Col. Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 All the build threads on Airfix 48th TSR-2s have got me itching to start the 72nd scale kit lurking in my stash (cheers Jen ) but as an operational machine. I'd like it to be as accurate as possible but a search on Google has turned up hardly any information on what changes if any were planned for the initial production batch to reach squadron service. So far I've seen mention of a bolt-on refuelling probe that could be fitted beside the pilot's cockpit and some word of external stores pylons as well as planed camouflage schemes but that's about it. I also have a vague memory of seeing a photo or diagram of changes to the rear instrument panel here somewhere but can't find it now. Can anyone help shed more light on these and any other details? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Well done Col. you beat me to it I was thinking of asking the very same question as one of my 1:48 TSR.2 is going to be a What If wearign Gul War colours. Somewhere I remember seeing a model of a TSR.2 with external pylons. Also any idead what she might have been called? Bird or Wind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamienB Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 The aircraft was being produced using a development batch, on production jigs and tooling, i.e. there would not have been any major differences between the first handful and those that followed - certainly no major structural changes. Compared to XR219, the differences would have been as already mentioned - IFR probe and pylons - plus the added strut on the main gear (supplied in the 1/48 kit, don't have the 1/72 one to hand to check if it has it). Don't use the intake-side fairings - these were camera fairings for monitoring stores separation on trials aircraft. The IFR probe fairing would have looked like this: As for changes to the rear panel - well a considerable amount of effort went into cockpit design, and it was finalised quite late on so I would not introduce any significant changes there (especially for the first batch into service). Ferranti did produce a mockup consisting mostly of three CRTs (piccy in TSR-2 - Phoenix or Folly?) but this was their concept only - it was not part of the final plan to my knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff_B Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Well another one was the removal of the extending nose leg after the prototype batch. With the Refuelling probe please ensure the that the probe is on the port side of the cockpit, the panel on the starboard side is a mistake in the kit. BTW when speculating the future look of TSR2 for gods sake dont apply what happened with the Tornado to the TSR2, on the Tornado all its addons are external as its a small airframe with little internal capacity. With TSR2 It has a moderate bomb bay, good fuel capacity and space fwd for avionics, the ECM and RWR were built into the airframe so modded fins and ecm pods are pointless as upgrades would have been to the hardware and software inside. Belly pylons are a no no unless on the existing bomb bay when used as a extra fuel tank, the area under the intakes being for main gear doors and the area between the nose gear bay and bomb bay is where the RAM turbine was located. The fin was all moving on a central pivot so EF-111 fin top pods are also a no no. Target identification and tracking systems however may have changed, the side mounted radar arrays and the various panels under the cockpit may have been changed to accomodate different targetting system in a semi recessed manner. The thing to remember is that the systems and weapons would have been designed around fitting into TSR2 rather than bolted to it, Bomb dispensers which envolved into JP233 would have been carried within the bomb bay and in pylon mounted canisters (there are photos of similar systems tested in the 70's on a Buccaneer in Tim Laminings book on the Buccaneer). We may also have seen more active development of stand off weapons, with futher developments of the Martel/Sea Eagle family including the the cluster bomb variant, extended range variants and the nuclear variant to replace the WE177. One thing to note is that the TSR2 was designed to carry weapons on its pylons at supersonic speed, so these would generally be low drag and heat resistant. aka the low drag 1000lb bombs rather than the fat variant we are more familiar with, tandem sores carriers as per Jag rather than the triple TERs etc, US Mk 57 or 61 nukes rather than WE177 (which would have been only carried internally). Hope this helps Geoff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I often thought, would the TSR2 have done the Black Buck missions ? Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F-32 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I think the trouble with the Black Buck missions might be the size of the oil tanks to feed the engines................ I know that's one of the reason the Buccs weren't selected. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousFO98 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Hi Col MAM did a seies of articles looking at how the TSR2 would hace been used operationally- i think it extended over 4 issues it was one of the reasons i started getting the mag- then i didn't even see an Airfix kit before they had all sold out - oh well - compensate for the disappointment by enjoying the irony! let me know if i can be of assistance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 (edited) Mish - seems I've seen more WiF TSR-2s than white ones As I find more information I'll let you know. Have heard it referred to as Eagle on various sources but don't know how official that name would have been. Damien and Geoff - thanks for the swift and informative replies. Damien, is the full profile available anywhere? Have had a look at the TSR-2 section of your excellent site on several occasions but didn't notice it there. Thanks for confirming my suspicions about the intake-mounted camera pods. Geoff - lots of useful information about weapons fit there and an interesting point about the all-moving tail fin, something I had never realised before. I see you include a TSR-2 Special Interest Group in your signature, yet another good reason for me to join the IPMS I guess? Robert & F-32 - am I correct in thinking an aftermarket decal sheet included markings for a Black Buck machine? Walrus - Thank You, I'd certainly appreciate any help you can offer. Strangely enough I picked up the current issue at lunch-time to see a three-view drawing of a proposed upper surface camouflage scheme and list of allocated serials for the initial aircraft. All good stuff. Edited February 16, 2009 by Col. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamienB Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Damien, is the full profile available anywhere? No, sorry, haven't finished it yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousFO98 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 There is a lot of stuff IIRC Col but glad to help if i can will dig out the editions after dinner and get back to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest les Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Don't use the intake-side fairings - these were camera fairings for monitoring stores separation on trials aircraft. Damien, Got a picture of these are the the tear drop fairings just past the intakes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 No, sorry, haven't finished it yet! Be something for me and everyone else to look forward to then There is a lot of stuff IIRC Colbut glad to help if i can will dig out the editions after dinner and get back to you Many thanks Walrus, got a sneaking suspicion I'll be digging out my TSR-2 from the stash around the same time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 (edited) Just been through all the photos I've taken at shows looking for that What If photo of a TSR.2 with wing pylons and weapons and do you think I can find it. I would swear I took a photo, Grrrrrrrr Knew I had seen one, these are on the IPMS Farnborough site Site is HERE Edited February 16, 2009 by Mish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Damien, Got a picture of these are the the tear drop fairings just past the intakes? Yes. Applicable to XR220 only, but possibly one of the other prototypes that was allocated to stores trials, possibly XR226 or XR227. As for what if TSR2s, have a look on the What If site. There's millions over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Given that the TSR had a bomb load of 2x 1000lbs and the Vulcan carried 21x 1000lbs to the Falklands and given that the TSR had a combat radius of 1,000 nautical miles and the Vulcans had to fly 8000 nautical mile round I think the TSR on a Black buck trip would have been a disaster :-)) Its difficult to see what use the TSR would have been if it had been built ! The F111 was to be a far better aircraft its just a shame we cancelled that idea as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 ....The F111 was to be a far better aircraft its just a shame we cancelled that idea as well. Burn the heretic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The wooksta V2.0 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Given that the TSR had a bomb load of 2x 1000lbs and the Vulcan carried 21x 1000lbs to the Falklands and given that the TSR had a combat radius of 1,000 nautical miles and the Vulcans had to fly 8000 nautical mile round I think the TSR on a Black buck trip would have been a disaster :-))Its difficult to see what use the TSR would have been if it had been built ! The F111 was to be a far better aircraft its just a shame we cancelled that idea as well. 2x 1,000lbs? Don't know where you got that from! 6,000lbs internal with 4,000lbs on external pylons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 "The envisioned "standard mission" for the TSR-2 was to carry a 2,000 lb (900 kg) weapon internally for a combat radius of 1,000 nautical miles (nm) (1,850 km). Of that mission 100 nm (185 km) was to be flown at higher altitudes at Mach 1.7 and the 200 nm (370 km) into and out of the target area was to be flown as low as 200 feet (60 m) at Mach 0.95. The rest of the mission was to be flown at Mach 0.92. If the entire mission were to be flown at the low 200-ft altitude, the mission radius was reduced to 700 nm (1,300 km). Heavier weapons loads could be carried with further reductions in range." Dont forget it was only meant to carry one Nuke to Russia :-)) With 10000ibs of bombs its range would have been approx....the isle of wight :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabba Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Just been through all the photos I've taken at shows looking for that What If photo of a TSR.2 with wing pylons and weapons and do you think I can find it. I would swear I took a photo, GrrrrrrrrKnew I had seen one, these are on the IPMS Farnborough site Site is HERE That model is mine if you want any info? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 That model is mine if you want any info? Oh yes please, not to sure how mine will turn out but I have the Gulf War decals on order and was thinking of hanging something from the wings. Maybe Boz pod and 'spiky thingie' like the Tornado, maybe fuel tanks. Just playing with ideas at the mo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col. Posted February 16, 2009 Author Share Posted February 16, 2009 If truth be told I'm not interested in how wonderful or otherwise the TSR-2 was or could have been in relation to the F-111 or any other aircraft around at the time or subsiquently, in my little world I'm pretending the project went far enough to reach squadron service Mish - thanks for digging out the link and photos, is that the inspiration for your project? Jabba - nice build, was this one powered by imagination or did you have some references to hand? Although I'm mindful of Geoff B's comments in a couple of areas it's always good to see someone's thoughts on a project. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dambuster Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 All the build threads on Airfix 48th TSR-2s have got me itching to start the 72nd scale kit lurking in my stash (cheers Jen ) but as an operational machine. I'd like it to be as accurate as possible but a search on Google has turned up hardly any information on what changes if any were planned for the initial production batch to reach squadron service. So far I've seen mention of a bolt-on refuelling probe that could be fitted beside the pilot's cockpit and some word of external stores pylons as well as planed camouflage schemes but that's about it. I also have a vague memory of seeing a photo or diagram of changes to the rear instrument panel here somewhere but can't find it now. Can anyone help shed more light on these and any other details? With regards to the undercarriage - the additional strut as fitted to XR220 was a temporary fix which would not allow the undercarriage to be retracted. Work was in hand to design an operational modification. The strut also appeared on XR219 and I believe it may have flown in this configuration. Looking at the videos of the undercarriage problems I would hazard a guess that there may have been a significant redesign of the main gear to prevent the main bogies being dragged sideways as the oleos compressed. Compare the geometry to that designed for the Jaguar. Other external mods to consider may have been some form of Laser Range Finder (Jag/Tornado), an airfield emergency arrestor hook, integral chaff/flare dispensers, and given the dispersed nature of operations maybe some integral steps similar to F-14 etc. Peter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Aero Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 They would have had a very short life as they would have to have had a total electronics refit as I understand they used a lot of valve technology. They were virtually a one mission aeroplane. I personally doubt they would have seen ten years service when Polaris took over the "instant sunshine role". John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousFO98 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Hi Col Model Aircraft Monthly Vol 5 iss.4-7 April - July 2006 The TSR2 as it Might Have Been, 1960-1972 by Paul Lucas Part 1: The Lost Tomorrow's of an Eagle background and projected service Part 2: Proposed Initial Deployment, The Tactical Strike Establishment, Coningsby. Part 3: Classified Top Secret Atomic TSR2 in the Nuclear Strike Role. Part 4: Eagle's Talons. TSR2 in the Conventional Strike Role. plenty of options for such a project! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnonymousDFB1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 If truth be told I'm not interested in how wonderful or otherwise the TSR-2 was or could have been in relation to the F-111 or any other aircraft around at the time or subsiquently, in my little world I'm pretending the project went far enough to reach squadron service Mish - thanks for digging out the link and photos, is that the inspiration for your project? Jabba - nice build, was this one powered by imagination or did you have some references to hand? Although I'm mindful of Geoff B's comments in a couple of areas it's always good to see someone's thoughts on a project. I'm with you on this one Col. Not interested in A was better than B, like you in my world she went into service and did very well thank you. Yes this was the Model that inspired me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now