TSR-2 (Merged a few times)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: South of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 625
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Thre is also "The Murder of the TSR2", but can't remember the author.
watp,iktch"
Stephen Hastings IIRC. (written much too close to the event to be considered anything but very subjective I suggest )
The discussion of the arguments surrounding the cancellation of this aircraft runs on and on over the years with all shades of opinion being supported by a very selective rendition of largely second-hand "facts".
Doubtless the "experts" will entertain us for years to come.
watp,iktch"
Stephen Hastings IIRC. (written much too close to the event to be considered anything but very subjective I suggest )
The discussion of the arguments surrounding the cancellation of this aircraft runs on and on over the years with all shades of opinion being supported by a very selective rendition of largely second-hand "facts".
Doubtless the "experts" will entertain us for years to come.
Last edited by RETDPI; 12th Feb 2007 at 11:46.
To be honest, I simply don't know.
But I have no reason to doubt the payload/range figures, nor the specific fuel consumption of the TSR2's engines, given normal development time scales.
Although I remain convinced that the Wislon government's cancellation was for more than mere fiscal reasons....
...and we lost a world-beater as the result
But I have no reason to doubt the payload/range figures, nor the specific fuel consumption of the TSR2's engines, given normal development time scales.
Although I remain convinced that the Wislon government's cancellation was for more than mere fiscal reasons....
...and we lost a world-beater as the result
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: On the Rump of Pendle Hill GB
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Harold Wilson, George Brown and Healey, were the up and comming PM and gang, they could not face down the unions with the amount of cash the TSR2 was needing , plus the now much written about knowledge that Wilson and others were in the pocket of the Rooshians.
The ex colony of The god ole boys were offering such goodies as the F111 and the Phantom as a VERY cheap stand in, so to cash strapped Wilson and his gang of misfits this seemed the easy way out, the rest as they say is history.
My father in law worked for English Electric at that time, and he was one of many people who was tasked to destroy press tools and other such priceless items and spares whilst being closely watched to ensure rigid compliance .
Sniff out the Rooshian connection with The Gannex wearing Pipesmoker, then you will start to find reasons.
Vfr
Peter R-B
The ex colony of The god ole boys were offering such goodies as the F111 and the Phantom as a VERY cheap stand in, so to cash strapped Wilson and his gang of misfits this seemed the easy way out, the rest as they say is history.
My father in law worked for English Electric at that time, and he was one of many people who was tasked to destroy press tools and other such priceless items and spares whilst being closely watched to ensure rigid compliance .
Sniff out the Rooshian connection with The Gannex wearing Pipesmoker, then you will start to find reasons.
Vfr
Peter R-B
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was it simply too good?
Nickdc: No. (and there's more: I know who really killed Princess Di. ditto JFK *)
There is a reason why, these 42 years, no TV prog has "exposed" the truth: it's because there is nothing to expose. The nuclear deep penetrator/Moscow role, grafted on in 1960, was taken by Macmillan's Polaris, confirmed by Wilson. A scarce tactical asset the length of Vulcan became unriskable against the low-value precision targets, like one tank, that its hot, frail sensors sought: RAF could deal with them cheaper with F-4D, so Wilson offered to buy 50 TSR.2 for an East of Suez Task. Geo.Edwards/BAC wouldn't play ball on money - he could just have taken the £750Mn. on offer and later blamed, say Ferranti (10% of total R&D cost) after the User was hooked (see Astute, Nimrod MRA4) - so CAS was able to do the sensible thing: buy a fixed price batch from a planned US run >3,000.
Sources:B.Jackson/Lord Bramall, MC, ex-CGS/CDS, The Chiefs,Brassey’s,92,P361:1964 Tory Minister Thorneycroft TSR.2 “an albatross round our necks (Healey) took the decision which would have had to be taken by (PT. MoD was saying TSR.2) would have (to go) it was just that (Labour) took the opprobrium.” Maj.D.Healey(Anzio beachmaster),The Time of My Life,Penguin,1990, P272: Post-681/1154 Sir R.Dobson,Chairman of HSAL “which lost work by our decision, gave a TV interview which put all the blame on the Conservative “twerps”:‘(in) light of what has happened before (it) is very difficult to quarrel with Jenkins and Healey’”.
Conspiracies and smears, as rehashed here, like all drama require suspension of disbelief. The only Tory Minister to go public on fellow-travelling was gadfly Sir Cranley Onslow, to be ’72/4 Trade Minister (Aerospace), who blamed the influence of CND unilateralists. The only reputable historian to do so is Maj.Gordon Corrigan (5 TV), Blood,Sweat and Arrogance,Weidenfeld,2006, who with no attribution refers to Jim Callaghan's (Chancellor in April,1965) "KGB liaison". Ah, yes,Wilson, he that inherited a Yellow Sun 2 Force where “loss of 70-90% (was) conceded” by Planners" A.Pierre,Nuclear Politics,OUP,1972,P184, who bequeathed SSBNs, laydown WE177A/B, and funding that led to their highly credible delivery by RAFG. Ah, yes, Lt.Callaghan, who secured Trident C4 (Mrs.T made it D5).
Neither Wilson, Healey, nor the Kremlin, was responsible for the move from P.1154/TSR.2, via F-111K, to Harrier GR.1/F-4M/Buccaneer S.2/Jaguar/Tornado. That was CAS Sir Charles (to be CDS, MRAF, Lord) Elworthy DSO (1941 W/C, low level Blenheim). Nor was it wrecker Capt.D.Sandys, WIA 1941 that deleted much in April,1957, but CDS MRAF Sir W.Dickson, DSO,AFC. There were very good reasons for all of it, which is why they did not resign.
There is a techno-story for TV, such as by The Discovery Channel, tracing avionics and pivots from first sketches, 1956, to deployment of Tornado, 1982. But too good? No. Go to T.Buttler's Secret Projects, Bombers, MCP,2003, P124 and see the schemes to the TSR.2 replacement Requirement, OR.355 put out in October,1961 for Service c.1975.
(*: the driver and the crazy. Sorry Oliver Stone. The truth is boring).
There is a reason why, these 42 years, no TV prog has "exposed" the truth: it's because there is nothing to expose. The nuclear deep penetrator/Moscow role, grafted on in 1960, was taken by Macmillan's Polaris, confirmed by Wilson. A scarce tactical asset the length of Vulcan became unriskable against the low-value precision targets, like one tank, that its hot, frail sensors sought: RAF could deal with them cheaper with F-4D, so Wilson offered to buy 50 TSR.2 for an East of Suez Task. Geo.Edwards/BAC wouldn't play ball on money - he could just have taken the £750Mn. on offer and later blamed, say Ferranti (10% of total R&D cost) after the User was hooked (see Astute, Nimrod MRA4) - so CAS was able to do the sensible thing: buy a fixed price batch from a planned US run >3,000.
Sources:B.Jackson/Lord Bramall, MC, ex-CGS/CDS, The Chiefs,Brassey’s,92,P361:1964 Tory Minister Thorneycroft TSR.2 “an albatross round our necks (Healey) took the decision which would have had to be taken by (PT. MoD was saying TSR.2) would have (to go) it was just that (Labour) took the opprobrium.” Maj.D.Healey(Anzio beachmaster),The Time of My Life,Penguin,1990, P272: Post-681/1154 Sir R.Dobson,Chairman of HSAL “which lost work by our decision, gave a TV interview which put all the blame on the Conservative “twerps”:‘(in) light of what has happened before (it) is very difficult to quarrel with Jenkins and Healey’”.
Conspiracies and smears, as rehashed here, like all drama require suspension of disbelief. The only Tory Minister to go public on fellow-travelling was gadfly Sir Cranley Onslow, to be ’72/4 Trade Minister (Aerospace), who blamed the influence of CND unilateralists. The only reputable historian to do so is Maj.Gordon Corrigan (5 TV), Blood,Sweat and Arrogance,Weidenfeld,2006, who with no attribution refers to Jim Callaghan's (Chancellor in April,1965) "KGB liaison". Ah, yes,Wilson, he that inherited a Yellow Sun 2 Force where “loss of 70-90% (was) conceded” by Planners" A.Pierre,Nuclear Politics,OUP,1972,P184, who bequeathed SSBNs, laydown WE177A/B, and funding that led to their highly credible delivery by RAFG. Ah, yes, Lt.Callaghan, who secured Trident C4 (Mrs.T made it D5).
Neither Wilson, Healey, nor the Kremlin, was responsible for the move from P.1154/TSR.2, via F-111K, to Harrier GR.1/F-4M/Buccaneer S.2/Jaguar/Tornado. That was CAS Sir Charles (to be CDS, MRAF, Lord) Elworthy DSO (1941 W/C, low level Blenheim). Nor was it wrecker Capt.D.Sandys, WIA 1941 that deleted much in April,1957, but CDS MRAF Sir W.Dickson, DSO,AFC. There were very good reasons for all of it, which is why they did not resign.
There is a techno-story for TV, such as by The Discovery Channel, tracing avionics and pivots from first sketches, 1956, to deployment of Tornado, 1982. But too good? No. Go to T.Buttler's Secret Projects, Bombers, MCP,2003, P124 and see the schemes to the TSR.2 replacement Requirement, OR.355 put out in October,1961 for Service c.1975.
(*: the driver and the crazy. Sorry Oliver Stone. The truth is boring).
"I understand that the main purpose of the TSR2 was to deliver nuclear weapons to the heart of the Soviet Union. It was designed to do this supersonic at low level...."
I thought it was supposed to be a Canberra not a V bomber replacement?
I thought it was supposed to be a Canberra not a V bomber replacement?
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: SE England
Age: 70
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>>>It was then realised that supersonic intrusion into the SU at low level was impossible, if you wanted the aircraft and crew back. The Buccaneer was the best airframe in the world to do the same job at subsonic speeds. This was why it was transferred from the RN to the RAF.<<
Some of the V-force pilots said that they didn't expect to get back either and saw the trip as a one-way.
And, if I recall correctly, the Buccaneer was given the RAF role only after the Labour govt had spent further millions on the abortive attempt to buy the F111. And yes, it did carry that role out well.
But I do wonder what there is new to establish on the subject. I don't think there is much we don't know. The financial position of the UK economy at the time, some below-the-radar pressure from the US, inter-service rivalry led by Mountbottom and the traditional Labour Party hostility to the services all meant she was pretty much doomed.
Still, I would be interested to see any programme showing her in flight
Some of the V-force pilots said that they didn't expect to get back either and saw the trip as a one-way.
And, if I recall correctly, the Buccaneer was given the RAF role only after the Labour govt had spent further millions on the abortive attempt to buy the F111. And yes, it did carry that role out well.
But I do wonder what there is new to establish on the subject. I don't think there is much we don't know. The financial position of the UK economy at the time, some below-the-radar pressure from the US, inter-service rivalry led by Mountbottom and the traditional Labour Party hostility to the services all meant she was pretty much doomed.
Still, I would be interested to see any programme showing her in flight
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,091
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite a lot of discussion about TSR2 on some of these threads:
http://www.pprune.org/forums/search.php?searchid=958819
http://www.pprune.org/forums/search.php?searchid=958819
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 1,256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a BBC doco some years back which occasionally appears on the History channel of Foxtel.
95% of the time when something goes wrong it is a stuff up.
The conspiracy only occurs 5% of the time and it is to hide the stuff up!
95% of the time when something goes wrong it is a stuff up.
The conspiracy only occurs 5% of the time and it is to hide the stuff up!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those of you who think the United States was behind it need to consider the cancellation of the B-70 and A-12/F-12A/SR-71 on this side of the Atlantic in the same time frame. The later even included an order to break up the tooling.
It was simply a bad time for advanced projects everywhere.
It was simply a bad time for advanced projects everywhere.
quote : "Who was it offending. Look no further than Uncle Sam and his aviation cohorts whom I suggest placed so much political arm twisting on the then Labour Cabinet that they had little option but too cancel TRS2 and a number of other projects."
I agree, one of the other projects was the little known Blue Water battlefield tactical missile which was cancelled by the feeble Macmillan goverment in 1962 due to US pressure.
I agree, one of the other projects was the little known Blue Water battlefield tactical missile which was cancelled by the feeble Macmillan goverment in 1962 due to US pressure.
Not as bad as Swingfire which, so I'm told, occasionally had its gyros 'toppled' by the launch, and subsequently reversed course and took out its own launcher.
I was told this by a Cpl who was i/c a Milan team.
I was told this by a Cpl who was i/c a Milan team.
Cancellation of TSR-2 was only one of a number of major UK projects cancelled at this time in a misguided attempt to keep the economy from slipping further out of control. There were others such as the Channel Tunnel (yes, it was going ahead at the time though to a smaller scale than what eventually materialised).
Interestingly at Monino Soviet Air Force museum outside Moscow there is a prototype of a very potent-looking Sukhoi 100 which, just like TSR-2, and at the same time, was cancelled at the prototype stage. There is a sad-looking notice under the nose making the point that "It was NOT cancelled due to any deficiency of the design", obviously put up by someone with project involvement, just like those who defend TSR-2 so vigourously.
The one "high tech" project to escape in the 1960s was Concorde, and this was attributed entirely to MP Tony Benn having a marginal Labour seat at the Concorde factory in Bristol (he'd already lost the seat once and regained it). He was Minister of Technology at the time and key to the decision, and also Minister for saving his own job it seems. The Channel Tunnel was in leafy Conservative Folkestone, TSR-2 was designed in bourgeoise Weybridge (built in Preston I believe but all those I know who were involved were at Weybridge) ..... you get the picture.
Interestingly at Monino Soviet Air Force museum outside Moscow there is a prototype of a very potent-looking Sukhoi 100 which, just like TSR-2, and at the same time, was cancelled at the prototype stage. There is a sad-looking notice under the nose making the point that "It was NOT cancelled due to any deficiency of the design", obviously put up by someone with project involvement, just like those who defend TSR-2 so vigourously.
The one "high tech" project to escape in the 1960s was Concorde, and this was attributed entirely to MP Tony Benn having a marginal Labour seat at the Concorde factory in Bristol (he'd already lost the seat once and regained it). He was Minister of Technology at the time and key to the decision, and also Minister for saving his own job it seems. The Channel Tunnel was in leafy Conservative Folkestone, TSR-2 was designed in bourgeoise Weybridge (built in Preston I believe but all those I know who were involved were at Weybridge) ..... you get the picture.
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There were THREE politicians who were involved in the 'death' of the TSR2. Jim Callaghan, Roy Jenkins and Denis Healy. In the documentary that the BBC did, with a huge input by 'Bee' Beamont, all three denied it! Their "nothing to do with me" stance was nothing short of lies. Then, of course, there was Mountbatten, who had little of an aviation background but who stabbed the TSR2 project in the back, with the help of the lying three above, by making a supermarket style offer of three F-111's for the price of one TSR2 to the Australian government. The RAAF were said to have paid three times the originally quoted price by the time the bugs had been eliminated, years later.
I met 'Bee' in April 2001 at a signing ceremony of our TSR2 prints at which time, over an extended lunch, he related a few stories which Tim Deadman, a PPRuNer and I sat enthralled by. He also made it clear that the TSR2 should not have been killed off. He told of his test flights, some of which were conducted up and down a N/S line from Warton over the sea. He achieved supersonic speeds frequently and told that the TSR2 would have been capable of 2.3M. He also said that had the project not been cancelled there would have been NO requirement for the Tornado!
TSR2 was a worldbeater and would have still been flying today probably! 'Bee' seemed to always carry his design sortie and I noted a few posts back that BEagle had posted one. That is it EXACTLY. Quite something.
Here today, nothing has changed. The politicians still interfere on the back of a distinct lack of knowledge and control. They will never learn that the money they need to enforce their own power hungary ill thought out ideas comes from the people. I just to see the true figures exposed after the Tories get back.
But, sadly, with a quick return to the topic!!! The finest builders of aircraft have been let down time after time after time! Sickening!
I met 'Bee' in April 2001 at a signing ceremony of our TSR2 prints at which time, over an extended lunch, he related a few stories which Tim Deadman, a PPRuNer and I sat enthralled by. He also made it clear that the TSR2 should not have been killed off. He told of his test flights, some of which were conducted up and down a N/S line from Warton over the sea. He achieved supersonic speeds frequently and told that the TSR2 would have been capable of 2.3M. He also said that had the project not been cancelled there would have been NO requirement for the Tornado!
TSR2 was a worldbeater and would have still been flying today probably! 'Bee' seemed to always carry his design sortie and I noted a few posts back that BEagle had posted one. That is it EXACTLY. Quite something.
Here today, nothing has changed. The politicians still interfere on the back of a distinct lack of knowledge and control. They will never learn that the money they need to enforce their own power hungary ill thought out ideas comes from the people. I just to see the true figures exposed after the Tories get back.
But, sadly, with a quick return to the topic!!! The finest builders of aircraft have been let down time after time after time! Sickening!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one "high tech" project to escape in the 1960s was Concorde, and this was attributed entirely to MP Tony Benn having a marginal Labour seat at the Concorde factory in Bristol (he'd already lost the seat once and regained it).
I thought Concorde survived because of the 'no get-out' clause negotiated with the French by Conservative minister Julian Amory. It was, ironically, devised so that the French couldn't pull out and leave the Brits with all the costs.
Ironically, it turned out to be us that wanted out, but were tied in by that clause!
SSD
I thought Concorde survived because of the 'no get-out' clause negotiated with the French by Conservative minister Julian Amory. It was, ironically, devised so that the French couldn't pull out and leave the Brits with all the costs.
Ironically, it turned out to be us that wanted out, but were tied in by that clause!
SSD
Prune Pop - it was reportedly 5 for 1 Buccaneers which that fool Mountbottom (probably the worst CDS of the era) used to pull out of his pusser's grip when back-stabbing TSR2...... The concept of paying for 5 times as many crews didn't cross his blinkered naval mind, it seems.
I'm told that TSR2 was a bit of a pig to fly at low speed (as was the Buccaneer) - but outstanding at high speed.
I'm told that TSR2 was a bit of a pig to fly at low speed (as was the Buccaneer) - but outstanding at high speed.
Last edited by BEagle; 15th Feb 2007 at 05:08.
