I'm afraid his comments simply aren't always accurate. You have to bear in mind that despite his position, he wasn't in the Government nor was he in the Air Ministry (and he was unashamedly pro-TSR2 of course). Like a lot of people, Beamont tended to repeat assertions that suited his view, and ignore others.
The people who
did know, included Jenkins and Healey. Jenkins is long deceased of course but his actions and views on the subject are on record if you care to look. Same applies to Healey, and of course one can always question him directly - as I did.
Naturally, I tried to get to the bottom of the story concerning the scrapping of the jigs, aircraft, etc., and I assure you that there is no record of anyone having "ordered" their destruction. Both Jenkins and Healey specifically state that they certainly gave no such orders, therefore it seems pretty clear that the jigs were simply destroyed by BAC - as they would with any cancelled project.
There was most certainly no order to destroy the aircraft, quite the contrary in fact. BAC were given the opportunity to keep both machines and fly them, but quite understandably, this was to have been done at BAC's expense (BAC had already wilfully declined to offer a fixed price for the continuing programme, so the Government was hardly likely to finance an open-ended research programme). BAC declined the offer and so both aircraft were simply disposed-of in the most practical way. XR219 (which was in a non-flying state at the time) was taken to Shoeburyness and XR220 was retained for noise research at Boscombe Down. Neither aircraft was destroyed.
It's remarkable how the tale of "mandatory destruction" persists. I recall a long communication with someone who insisted he had been at Weybridge at the time and how he'd seen "men in black suits" turn-up and demand the destruction of everything. But when I started to ask for some specifics, it transpired that it was his father who had supposedly been there, and that this was just what he'd supposedly seen. It seems quite likely therefore, that all he saw were some BAC officials, discussing arrangements for the disposal of an awful lot of redundant metalwork.
Likewise, Beamont's comments give the impression that the Budget Day announcement was an "out of the blue" blow. It wasn't like that at all. Yes, BAC were informed of the final decision only shortly before the announcement but they already knew that it was coming. More importantly, the RAF had already agreed that TSR2 should be dropped in favour of F-111, long before Budget Day. Maybe Beamont didn't know, but I suspect he had a pretty good idea.
Beamont can't be blamed for his pro-TSR2 comments but you have to bear in mind his loyalty to English Electric and the aircraft that he flew. He rightly praised the aircraft for its excellent handling qualities but he never mentioned any of its flaws, particularly the on-board systems that lagged way behind the actual airframe. He even managed to gloss-over the endless problems with the landing gear system which was, by any standards, complete nonsense from the outset, and contributed to so many delays in the flight test programme.
Ultimately, Beamont believed in TSR2 despite everything, but he was far too eager to blame its demise on the government of the day. It was the previous government that had allowed the project to run unchecked until it was out of control, and it was the same government that had overseen the forced merger of his company with Vickers - one of the ill-conceived acts that started the whole ugly saga!
I note that you're in Australia and of course the Australian aspect of the story is another one that is hopelessly mis-reported. Accepted wisdom is (was) that Australia was either bribed by America to buy F-111, or that they were dissuaded from buying TSR2 by Mountbatten. Both assertions are untrue, as a bit of investigation revealed. The truth of the matter was that the Australian Government wanted to be more closely and permanently tied to American defence and foreign policy, as they had lost confidence in Britain's will to continue supporting them. Australian Government papers include statements that specifically confirm this, and also state that this was why they abandoned interest in TSR2. It had nothing to do with American chicanery (another ridiculous claim made in so many TSR2 stories), nor did it have anything to do with Mountbatten's poison campaign.
As with so many aspects of the story, the truth was out there, but nobody ever bothered to look for it, because it's obviously easier to simply regurgitate material that is already published on the subject, especially when it's the usual salacious stuff that people enjoy. The problem was (and is) that all of this material can ultimately be traced right back to the Hastings book.
It's an uphill struggle trying to convince people that they've been fed a myth for fifty years, as you can see if you read some of the hilarious comments attached to the TSR2 clips on Youtube (which is where we came in!). Foolishly, I even tried to offer some explanations on Youtube but it's a hopeless cause. I was simply accused of being a co-conspiracist!
