The TSR2

Author
Discussion

Polarbert

Original Poster:

17,923 posts

231 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
Having recently read a copy of Sled Driver and watched a 20 minute long youtube video detailing everything about the cockpit of an SR71 Blackbird I stumbled across this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o53u0X0Ik0w

Well I ended up watching it all the way through and thought it was fascinating, and very confusing why everything was destroyed afterwards. Was it something to do with the yanks and their F111?

Anyway, its a brilliant documentary and I'd definitely recommend watching it.

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
The subject of the TSR2 has been discussed on here many times before. Indeed, a regular PH contributor, Damien Burke, has written a pretty authoritative book on the aircraft. Hopefully, he might post on this thread.


SMB

1,513 posts

266 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
The tsr2 was a sad story for technology development but I find the avro arrow to be the low point of politics killing technology development.

Polarbert

Original Poster:

17,923 posts

231 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
I figured it might have been discussed before.

It seems a shame all around because with technology nowadays these types of planes aren't really relevant any more.

Has anything beaten the four records the SR71 set on its last flight?

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
The Tornado GR1/GR4 has more or less carries out the missions that the TSR2 would have - and they have been doing it for over 30 years.

CrutyRammers

13,735 posts

198 months

Monday 17th November 2014
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
The subject of the TSR2 has been discussed on here many times before. Indeed, a regular PH contributor, Damien Burke, has written a pretty authoritative book on the aircraft. Hopefully, he might post on this thread.
A recommended read if you're at all interested.

wildcat45

8,072 posts

189 months

Wednesday 19th November 2014
quotequote all

What would the in-service date have been for TSR2? I winder, would it still be flying today in GR 9 or 10 fit? Also, would it have bee called Tornado I wonder, or maybe a "V" name?

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Thursday 20th November 2014
quotequote all
The timetable was for service entry around 1970. I expect that would not have happened, with a service entry more like 1973/74.
Given the service career of the various aircraft that replaced it (the Buccaneer S2 and Phantom) I would think they might have been withdrawn around 1993/94 - perhaps soldiering on towards 2000. I don't think any would be in service today.

The name earmarked for the aircraft was Eagle.

wildcat45

8,072 posts

189 months

Thursday 20th November 2014
quotequote all

Cheers Eric, that's answered questions I have had for some time.

I wonder - considering it was powered by Olympus and therefore enough oil - if Eage would have had more effect than Vulcans in Op Black Buck.

Certainly would have seen service in GW1

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Thursday 20th November 2014
quotequote all
I don't think it would have been capable of Black Buck type ops - no more than the Tornado could have been.

It certainly could have been used in Gulf War 1. Indeed, I have seen drawings and models of TSR2s in the Sand Pink colours used during GW1





wildcat45

8,072 posts

189 months

Thursday 20th November 2014
quotequote all

Love that! So that's 2 Paveaways and ASRAAM?

DamienB

1,189 posts

219 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
I feel like Candyman sometimes. Say TSR2, TSR2, TSR2 and up I pop...

Lovely looking jet. Too expensive, too limited, too troubled... the end. No need for conspiracy theories or political flag-waving. A government of any colour would have cancelled it. My book covers the problems pretty well - nothing insurmountable if you didn't mind throwing yet more money at the project, but doing so simply didn't make sense.

I think the RAF ending up with the Buccaneer and Jaguar - and later Tornado - actually made a great deal more sense.

'Eagle' was a name made up on a modelling forum. I found no evidence of any serious discussions about naming the aircraft.

The "documentary" linked to is a puff-piece, with various factual inaccuracies. If "everything was destroyed", for instance, why are there shelves full of documentation at Warton, Weybridge and Kew, two complete airframes and various other bits still around?

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
I 've always had a suspicion that the "Eagle" moniker had a "made up" feel to it. It actually doesn't sound very British to be honest.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

261 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
SMB said:
The tsr2 was a sad story for technology development but I find the avro arrow to be the low point of politics killing technology development.
I think the Vickers V1000 was the low point. A 4 engine airliner that could have been a match for the 707, but could only be built if BOAC agreed to buy it.

'We don't need it' said BOAC, we can manage fine with Comets and Britannias.'

V1000 cancelled, prototype already under construction cancelled and jigs broken up.

Then BOAC ordered 707s, 'you can't expect us to manage with Comets and Britannias.'

Or of course the Trident saga...............

Eric Mc

121,990 posts

265 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
Can't you see the fundfamental problem with the British manufacturers though?

They only ever considered one customer, the UK taxpayer. When they were planning a new aeroplane, the expected customer was either, the RAF, thr Royal Navy, Imperial Airways (pre WW2) or BEA/BOAC (post WW2).

There was little or no attempt or understanding of designing aircarft for world markets.

And there were far too many manufacturers. In 1950 there were over 20 independent or semi-independent airframe manufacturers plus around 10 aero-engine manufacturers - all chasing one customer. It was utter madness.

Dr Jekyll

23,820 posts

261 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
The VC10 was certainly aimed specifically at BOAC requirements circa 1958. But to be fair the V1000 could have appealed to world markets if it had been produced. And there was a vociferous faction within De Havilland that wanted the Trident to be the size the world market wanted (IE 727 sized) rather than the cut down version BEA wanted, but the BEA faction won the day.

I don't think it was so much that the manufacturers didn't think of the world market. More that they needed BEA or BOAC orders to get started and BEA/BOAC didn't like being put under political pressure to buy British so they wanted the UK aircraft industry to go away.

Look at the BAC 111. BEA said they didn't want it, but BAC managed to produce it anyway with orders from BUA. Then BEA decided they wanted it after all but as a special 'Super 111' with the switches the other way up.

The Britannia is another interesting one. It could have appealed to a world market but so much time was wasted due to BOAC interference that it was simply too late.

Munter

31,319 posts

241 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
Popped into a local place for coffee earlier today. Guess what I saw:

anonymous-user

54 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
Considering the size of the thing, it always looks a bit "underwinged" to me..... (guess they were fixated on high speed at high altitude, rather than scudding around doing NOTE Flying etc?)

Klippie

3,137 posts

145 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
The video on YouTube mentions it outrun a Lightning with only one engine on re-heat...awsome plane a real shame it was never given a chance.

Britains aero industry was world leading as with everything else no funding and a lack of vision killed it dead.

maffski

1,868 posts

159 months

Sunday 23rd November 2014
quotequote all
Max_Torque said:
Considering the size of the thing, it always looks a bit "underwinged" to me..... (guess they were fixated on high speed at high altitude, rather than scudding around doing NOTE Flying etc?)
Fast and low without shaking to bits wasn't it?