The TSR.2 Thread

[Mike]

Britain's biggest missed opportunity, the death-knell of the UK as a major aircraft producer and a beautiful aircraft... I think it deserves its own thread

[Skii]

Abso-bloody-lutely

Its funny how a kit can focus your attention so much on a particular aircraft , and the more I read about this aircraft, the sadder I feel about what might have been.

Dennis Healey - what a pillock

[Mike]

Him and Roy Jenkins. Personally, I think there was political skulduggery going on there... someone was paid to bin it off. The most logical candidate being the US Gov't at the time, as it was the F-111 that we were going for after it was cancelled.

Who in their right mind would allow the cometition intimate access with the latest & potentially world-beating airframe? Were they going to ditch theirs & buy ours? Sure they were We did the same when we gave away the details of the flying tail on our version of the X-1 (I forget the name of that one).

I despair

[Geoff_B]

Britain's biggest missed opportunity, the death-knell of the UK as a major aircraft producer and a beautiful aircraft... I think it deserves its own thread

Yeap great idea, but i would suggest looking at the link on TSRJoes Signature, as he has amassed a large amount of images relating to the TSR2 program on his MSN website.

[miduppergunner]

I am not sure that it was Healey at all - nor Jenkins - both a bit too astute and practical. However I do recall that H Wilson (who I believe hated the project) was told shortly before a cabinet meeting by well meaning lackies "Prime Minister "-- we think you ought to know that the wing on the TSR2 has broken yet again" what they did not add was that it was being tested to destruction and had broken long after the expected maximum stresses had been inflicted on it. So no doubt it was a victim of one of those silly prejudices by one of the inside groups in the Labour Government - and which exist even today. It was quite extraordinary how some people passionately believed that it was the US and GB who were provoking agression and that the Eastern Block Countries were simply taking steps to defend themselves if need be with minimum armament. Sorry about getting political - it is just that we never seem to learn.

[Mike]

I am not sure that it was Healey at all - nor Jenkins - both a bit too astute and practical. However I do recall that H Wilson (who I believe hated the project) was told shortly before a cabinet meeting by well meaning lackies "Prime Minister "-- we think you ought to know that the wing on the TSR2 has broken yet again" what they did not add was that it was being tested to destruction and had broken long after the expected maximum stresses had been inflicted on it. So no doubt it was a victim of one of those silly prejudices by one of the inside groups in the Labour Government - and which exist even today. It was quite extraordinary how some people passionately believed that it was the US and GB who were provoking agression and that the Eastern Block Countries were simply taking steps to defend themselves if need be with minimum armament. Sorry about getting political - it is just that we never seem to learn.

It's not easy to stay away from politics with a subject like the TSR.2, and we're all adult enough to keep it civil Plus, it was years ago, so people will probably find it difficult to get hot under the collar about it.... hopefully.

[spike7451]

If we had the TSR-2,the would have been no Jaguar,Phantom,Bucaneer (for the RAF) & no Tornado.We may have had the Phantom for Air Defence & maybe the Typhoon would still have entered service to replace the Phantom.

[Mike]

If we had the TSR-2,the would have been no Jaguar,Phantom,Bucaneer (for the RAF) & no Tornado.We may have had the Phantom for Air Defence & maybe the Typhoon would still have entered service to replace the Phantom.

It's an interesting postulation (is that a real word?)... From what I've read, and I'll be happy to demure to the TSR.2 buffs here, a few of the lessons learned in the TSR.2 were used in the building of the Jag... it does bear a passing family resemblance in terms of configuration, if not performance.

I often wonder whether the Tornado would have come to pass, and if so whether it would have involved the UK, or just other partners... indeed, would the other partners simply have bought TSR.2? We'll never know, but it's interesting, and a little sad to think of what might have been...

[spike7451]

It's an interesting postulation (is that a real word?)... From what I've read, and I'll be happy to demure to the TSR.2 buffs here, a few of the lessons learned in the TSR.2 were used in the building of the Jag... it does bear a passing family resemblance in terms of configuration, if not performance.

I often wonder whether the Tornado would have come to pass, and if so whether it would have involved the UK, or just other partners... indeed, would the other partners simply have bought TSR.2? We'll never know, but it's interesting, and a little sad to think of what might have been...

Also Mike,If we had exported the TSR-2,what other NATO aircraft would'nt have come into being.We all know about the Aussies ditching it over the F-111 after 'backhanders' from the states.

Maybe the Canadians would not be flying the CF-18,No German or Italian Tornados or German Phantoms,Maybe the USAF would be flying it instead of the B-1?

Who knows.

[Mike]

Also Mike,If we had exported the TSR-2,what other NATO aircraft would'nt have come into being.We all know about the Aussies ditching it over the F-111 after 'backhanders' from the states.

Maybe the Canadians would not be flying the CF-18,No German or Italian Tornados or German Phantoms,Maybe the USAF would be flying it instead of the B-1?

Who knows.

They may have had no choice with the delay of the F-111... god that would have been ironic!

[miduppergunner]

Forgive me but just remembered another one --- about the time H Wislon was doing battle with Ian Smith over the UDI of Rhodesia there was talk of scrapping aircraft carriers. He was asked how we would cope with a "Rhodesian situation" without aircraft carriers (they were going to be deployed there) and he said "oh well, we will have the F111" I am not sure if he really thought that a F111 could do the round trip or not?

[Nev]

Regarding aircraft we may or may not have had, when my dad did his RAF apprenticeship in the mid 60s he said the entire air force training structure & syllabus had been re-organised around the TSR2....which had been cancelled

I'm sure Geoff and Joe will give you more detail, but IIRC the TSR2 was one of the 3 a/c the RAF planned their force around for the 1970s and beyond. All 3 ended up cancelled, the other 2 being the p.1154 and AW681 (thats another plug for Geoffs model there )

[falcon]

Here are the 3 aircraft in question.

Enjoy

[Mike]

The middle one's the supersonic Harrier, isn't it? The transport looks like a baby Globemaster... probably gave 'em that for nowt aswell

[Martin H]

The middle one's the supersonic Harrier, isn't it? The transport looks like a baby Globemaster... probably gave 'em that for nowt aswell

the transport is the AW 681 (dont u dare call it the HS 681 LOL) the tactical transport we were going to get before it they ordered the Herk. (axed along with the TSR-2 and P1154)

the middle on is the RAF version of the HS P1154 super sonic VTOL strike fighter. Most likly it would have got the Harrier name, as the P1127/kestral was maent as northing more than a proof of concept type originaly

Geoff is the King of scratch building, that AW 681 has a herk and a KC 135 in it and a ton of miliput and plasti card. U should see some of his fighter builds.

[falcon]

The top pic is of the Armstrong Whitworth AW681 Aldershot C Mk.1(later Hawker Siddeley HS681). The second pic is of the Hawker Siddeley P1154 RAF version (FAA version having a different undercarriage layout). Finally, one we all should know, the BAC TSR-2.

[Geoff_B]

Nope that is the HS-681 Aldershot, the Hawker Siddley boys revamped the earlier AW design (much to my annoyance as started the build based on the final AW configuration !!!).

[Geoff_B]

It's an interesting postulation (is that a real word?)... From what I've read, and I'll be happy to demure to the TSR.2 buffs here, a few of the lessons learned in the TSR.2 were used in the building of the Jag... it does bear a passing family resemblance in terms of configuration, if not performance.

I often wonder whether the Tornado would have come to pass, and if so whether it would have involved the UK, or just other partners... indeed, would the other partners simply have bought TSR.2? We'll never know, but it's interesting, and a little sad to think of what might have been...

Hi Mike

Tornado can actually be traced back to the late 50's and Barnes Wallis's VG work for Vickers. The idea was to use the VG for a carrier based fighter to initially replace the Sea Vixen and then develop a secondary strike strike role to replace the buccaneers using stand off missiles rather than bombs. The final design being the Vickers 583 design. Unfortunately the Sea Vixen replacement program was merged with the RAF's Hunter replacement program and created the disasterous Hawker P1154 program (Disasterous as this effectively killed the possibility of a British Carrier (and land based) VG Incerceptor/Fighter and compromissed the 1154 program for a VTOL supersonic strike fighter down to the more basic Harrier).

Following cancellation of the naval P1154 the Phantom was ordered as an interim stopgap with the intention of redoing a new coomon airframe to replace the Phantom and the Buccaneer, but possibly larger than the BAC(Vickers) 583 as not required to operate of the smaller Hermes/Victorious classes but the new CVA-01 class.

Following cancellation of TSR2 and the RAF P1154, 50 F-111K's were then ordered to replace the TSR2 in the deep strike role, however this did not cover the replacement of the TSR2 numbers expected nor did it cover the hunter replacement now urgently required. The Hawker P1127 was to be developed as smaller cheaper hunter replacement and a new joint project between Britain and France to create the AFVG carrier capable strike fighter to complement the F-111K and replace both the canberra and the Naval Phantoms. The AFVG brought together the original Vickers 583 with the Dassault Mirage as a supersonic mach2 VG strike fighter.

(To be continued)

[Mike]

Oooh, this is good stuff I'm rivetted! And that was said without any trace of sarcasm - it's genuinely fascinating

[desmojen]

Sure is, that AW transport looks well ahead of it's time.

Whatever happened to the 'Great' in Great Britain eh?

Jen.

[Mike]

Sure is, that AW transport looks well ahead of it's time.

Whatever happened to the 'Great' in Great Britain eh?

Jen.

I think we must have sold it, along with everything else we ever owned. I've got some Scot Power shares that are currently being bought by some Spanish company... What will we have left once we've sold off all the family silver? A small, overcrowded rock, run by dimwits of the highest order. It's no wonder everyone's bailing out of the country... just wish I was saleable to those johnny foreigner countries

[Geoff_B]

Sure is, that AW transport looks well ahead of it's time.

Whatever happened to the 'Great' in Great Britain eh?

Jen.

Jen if you use your imagination and replace the plylon mounted jet engines with new turbo props and you find a frightning resemblance to the Airbus A400M !!.

Scary when you consider we designed this in the early 60's as a competitor to the Erk and even attempted to avoid the pitfall that are inherent still on the hercules - The main gear encroaches into the cargo bay floor restricting the load capacity !!!! (no offence as i know you play with the real thing but the Lockheed have been somewhat half arsed in redeveloping the Hercules considering it was designed in the early 50's )

Geoff

[desmojen]

None taken Geoff, not like I designed it or anything!

I saw the resemblance to the A-400 straight away, and in all honesty, I would not be at all surprised if elements of the design are there being European and all.

Jen.

[Geoff_B]

By 1967 the French withdrew from the AFVG program as they had the VG data they wanted, plus with the cancellation on the Carriers there was no longer a Royal Navy requirement for the fighter version. To make matter worse the F-111K costs started to rocket resulting in cncellation and yet another hefty consolation bill with still no operational aircraft.

As a result the RAF now seriously required a new strike aircraft as the last 10 years developments and funding had been wasted, thus BAC revemped the AFVG design into a larger more strike focused VG aircraft called the UKVG. Unfortunately by now funding was seriously restricted so rather than developing in house it was decided by the Government to seek partners in NATO, compromise on the requiement and create a common NATO strike aircraft (UK, West Germany, Italy, Canada, Belgium, Netherlands)

Thus the Panavia MRCA program was born, West Germany and Italy looking for a short range light strike fighter to replace the Fiat F-91's and strike elements of the Starfighters, and the RAF looking for a long range heavy strike aircraft, with a later secondary Interceptor to replace the Phantoms then on order as stop gaps to replace Javelins. As you can see there was some difference in opinion as to what the aircraft should be, as the Europeans wanted a light single seat short range strike fighter and the UK needed a two seat long range strike aircraft. therefore two aircraft were envisaged for the program a smaller single seat variant the Panavia 100 and its larger brother the two seat Panavia 200. When the costs started to rise a compromise was done an the Panavia 200 (originally to be called Panther !) became the sole variant, with the emphasis towards the Strike role.

This is why the Tornado has stuggled to live upto its role within the RAF. The RAF were wanted a larger aircraft with plenty of range and internal capacity for weapons, fuel and avionics as per the TSR2, but the Europeans wanted a light short range strike aircraft as they expected only ever to be in use in defending thier own turf. Thus the Tornado has little internal capacity and the extra fuel and systems have had to be bolted onto the airframe thus reducing the warload. This is why the longer ADV was generally offered as the export version as it was better able to incorporate upgrades than the IDS.

To be honest the Panavia program should really have been structured into a family of aircraft. The smaller P100 light strike fighter similar in role and size to the AMX or Hawk 200, a larger two seat P200 interceptor/stike aircraft as original conceived by the Vickers 583 and then an even larger P300 something more akin to the F-111 with much greater internal capacity and range.

Obviously somewhat generalised and abridged but gives an idea of where the Tornado comes from, and how much better it could have been,

Cheers

Geoff

[JakeEaton]

I guess the TSR.2 is a little before my time but I really cannot why people like the look of it. It looks like the British version of a F104 (and they aren't especially pretty!)

From a purely aesthetical point-of-view, I'd rather have a Tornado anyday