Discussion
Klippie said:
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.
You really need to read the other threads on here to find out the "truth" behind these stories.Britains aero industry was world leading as with everything else no funding and a lack of vision killed it dead.
The TSR2 has become a thing of mythology. Don't believe everything you read or hear about it.
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?)
TSR2 was primarily designed to be a low level, high speed, Interdictor/Strike a/c.It gets very turbulent at low level and pretty uncomfortable flying at speed through such turbulence.
Until the design of modern, fully FBW (Fly By Wire), 'electric jets' (such as F15E Strike Eagle), the only way to get any sort of reasonable low level ride (and hence crew comfort/reduced crew fatigue) was to lower the gust response of the a/c. Other benefits of doing this were reduced airframe fatigue but, most importantly, reduced weapon aiming degredation. Remember, TSR2 was being designed in the days long before PGMs (precision guided munitions); indeed the RAF only began to receive limited stocks of PAVEWAY 1 LGBs (Laser Guided Bombs) at the tail end of the 1970s and even as late as Gulf War 1 the PAVEWAY II capability was pretty limited.
Simplistically, the way to reduce the gust response was to increase the wing loading ie to 'underwing' the a/c as you put it.
Additionally, if you want to go fast in an a/c (especially at low level) then, aside from reducing the Coefficient of Drag of the airframe, you reduce the surface area of the wing. Hence the wing loading goes up futher. Indeed fast jets comparable in size/weight to non- fast jets always have significantly higher wing loadings.
Of course, doing this tends to give you limitations in manoeuvrbility and increased take off and landing runs (owing to the higher stall speed of the wing) - hence the concentration with boundary layer control on TSR2.
DamienB said:
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?
Where is the other airframe, ive only seen the Cosford plane. 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?
Flying low and fast certainly isn't/wasn't a safe occupation, however as a strategic bomber option it's one of the few ways you could avoid most enemy air defences to lay a tactical nuke in your opponent's back yard.
Downside is that whilst training your pilots you will loose quite a few.
Downside is that whilst training your pilots you will loose quite a few.
si-h said:
What technology was actually taken from the TSR2 program, and used in other projects ?
That is, was the technology ground breaking and can it be considered a very expensive research project ?
The INAS (Inertial Navigation and Attack System) went directly into F4M.That is, was the technology ground breaking and can it be considered a very expensive research project ?
The Inertial Platform was developed into that fitted in Nimrod MR1.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Wednesday 26th November 23:36
News to me than the F-4M INAS was TSR2 kit - perhaps some small bits of it were related (as per Harrier) but it wasn't the same system. Good discussion here about the complex relationships between various IN[A]S kit of the time:
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?to...
HF transmitter ended up on Phantom and Nimrod. IFF transmitter/receiver was being developed for numerous types anyway and went forward. Doppler continued development and I think ended up in the Nimrod. Missile warning receiver work continued and was - I think - an ancestor of the RWR fitted to the Phantom and Jaguar. The Phantom's big recce pod was a cut-down version of the one destined for TSR2 (American IR linescan rather than British visual spectrum linescan, a side looking radar developed from the TSR2 one and similar camera fit). It was an expensive flop I understand...
Tornado flight control system is a very distant ancestor of TSR2s - basically based on the same principles, no hardware commonality.
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php?to...
HF transmitter ended up on Phantom and Nimrod. IFF transmitter/receiver was being developed for numerous types anyway and went forward. Doppler continued development and I think ended up in the Nimrod. Missile warning receiver work continued and was - I think - an ancestor of the RWR fitted to the Phantom and Jaguar. The Phantom's big recce pod was a cut-down version of the one destined for TSR2 (American IR linescan rather than British visual spectrum linescan, a side looking radar developed from the TSR2 one and similar camera fit). It was an expensive flop I understand...
Tornado flight control system is a very distant ancestor of TSR2s - basically based on the same principles, no hardware commonality.
DamienB said:
News to me than the F-4M INAS was TSR2 kit - perhaps some small bits of it were related (as per Harrier) but it wasn't the same system.
My other half is an ex- F4 engineer and he tells me that the INAS in the F4M (FGR2) was basically that from TSR2 with all it's attendent niggles (at least in the early days). I guess he ought to know given that he worked on it!I'd also be surprised if TSR2's Doppler found its way straight into Nimrod without much modification, given the nature of sea returns (especially in a low Sea-State) to the Janus array.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Thursday 27th November 18:31
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff