The biggest TSR2 assasin was actually Lord Mountbottom......

Yes BEags. Entirely agree.

Interesting comment about his late Lordship

Care to expand on it for those not in the know (or born)?

Sir George Cayley

Sir George Caley
You will understand the comments about Mountbatten if you watch the video called TSR2 or read the book titled Project Cancelled??::mad: :mad:

Sir George:

Have a look at http://www.spyflight.co.uk/TSR2.htm

This has always been a highly contentious issue and one that will forever live as perfect example of politicians interfereing in matters they have no conception of. They, and their advisors, make crass decisions that make or break a country or, indeed, the industries within it. Those that are power hungry are worse than any of the idiots who call themselves politicians.

Those with power, like Mountbottom as BEAgle calls him, I suspect because he doesn't like using his name in the same breath as TSR2, was a perfect example of a power hungry, toffee nosed aristocrat who used his position to abuse the system one way or another but always for his own ends. A Commander he wasn't, and proved it with his disastrous raid on Dieppe and then persauded those who questioned his integrity and wisdom which cost so many uneccessary lives, that it was "worth the trip" to test the German defences. But who but a bloody clown would dare send tanks on to a shingle beach with cliffs in their faces? Crass stupidity. A track laying vehicle cannot cope with soft shingle like that at Dieppe but he ignored the advice given to him.

Then we get to TSR2. He thought that he could save the Royal Navy buy belittling TSR2 and daring to say to Australia, you can have five of these (F-111's) for one of them(TSR2) - another crass example of his stupidity when trying to be a politician.

He cost this country dear and used his grandiose position as a platform to enhance his own self importance I refuse to mention Burma but I will mention that he proved to be a fool as Viceroy of India so maybe it was, at last, that someone stood up to him and bought him home.

The end to his life is not one I would wish on anyone but it did somehow seem a strange end for a man who would have expected the grandest of the grand. That he didn't get it does have a sense of justice I fancy. But then who am I to say.

I loved TSR2 and it will always be that its cancellation was a huge mistake. Why is it that the aircraft industry has been consistently destroyed by politicians who wouldn't know one end an aeroplane from the other!

I understood that Mountbatten told the Australians they could have 5 Buccaneers for 1 TSR2. The Aussies never had any interest in the Buccaneer, but decidided that if even Mountbatten was against TSR2 it was obviousy going to be cancelled so they had better order F111's.

The reason the government wanted to cancel TSR2 may have been pressure from the USA who wanted to export F111's and rightly regarded the TSR2 as serious competition.

That was indeed one of Mountbottom's typically inane views..

Servicing 5 a/c instead of one, training and paying 10 aircrew instead of 2.....and the Buccaneer had nothing like the potential of the TSR2.

But it made sense to Mountbottom - somehow. Never was one to be confused by facts when he had his own made-up opinions.

I thought Healey wanted US support for his application to the IMF for a loan. The Yanks said "no probs, Dennis, you can rely on Uncle Sam to support you. Just bury that promising damned aeroplane so we can sell some F1-11s".

Allegedly, of course:rolleyes:

SSD

SSD, the application to the IMF for a loan (1976) was 11 years after the cancellation of the TSR-2, and thus the two events were in no way connected. The only common factor was Denis Healey himself (first MInister of Defence, then Chancellor of the Exchequer).

G-CC

Dam!!

Facts getting in the way of good story yet again:cool:

But the whole affair stinks, of that there's no doubt. I wonder if we'll evr know what went on?

SSD

Archimedes,

A long departed dear friend who was deeply involved at the time always claimed that there had been an Air Staff decision to call TSR2 the Claymore S1 in RAF service.

Conspiracy theories abound but at the end of the day it was way over budget, the RAF could barely afford 50 of the things, no-one else was going to buy it, the economy and the currency were in a right old mess, and at the time of the cancelation it didn't actually work!

It would have worked, they would have sorted the engine, vibration and undercarriage issues, and it could have gone into service.

But would that have been a good thing? If we had 50 Claymores we would have had no Phantom FGR2's, MRCA would probably not have happened and the UK industry would have taken the same hit anyway, just a year or two later.

It was a classic low under the radar nuclear strike aircraft that would have been entering service just as NATO was abandoning the nuclear tripwire and going over to measured response and a period of conventional warfare. Would it have been as good at that as Tornado? I don't know but I doubt it.

Pr00ne,

Thank you. Now I've got a possible clue, I'll see what happens to be lying about the archives (assuming no weeding, flood damage, retained for xx years, etc, etc).

'Claymore' would fit in with the documents on the F-111 , since there were references in the early stages of the intended procurement of that aircraft to the possible use of 'Rapier' but this was rejected as it had been 'reserved' for a missile system (I wonder which that could have been :) ?) . What didn't make sense to me at the time of looking at that was the appearance of that name in amongst birds of prey (and 27 Aboriginal names). Evidently, their airships moved from weapons to birds of prey for the proposed name for the F-111.

At least they didn't try to call the thing the Harrogate B.1 (which was the fate that could've befallen the F-111!)

I was lucky enough to clamber all over a TSR2 at Boscombe Down as an air cadet in the 60's. One lasting image is of the mock coat of arms pencilled on the side, bearing the motto "Harold Wilson's Folly".....

I believe the four axis simulator continued in use for some time afterwards at Weybridge. It was capable of giving the +4/-2g ride that 600kts at 50' would be like.

But there WAS an IMF or some sort of "be-nice-to the-cousins-and-we'll-get-some-cash" connection.

I remember 2 things from school VIth form years - which were 64-65 and 65-66.

English master with no military experience who loved the "romantic" shape and sight of TSR-2, coming into a poetry class with a "Hurrumph! Shelley would never have cancelled TSR-2!!"

Discussing in economics class possibility of shady deal with Spams to cut some loan deal - Callaghan was Chancellor I think.

Can't be precise on dates, but certainly within those 2 academic years.....

Anyone read Boscombe ETP Mike Crossleys book "Up in Harms Way" ?

He was not too dewy eyed about the demise of the TSR2 in his book

But maybe it is nice to continue to speculate about how good an aircraft it might have been,, had it been given half a chance...:}

Wunper

TSR-2
 

Hi all,

Would anyone have any 'period' photographs of the TSR2 during any of its flight testing that they could email to me (for my own personal use), higher resolution the better

All the best
Neil

Peut's TSR-2 photo page
 

http://84.82.173.12/photos.htm

and if you Google Images for TSR-2 there are lots more....

http://toyotei.air-nifty.com/toyotei/images/TSR2.jpg

Many thanks, thats just what i was looking for

Also check out ->
http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/tsr2/index.html

It's a wonderful site, lots of very interesting items in it.

TSR2 and Hemswell
 

After a visit to the lesser known post war base at Hemswell last week, i looked up some history on tinterweb. I knew the canberras had been based in the mid 50's but i thought that, like other bases in the area, it had closed after its use as a thor missile station.

I read on one site that Hemswell was to be the test base for the unfortunately ill fated TSR2 program. Does anyone know if any more on this subject i.e was the aircraft ever flown into Hemswell? What was planned for the base had the TSR2 continued?

Also not to do with this topic, was their ever plans to keep Binbrook and Leconfield open as RAF stations with other based units after the lightenings reign?

Any info on these topics would be much appreciated.

Cheers

Worked with a guy who told me he was instructed to buy new chains & paddocks for everybuilding that was to be associated with TSR2 Programme at Hemswell upon the annoucement of the TSR2 cancellation. Im sure he told me that shortly thereafter Hemswell was declared as no longer required and was to be sold off.

Presumably that was when the poor old TSR2 was put out to grass...?

It wasn't sold off quite that quickly. It remained in use for recruit training until at least the end of the sixties.

The history regarding RAF Hemswell and its relationship with Thor Missiles and the TSR2 can be found here.
http://website.lineone.net/~bcam/

Drove past there in '73 and it was full of Ugandan Asians chucked out by Uncle Idi, plus there was an Aero Commander parked by the tower.

TSR2 documentary
 

Not quite a reply this, but I could use some help. We're a TV production company called Wide Angle and in the process of developing a documentary about TSR2. It's story with a lot of unanswered questions and we'd be interesting in hearing from - and talking to - anyone who has either a point of view on the subject or some special knowledge. I can be reached by emailing [email protected]. Thanks.

Take a look at any of Roly Beamonts books; he was the TP who did first flight and knows the 'political' side of things intimately!

"Unanswered" TSR.2 Questions
 

It was cancelled because CAS Elworthy knew it was late, inoperable and unaffordable - see R.Gardner's Bouncing Bombs new official biography of Sir George Edwards. But if you want a fun story around one of the conspiracy theories you need a principal on camera, such as a colleague of the late (Baron, formerly Sir Cranley) Onslow, 1970 Tory Trade Minister. He asserted the chop was a deal between Wilson and CND, a sop to cover retention of Polaris. Lord Healey would deride such things and tell you the small quantity we might afford made it a Counter-Value capital asset, not to be expended in Counter-Force precision for which it had been designed. Jutland Dreadnoughts again. So he bought Phantom mud-mover plus nuclear penetrator F-111K, all on credit at fixed prices.

TSR2: Still a mystery? (Merged)
 

I'm developing a documentary on TSR2 and am aware of much of the controversy surrounding its cancellation. The available theories seem to divide into two principle camps: (1) Too expensive, too many development problems (2) Pressure from the USA to buy American. Of the various additional 'conspiracy' theories, nobody seems to want to articulate these very clearly. For my part, aspects of the story that raise issues were the obsessive way that records, blueprints, tooling etc were destroyed. If, as many people believed, the aircraft was so advanced (might still be flying today etc), is it possible that TSR2 was seen as seriously destabilising to the then 'balance of power' - this in an era where the concept of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) influenced most military investment. Was it simply too good?

Try reading Roly Beamont's book about aircraft he has test flown; he has some very specific things to say (sorry can't remember the title of the book)
All the early teething troubles were being fixed or had a fix in the works apparently; he reckons it was an entirely political decision.
Don't forget Labour cancelled a lot of other aviation projects at this time eg the Hs681 four engined high winged military transport, which the later HS/BAe 146, although smaller, looked very similar to(but the yanks wanted us to buy Hercules). I seem to recall a derivative of the '681 would have had four Pegasus engines (as fitted to the Harrier, then being test flown as the Hawker P1127) thus giving it very short takeoff performance.

Roland Beamont.
 

Two books by Roland Beamont covering this topic are,

Testing Years, published in 1980 by Ian Allan, ISBN 0 7110 1072 2.
and,
The Years Flew Past, published by Airlife in 2001, ISBN 1 84037 299 0.

This should provide a good starting point in your research,
Best regards,
om15

Thre is also "The Murder of the TSR2", but can't remember the author.
watp,iktch

The cancellation conspiracy theory thread has run though the whole history of the TSR2 project and has in my opinion been done to death, much like the plane really.

This aviation debacle like so many other labour contrived fiascos need only to be compared too the Canadian Avro project, similarly cancelled along with rabid destruction of all equipment and technical drawings of the offending airframe.

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.

It’s doubtful that any political figure from that time will have the genital fortitude to come forward and offer for public scrutiny the true facts about what took place but it’s effects on British Aviation and it’s supporting industry are a matter of public record, So I would suggest that you include TRS2 in your documentary by all means but concentrate the main theme on the demise of what was once a great and innovative aviation industry destroyed by it’s own government in pursuit of political ends contrived by another countries government.
Maybe you could even answer one of my own questions, ‘Who coined the Phrase Special Relationship, and what ever were they thinking’ ??

Tsr2 / Ra5
 

The North American A5/RA5 Vigilante bears an uncanny similarity to the TSR2???
Both Aircraft are of a similiar vintage. Any thoughts? :8
Cheers
Snips

It wasn't just the aircraft the yanks were jealous of; it's systems were well in advance of anything they had eg F111 had simple terrain avoidance radar (tells you when you're about to hit a hill), TSR2 had terrain following radar(flies the aircraft over the hill maintaining the same MSD)(MSD = Minimum separation distance) .

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. Unfortunately it could not carry sufficient fuel to do this. Neither could the F111 which was initially ordered instead. This was cancelled too, and for the same reason.

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.

Anyway, that's what I overheard a group of Boscombe Down test pilots saying in 1968.

So, if it wouldn't achieve it's primary role, what else was it so good at?

A marvellous bit of aeronautical engineering it probably was. But what use was it?

Doing this over the 'Stan and Iraq

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v8.../TSR2_sc13.jpg

The book you are thinking of is 'Phoenix into Ashes' - now out of print.

There are many theories concerning the cancellation. Although the pro-navy biased thoughts of Mountbottom didn't help, perhaps the desire of the closet communists of the Wislon era to appease their Soviet masters was the key?

TSR2's 1000 mile radius design sortie with a 2000lb bomb load was a climb to just above 20000ft, a cruise at M0.92 for about 500nm, followed by a supersonic acceleration and climb at M1.7 to around 48000ft. Then a rapid descent at M1.7/600KIAS to ultra low level for a 200nm ingress at M0.9. After weapon release, it would egress at M0.9, then climb to around 30000ft at M0.9 and return at M0.92......

Which would have made a nuclear attack on Moscow and return to RAFG quite achievable, though very risky.

Alternatively, a 700 nm radius sortie could have been flown entirely at 200ft and M0.9 - sufficient to fly from RAFG to the Ukraine and back.