TSR-2 Automated Flight Control Systems

[KJ_Lesnick]

I remember hearing the TSR-2 had a heavily automated automatic-flight control systems based on the VERDAN which was used on the A-5 Vigilante, but that the system was removed from the design somewhere along the way.

Why was this done?


KJ_Lesnick

 

[bri]

I doubt that was the case. Most systems were made by Smiths, others by Ferranti.

The Ferranti moving map navigation system was independent from the flight control system and used doppler and gyro compass inputs. Maps were on 35mm positive film.

Side-looking radar provided confirmation of position and the moving map was updated according to what was seen on the radar.

Don't forget that British military planes had self-contained nav systems in those days (no SatNav) so that radio silence could be maintained.

How do I know all this? I worked on navigation systems at Boscombe Down, and attended a course on the moving map system!

Bri

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

http://www.stevebroadbent.net/036a.pdf

Read this and all will become clear. Verdan was a US computer and 2 were used in TSR2.

 

[bri]

Mia culpa. Egg on face.

Bri :-[

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Why did they eventually take away the automated flight control system from the design? If the TSR-2 flew do you think it would have had an effect on technological developments in other airplanes?

 

[alertken]

The link in overscan's post is hugely relevant to KJ_L's Q. TSR.2 did fly, though with very basic avionics; the AFCS was not deleted, just changed; there was a skein of continuity on through AFVG,UKVG, into MRCA. Much of the "conspiracy" nonsense puffed around TSR.2's deletion could be put to bed if someone here could tie in the timeline in design of these airframes, with the technology leading to EASAMS' definition in 1968 of the digital data bus, core of MRCA. I remember the essence of that as a chip from Beckman which provided a "window" (yes, really!) through which TFR spoke to E-Scope, on to AFCS, on to Stores Management System.

All everso novel. All consuming rather less space/heat/vibration than the cavern of TSR.2's equipment bay. It was galloping avionics obsolescence, 1957-1964, that did for TSR.2, not a commie plot by Red Wilson.

 

[zen]

Nah, the size of the technology in Tornado is such you should able to easily fit it into the TSR.2.
The airplane was not obselescent, just some of the avionics inside.
In fact scrapping the development machines likely raised the costs for the MRCA, as a lot of development for that aircraft could've been done of the TSR.2

But the TSR.2 is a fiasco anyway and should never have been. For that however we have to look to 1957.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

The link in overscan's post is hugely relevant to KJ_L's Q. TSR.2 did fly, though with very basic avionics; the AFCS was not deleted, just changed; there was a skein of continuity on through AFVG,UKVG, into MRCA. Much of the "conspiracy" nonsense puffed around TSR.2's deletion could be put to bed if someone here could tie in the timeline in design of these airframes, with the technology leading to EASAMS' definition in 1968 of the digital data bus, core of MRCA. I remember the essence of that as a chip from Beckman which provided a "window" (yes, really!) through which TFR spoke to E-Scope, on to AFCS, on to Stores Management System.

What's the MRCA and E-Scope?


Kendra Lesnick

 

[alertken]

Tornado in 1968 was the Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (or if you prefer, Mother Riley's Cardboard Aircraft, or yet again Must Refurbish Canberras Again). The Elliott E-Scope presented the TFR image.

 

[Bruno Anthony]

http://www.stevebroadbent.net/036a.pdf

Read this and all will become clear. Verdan was a US computer and 2 were used in TSR2.

New link? This one is dead.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I don't think I grabbed all the TSR2 stuff from the site - perhaps @TsrJoe did?

 

[CaseyKnight]

The Ferranti moving map navigation system was independent from the flight control system and used doppler and gyro compass inputs.

While this might not make me sound terribly bright, I assume the doppler inputs were derived from the side-looking radar system?

Maps were on 35mm positive film. Side-looking radar provided confirmation of position and the moving map was updated according to what was seen on the radar.

The concept vaguely reminds me of the TERCOM system designed for SLAM, though that system scanned either downward or forward/downward. To be honest, I am curious why this system would have the radars scan sideways instead.

 

[Hood]

While this might not make me sound terribly bright, I assume the doppler inputs were derived from the side-looking radar system?

TSR.2 had a downwards-looking Decca ARI.23133 Doppler radar. It was located in a separate ventral bay just ahead of the weapons bay.

The SLRs were for navigational fixes using pre-plotted fix points - the navigator matching the radar output on the scrolling photographic paper display against his book of pre-prepared photographs from previous calibrated radar recon sorties. The Doppler measured the drift from the track, but only the SLR could accurately fix the aircraft's position by measuring the distance and bearing of the fixes from the intended plotted track.
Plus of course there was the inertial platform which was linked to the Doppler. Altogether a belt and braces approach. (Plus the Doppler and SLR were developed pretty smoothly, the two parts of TSR.2 that would have worked ok!)