Re: TSR-2 (Cancelled Project)
Posted: 27 Sep 2018, 15:45
Imagine if someone else had been sent to India?Little J wrote: Have to wonder what might have been had Mountbatten not stuck his nose in with the Aussies..
News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.
https://ukdefenceforum.net/
Imagine if someone else had been sent to India?Little J wrote: Have to wonder what might have been had Mountbatten not stuck his nose in with the Aussies..
I think with the Aussies there were other factors at play. Australia was contemplating its own nuclear weapons program In the early 60s - TSR2 was going to be the delivery vehicle. The Americans weren’t too keen and so made them a better offer - well put you inside the umbrella via the Joint Defence Facilities (Pine Gap). This was around the time of the pullback from east of Suez and the domino theory in South East Asia - there’s no way Britain could compete with US protection.Little J wrote: ↑27 Sep 2018, 15:06Have to wonder what might have been had Mountbatten not stuck his nose in with the Aussies...Lord Jim wrote:Whilst the investment of funds was huge for the TSR-2, it was way ahead of anything else either in service or in development at the time. IF we had been more positive in the management of the programme without the mixed signals form Government it could have been a major success, both for the RAF and for exports.
I have to disagree. The capability to build the aircraft was demonstrated.mrclark303 wrote: ↑08 Sep 2022, 14:26Unfortunately, the decision I've come to is that in reality, it's a project that should never have been started. It was simply beyond the capacity of the Mod to fund in the numbers needed and operation of the type in squadron service would have been 'ferociously' expensive.
Too late, the baying mob with pitchforks and burning torches is already coming down your street!SD67 wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 08:36 According to public source material
- Only flew supersonic once
- Major problems with landing gear
- Terrain following radar immature, may have been shaken to bits by low level flight
- Engines would have been a maintenance nightmare
- Mission computer verging on obsolete
Added to the general design limitations
- lack of swing wings (how would those tiny wings have performed at altitude?)
- lack of turbofans
- limited payload relative to cost
TSR2 seems to be a very high risk way of bombing Moscow, most likely a one way ticket, in which case you may as well send a missile.
I think what we really needed was UKFG - swing wings, turbofans, multi role capability- TSR2 was a dead end
now I'll go and hide
If I vote with my heart, I fully agree, but my rather exhaustive decades of research on every aspect of the TSR2 unfortunately points in another direction...swoop wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 05:20I have to disagree. The capability to build the aircraft was demonstrated.mrclark303 wrote: ↑08 Sep 2022, 14:26Unfortunately, the decision I've come to is that in reality, it's a project that should never have been started. It was simply beyond the capacity of the Mod to fund in the numbers needed and operation of the type in squadron service would have been 'ferociously' expensive.
The "problem" was British bureaucracy. Far too many departments and ministries were involved and then, far too many additions and variations to the capabilities of the project as it progressed.
The engineers did an outstanding job.
The politicians and "ministries" should have been put against the wall and shot.
They won't rest until he's been completely forkedmrclark303 wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 17:40 Too late, the baying mob with pitchforks and burning torches is already coming down your street!
Looking at the amount of flying time and the issues resolved/identified, they did remarkably well indeed. Look at the amount of time a current aircraft takes to get into the air and then on into service. F-35 is around 30yrs. Compare that with TSR2 timeline.SD67 wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 08:36 According to public source material
- Only flew supersonic once (1)
- Major problems with landing gear (2)
- Terrain following radar immature, may have been shaken to bits by low level flight (3)
- Engines would have been a maintenance nightmare (4)
- Mission computer verging on obsolete (5)
Added to the general design limitations
- lack of swing wings (how would those tiny wings have performed at altitude?)
- lack of turbofans
- limited payload relative to cost
TSR2 seems to be a very high risk way of bombing Moscow, most likely a one way ticket, in which case you may as well send a missile.
I think what we really needed was UKFG - swing wings, turbofans, multi role capability- TSR2 was a dead end
Unfortunately Swoop, the Avionics were a serious concern, had TSR2 survived into service it would probably have had technology refresh to MK2 standards in the late 1970's. The early 1960's Avionics would have been obsolete by the early 1970's for that matter, just as it reached operational service!swoop wrote: ↑10 Sep 2022, 09:25Looking at the amount of flying time and the issues resolved/identified, they did remarkably well indeed. Look at the amount of time a current aircraft takes to get into the air and then on into service. F-35 is around 30yrs. Compare that with TSR2 timeline.SD67 wrote: ↑09 Sep 2022, 08:36 According to public source material
- Only flew supersonic once (1)
- Major problems with landing gear (2)
- Terrain following radar immature, may have been shaken to bits by low level flight (3)
- Engines would have been a maintenance nightmare (4)
- Mission computer verging on obsolete (5)
Added to the general design limitations
- lack of swing wings (how would those tiny wings have performed at altitude?)
- lack of turbofans
- limited payload relative to cost
TSR2 seems to be a very high risk way of bombing Moscow, most likely a one way ticket, in which case you may as well send a missile.
I think what we really needed was UKFG - swing wings, turbofans, multi role capability- TSR2 was a dead end
In order:
1: Correct. Due to the limited performance of the new engines (~80% thrust reliability iirc) and afterburner issues. It went supersonic on one engine though.
2: Identified issues and stop-gap remedy supplied (Salisbury tie) as well as beginning to redesign for an upgraded solution to the gear.
3 & 5: Everything electrical was "immature" in the 60's but it was what the UK had to live with. The low level ride was described as smooth, so hopefully those valve driven electronics could still keep a head of steam...
4: Any engineer will say whatever they work on is a nightmare... Your point is?
Swing wings were not needed. Period. As for turbofans? Where do you fit the afterburners?
Going to Moscow in any aircraft was a one-way affair, as stated by both Vulcan and Bucc crews. We are talking about 1960/1970's doctrine and tactics, so having a long range with supersonic dash capability has advantages.
The engines development fed into the Concorde programme, the TFR fed into MRCA/Tonka, the electronics and radar helped develop newer technologies.
Sadly it was the "multi-role capability" that killed TSR2, by adding unnecessary nonsense.
Also, it was the last British warplane. Everything afterwards had to be a compromise with other nations' interests & capabilities.
Absolutely. Anything electronic is obsolete the moment it hits the shops. Especially so for MoD procurement processes!mrclark303 wrote: ↑10 Sep 2022, 17:21 Unfortunately Swoop, the Avionics were a serious concern, had TSR2 survived into service it would probably have had technology refresh to MK2 standards in the late 1970's. The early 1960's Avionics would have been obsolete by the early 1970's for that matter, just as it reached operational service!
In 1951, Britain introduced the English Electric Canberra. Designed to operate at high level, it would go onto become the RAF's longest serving machine. It was an incredibly efficient aircraft, but by the late 1950s everything changed. The Soviet Union brought into service brand new surface-to-air missiles and overnight the Canberra was vulnerable.
Now the British government needed a new aircraft, one that could beat this threat and fly under the radar. It was a huge ask for the technology of the time, but had it been successful the aircraft itself would have been a world beater. In this episode of Duxford in Depth, Liam Shaw takes a detailed look at the aircraft that never was, the BAC TSR-2.