at RAF Cosford about 12years ago.

After that I did learn more about it, but even then its hard to follow it all because of the what happened.

[Jennings Heilig]

Oh, the ignorace of today's youth!

One finds that more and more as one gets older, doesn't one? Perhaps it's because the whole subject of "history" becomes more complex with every passing nanosecond. In the "old days" we didn't have as much information to remember as the young lads do nowadays. Heck, when I was coming up, P-51s had only been out of the inventory for, oh, let's see.... about 25 years. RF-84s and F-100s were still de rigeur among ANG squadrons, and Europe was positively crawling with F-104s.

Now they have to remember all the BuNos for every F-18 ever built (YAWN...) and all the different block numbers of F-16s, and what kind of engine and intake each has, and what units fly what (double YAWN...).

All we old farts had to remember was the serial number of all 16,000 Spitfires, all 12,000 P-51s, and all 36,000 Bf109s... Oh, and the fact that the TSR.2 existed

J

[marty_hopkirk]

The government did a pretty good job of making sure nobody really remembers the TSR.2.

An interesting thought, could you expand on that. In the copious reading material on the subject, I have never come to that conclusion.

I built a model of TSR-2 in the '70s: I wrote to BAC asking for reference material, not really expecting a reply and they within a fornight a small box of reference material [including drawings] landed on my door mat - which considering I had only sent them a SAE was pretty good.

I do feel that there is a lot of dewy eyed myth on the subject, and that sometimes makes better copy than the truth which often more mudane. If one is prepared to ignore urban myth and try and get at the 'proper' story - to me at least it seem obvious and understanable why the project was cancelled.

That said it's over 40 years since the project was cancelled so I can understand why the average shop assistant might not be aware of what it is and the 'history'.

Marty...

[paul_c]

i have to admit i'd never heard of it until i joined up and saw the Cosford one. sorry!

[Gary C]

It didn't see combat, didn't enter service, of the 3 completed prototypes only one was actually flown and was later destroyed, only got it's 15 minutes of fame for the way in which it was cancelled and all of this took place some 40+ years ago. And the guys in this shop have never heard of it? Shocking...

From a modelling point of view if you remove the fantasy element it's not actually very interesting (if you thought grey over grey was boring try disruptive camo of white over white over all white lower surfaces). The 72nd version sold well largely because they were cheap enough to enable the what if community to produce many multiples and consequently they were selling a dozen at a time so it'll be interesting to see how well something twice the size and cost sells. Similar predictions were made that the Nimrods would all vanish overnight but six months on they still seem to be widely available.

[Muzz]

I have to admit I've never really got the thing about the TSR-2 and dare I say it I don't think it's a very attractive aircraft. I've heard lot's of stories about how it was ahead of it's time but was there any proof that it was going to be any good as a strike platform?

[bentwaters81tfw]

Well, Muzz,, you know the following that the Lightning has on this forum. Just imagine and all singing, all dancing strike and reconnisance platform the would leave a Lightning for dead, at all altitudes, powered by those lovely engines that pushed the Vulcan and the Concorde along, and frightened the out of the Russians, by their own admission, cos they had NO solution to it. What's more it was designed to operate from a ploughed field in thick fog (I kid you not).

All designed in 1957, and flying 43 years ago; it would go further, faster, and deliver more bang for your buck than anything on the drawing board.

Do you really need to ask why we love it so much, and why it was treasonous to scrap it? It would have sold abroad in numbers, and kept the British aero industry at the forefront, with job security, instead of just component makers.

Oh, and don't forget, the design came from those same nice people that produced the Lightning.

Edited September 7, 2008 by bentwaters81tfw

[Pete in Lincs]

Well, Muzz,, you know the following that the Lightning has on this forum. Just imagine and all singing, all dancing strike and reconnisance platform the would leave a Lightning for dead, at all altitudes, powered by those lovely engines that pushed the Vulcan and the Concorde along, and frightened the out of the Russians, by their own admission, cos they had NO solution to it. What's more it was designed to operate from a ploughed field in thick fog (I kid you not).

All designed in 1957, and flying 43 years ago; it would go further, faster, and deliver more bang for your buck than anything on the drawing board.

Do you really need to ask why we love it so much, and why it was treasonous to scrap it? It would have sold abroad in numbers, and kept the British aero industry at the forefront, with job security, instead of just component makers.

Oh, and don't forget, the design came from those same nice people that produced the Lightning.

Politicians eh? Who would have thought it?

Anyone remember the Miles M50?

Oh yes, the Lightning, the chase aircraft for the test flights that couldn't keep up!

Oh, did we mention the first airborne sidelooking radar, first inflight realtime datalink, first terrain following radar, etc etc.

Where did you think Tornado got half it's capabilities?

Yes, it was sacrificed in the name of international politics. Even Australia wanted them, But Uncle Sam offered cut price F-111's that never

turned up, (at the promised price) So the Vulcan had to go low level, and the RAF got Buccaneers, an aircraft they'd turned down once already.

I think thats about right, please feel free to correct me.

All the best

Pete

[marty_hopkirk]

I think the ''ahead of it's time" urban myth, a more accurate description it was certainly of its time. The vast majority of its avionics systems were analogue there were already peer machines with digital systems. At the time of cancellation there were still significant issues, not least with the engines. It was certainly an aesthetically pleasing machine, no one can take that away - but it was years away from squadron service. Not only was the bang big, so was the buck.

...there is plenty of informed reading out there, make your own mind up.

Marty...

Edited September 7, 2008 by marty_hopkirk

[dylan the rabbit]

Ahhhh, another Gulf State BritModeller!

Ahlan wasahlan chap. How's it all going? Bet Riyadh's lovely right now!

[bentwaters81tfw]

The engine problem had been cured, it was mainshaft resonance, and by simply shrinking a sleeve onto the shaft, all problems were solved.

The real point was, it HAD all the systems, whether analogue or digital, and NOTHING ELSE did for at least a decade later. Squadron service? who knows? 3 were completed, at least 30 more were in very advanced construction when they were unceremoniously cut up.

Don't forget, the left leaning mouthpieces of the day kept telling the Ministers of all the 'problems', like 'the wing failed again'. Of course it did, it was a destruction test to determine the stress limits.

At the time, we had a left wing government sucking up to the Russians. Can't make a plane to threaten the Russians, let's scrap it, and not buy anything to defend the country with!

Rant over!

Edited September 7, 2008 by bentwaters81tfw

[marty_hopkirk]

Don't forget, the left leaning mouthpieces of the day kept telling the Ministers of all the 'problems', like 'the wing failed again'. Of course it did, it was a destruction test to determine the stress limits.

At the time, we had a left wing government sucking up to the Russians. Can't make a plane to threaten the Russians, let's scrap it, and not buy anything to defend the country with!

Rant over!

An often (convientely) overlooked fact is the then incumbent Conservative Government had ordered review of the project, but supended it when the 1964 General Election was called as the outcome was allbut a foregone conclusion, hence the suspension. Had they been returned the decision would almost certainly be the same that the new Labour adminstration took a few months later, given the basis of the two reviews were by and large the same.

As regards the technical difficulties, once again I point anyone to the copious reading (I don't mean the political spin or the counter spin of those involved) on the mater it was clearly years away from operational service - the most optimistic being 1970/1.

Marty...

[Wez]

As regards the technical difficulties, once again I point anyone to the copious reading (I don't mean the political spin or the counter spin of those involved) on the mater it was clearly years away from operational service - the most optimistic being 1970/1.

Marty...

Regardless of which persuasion of governement that cancelled it (if you read the history of the times we as a nation were living on extended credit and were looking both east and west to extend those lines of credit even further to avoid the devaluation of the pound which finally came in the early 1970's so we would have had to appease either the Americans or Russians or both to get that credit), the fact remains, it was a travesty.

1970/71 is still 15 years ahead of any aircraft with similar capability merely in terms of capability (e.g. Tonka GR.1A's with the linescan capability). In the meantime the analogue, mini-valve technology within the TSR.2 would have been upgraded with modern digital systems that would have taken up less space and provided greater capability that would have kept the aircraft in the fore-front twenty years later.

It's a shame we never got to find out and I think that's why it's still held with great affection and esteem.

Regards

Wez

Edited September 7, 2008 by Wez

[xffw45343tg]

From a modelling point of view if you remove the fantasy element it's not actually very interesting (if you thought grey over grey was boring try disruptive camo of white over white over all white lower surfaces).

I would have agreed with you had I not seen Skii's build - a masterful lesson in subtle weathering. Post if you've not seen it and I'll see if I can work out how to post a link.

Kirk

Edit: Try here

Edited September 7, 2008 by Kirk

[Gary C]

I would have agreed with you had I not seen Ski's build - a masterful lesson in subtle weathering. Post if you've not seen it and I'll see if I can work out how to post a link.

Kirk

Yes, I did see it, very nice too . It does in a way though make my point, it requires open panels, a good deal of detailing and a carefully handled paintjob to distract from the fact it is a one tone finish mostly devoid of markings and colour. Add to that the fact that it's the only real option save for a change of serial and I'm afraid it just doesn't do it for me.

Viewed from this point in history ie. some 40 years on and without the emotions that ran hot at the time, it strikes me as more of a footnote in the annals of aviation history when compared with a lot of other types. To that end I wish Airfix would leave the 'what might have been' alone for now and concentrate on the 'what actually was' such as the Meteor or Vampire or Venom and the 'what still is' such as a decent retooled Tornado.

Edited September 7, 2008 by Gary C

[xffw45343tg]

To that end I wish Airfix would leave the 'what might have been' alone for now and concentrate on the 'what actually was' such as the Meteor or Vampire or Venom and the 'what still is' such as a decent retooled Tornado.

Is this the right point to put in my vote for a large scale Harrier II or would that be going off topic?

I suppose the thing about the TSR2 is that like its conterporary (?) the abandoned P.1154, it marks a point where the UK ceased to be at the forefront of aerospace technology development? [He said, ducking.]

Also, a quick question for the experts on this thread: TSR2 was never intended to be a fighter, right? Wing loading looks like it would have been very high...

[bentwaters81tfw]

It was meant to fly among he weeds......however, Starfighter comes to mind. Probably have been as good at air defence as a Tornado. Range, speed and firepower if not manoueverability.

[JagRigger]

I've been throwing together a 1/72 example from the stash this week - as teaching my ATC cadets last week I got a similar sea of blank looks when mentioning TSR2.

Only modification from standard is to fit 'working' links to swivel the U/C to that classic 'sit' when I hang it up at the Squadron ( oh, and pin the bogies so they do pivot )

While building this a thought struck me - had it entered service NATO would've needed bigger HAS's................

[ElectroSoldier]

The biggest mistake of the TSR.2 program was the destruction of all the jigs and machining tools to make them.

They deliberatly and completley destroyed all chance of resurecting the program at any point in the future, for no apparent reason.

No reason was given to the British people as to why their property was destroyed without reason.

We were told nothing.

This country has been on a bad foot financialy since the war, so saying it was for budgetary reasons just doesnt cut it, so many other programs were over budget and were carried on regardless.

The F-111F was and is the only jet to have a capability that the TSR.2 would have had*, and that wasnt until the 1970s

*though the F-111F doesnt have the rough field capability.

[Bobski]

An interesting thought, could you expand on that. In the copious reading material on the subject, I have never come to that conclusion.

The Labour Government systematically destroyed almost everything to do with TSR.2 when it was cancelled. There were guys on the line finishing their work and watching the machines being destroyed when they were done. Not dismantled, actually destroyed. All tooling, most of the drawings and most of the existing components were all deliberately trashed. The Cosford bird is the closest to a complete TSR.2 left. The one at Duxford is but a shell, made up from parts from a number of different a/c in varying stages of completion. The Government tried to have them both destroyed as well, but saw better of it. A lot of what survives only does so because BAC employees stole it or hid it from the Government people sent to destroy it.

There are many reasons given as to why it was completely destroyed. One of the biggest was the Government was 'bribed' by the US Government to not produce it with the offer of F-111 combined with the writing off of some of our WW2 debt. It was certainly a threat to the F-111 - the Australians were going to buy it until our wonderous Labour Government, on the advice of the Americans, actually told them to buy F-111 instead. Yes, that's right, our own Government was working to scupper an export contract for one of its own aircraft, built by a state-run company, in favour of a competitor. Lord knows how many jobs would have been created or kept in the industry if the so-called party of the working man hadn't gone out its way to sabotage the project.

An absolute farce. Just thinking about it makes my blood boil and it was 20 years before I was born!

Edited September 7, 2008 by Bobski