TSR2 SLEP

[Foo Fighter]

G'day folks, consider this. The TSR2 goes into service and later requires a SLEP, what engines are avaulable and could a big wing be fitted/would it be an improvement?

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

Certainly sir;- what do you want it to do? How much do you want it carry, how far and how fast?

If you want it pretty much as per the original spec, I would suggest getting a bit more out the Oly 22R by raising the TET (introduce better ngv/blade cooling) is about all that would be available.

Now if you dumped the Mach 2 nonsense that may open it up a bit but, as you point out the wing is too small. The wing area is sized to be the minimum required to get the max mass of fuel an payload to the first leg cruise altitude. With a turbofan that’s a big hit as the fuel consumption increases with altitude and pushing a small wing up is bad news. These high Mach aeroplanes are very single operating point optimised so changing almost anything is not so easy.

Also the engine is highly matched to the intake, so changing engines often leads to more inefficiencies because of cost of rebuilding the fuselage for better matching.

The only option would be something like a J58, but it’s diameter is too big;- 50inch vs 44inch. You could zero stage the F100 (add an an extra LP stage on the front;- thus pushing up the mass flow) but let’s be real, that’s got the same chance of happening as putting Russian engine in.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I was thinking the Buccaneer plus ten or fifteen percent as being reasonable and only engines that could fit. An extra stage might do that as you say. To put it another way, without the supersonic Buccaneer but more serviceable than the super tech heavy original and up-gradable.

It does of course depend on which year the SLEP occurs in a-la BUFF.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

How much bigger was Concorde's Olympus 593?

 

[Zoo Tycoon]

The Oly 593 was a zero staged 22R, so much bigger.

 

[Hood]

I can't think of many post-war aircraft that the RAF did a serious engine upgrade to.
Jaguar and Harrier II seem to be the stand-out ones, and then that involved improved marks of the same engine.
We might speculate whether Rolls-Royce might have put some newer engine tech into the Olympus, I hesitate to say RB.199 technology because its not clear whether the RB.199 would exist in a non-Tornado world.

A larger wing might have been possible, though probably expensive and requiring extensive flight testing. The UK couldn't fund big wing Harrier on its own, so would it be able to afford a new partly-composite wing for TSR?
Probably would give some trim and CG issues too, though miniaturised electronics may have become lost in that huge avionics bay, so some redistribution of airframe weights might have been necessary anyway (finding a useful use for the empty avionics shelf space might have been a issue too).

 

[zen]

G'day folks, consider this. The TSR2 goes into service and later requires a SLEP, what engines are avaulable and could a big wing be fitted/would it be an improvement?

Good question.

Short answer yes both things can be done. But both things come at a price and with the devastating question "why"?

It is possible to field say a development of the Medway to replace the Olympus. But while it might improve cruising range, and low level efficiency. It comes at a price for the medium altitude cruise and high altitude dash. As well as high speed limits.
So it implies the high speed dash and high altitude recce roles have gone elsewhere.

So why would you do it?

The big wing can only really make sense if it's accompanied by a change in focus. A Fighter version or a medium to high altitude bomber might justify such expense.
If it's a fighter, then you're changing the front end as well to accommodate the large AI set.

 

[Archibald]

How much bigger was Concorde's Olympus 593?

It would send a TSR-2 into orbit... ! More seriously, Concorde engines (the 600 - 610 series) still hasn't exhausted the Olympus potential (!) even coming after both TSR-2 AND Vulcan variants. A truly astonishing engine.
I've found tidbits on Google books, related to a 625 / 626 variant which I think was for Concorde B. Some kind of early "variable cycle engine". While their flight regimes were different of course, some advanced Concorde engine tech could surely be useful for a TSR-2 slep.

How about analog or digital FBW ? would greatly help at low level.

The massive 1960's avionics would have rapidly shrunk (God bless the Moore law !) freeing a ton of internal space for MOAR fuel.

 

[kaiserd]

A thought that always occurs to me with these “what-if” upgrades and developments of the TSR2 is;
(1) If it entered service it would have lived its service life in a tough wearing environment (low level high speed and all that comes from that). High likelihood of fatigue/ cracks (of which the Tornado was somewhat spared by switch to higher altitude operations starting in the 90’s)
(2) If it survived we are talking about a small operating fleet (reduced procurement numbers) with no international orders or partners likely
(3) the TSR2s avionics likely to be at the opposite of a sweet spot in terms of desired performance/ functionality, complexity, reliability etc. Given the issues experienced by contemporaries (F-111, A-6 etc) in this regard a total revamp may have been required to give anything close to intended performance paired with anything like acceptable reliability.

So a TSR2 that cheats history and actually enters service is likely to have real problems that would be extremely expensive (uneconomic?) to fully resolve long-term for such a small fleet. Hence quite likely a relatively short career with bodged temporary solutions (zero chance of news engines and the like) with a reluctance to spend real money which instead goes on a multi-national swing-wing successor which can really deliver the required strike capability and for which a variant can also be the loitering air defender the RAF wants (a Tornado via a slightly different route).

 

[uk 75]

Kaiserd summarises the fate of TSR2 well.
The most optimistic programme would have been 35 to 50 TSR2s replacing the Vulcan fleet around 1970. They would probably have experienced all the headaches of new airframe, engine and systems.
The gap in the frontline caused by this purchase would have needed the Buccaneer S2 to be procured.
A frontline RAF in 1975 would have been the TSR2/Buc force with Lightnings in the Air Defence role supported by Victor tankers. The P1127 Harrier might have scraped into service replacing some Hunters until Hawk arrives in the 70s as a cheap Trainer/GA plane. Similarly Nimrod would have probably also been funded.
TSR2 would have been as controversial in service as it was in cancellation. Comparison with US and RAAF F111s would have been increasingly unfavourable. These planes receiving regular upgrades.
France and Germany begin introducing the Mirage NKF in the late 70s.
A new government in 1979 is faced with an unpalatable choice. The RAF's TSR2 and Buc force is falling apart from lack of investment.
Does the UK join the European programme or purchase secondhand F111s from the US?

 

[Hood]

I think Kaiserd has just about nailed the pitfalls.
I cannot conceive the MoD spending vast sums on SLEPs, they never really did for any frontline types. Some updates at best but the Tornado GR.4 of the 90s was probably the biggest upgrade undertaken since the 1960s.

As to numbers, as UK75 points out a V-Bomber withdrawl means less airframes. I feel a Bucc S2 unlikely in this scenario, politically as much as anything else. Had the TSR line still been winding down its not beyond the realms of fantasy that a second batch may have been ordered during the early 1970s, perhaps with avionic tweaks.

The big crunch would be 1970s planning for the 1980s. What replaces TSR in the interdiction role? How does that affect Jaguar and Harrrier replacement with AST.403? Could both be afforded even if they were both collaborative programmes? Would ECA become a bigger aircraft capable of multirole strike. Many knock-ons to ponder.

 

[uk 75]

I chose Buccaneer S2 procurement because the purchase of TSR2 would have doomed the RN carrier force to help balance the books for Polaris. The Buccaneer stands in for the P1154/Jaguar.
The Hunter soldiers on except perhaps for some P1127s till Hawk or an equivalent takes care of the close support non nuclear role as Alpha Jets do in Germany.
TSR2 would have hogged money into the 70s.
But its presence would have stifled development of a replacement leaving the UK forced to join a European buy of a Mirage NKF type or buy secondhand F111s.
The big programme for the 80s would have been an urgent replacement for the Lightning force. With no Tornado ADV to turn to, some interesting and difficult choices loom.

 

[zen]

Really the avionic question has to be answered in how did the TSR.2 get into service.

There really was no way a Verdan with virtual memory on tape or disc was going to work.

So you have two options here.
1. It's been de-specced to use the sort of avionics in the Jaguar and Harrier. Very much an interim and bare bones solution.

2. The UK offering to MRCA. Presumably based on a Elliot set as used in had A7. Implying quite a delay into service.

Now if it's 1. This could only be viewed as an interim and so a full spec solution had to be in the Plan. Which likely would be option 2.

If it's 2. This is likely to follow Tornado IDS upgrades.

So abandonment of the TSR.2 fleet or replacement with another new machine seems logically dead unless the interim solution 1 sees a tiny number enter service. Even then the cost is sucking cash away from Jaguar and may make yet another type too crushingly expensive even if the TSR.2 fleet is just cut there and then.
Damage already done.

If it's not cut at tiny numbers then commitment to more imposes a certain inevitability to keeping it going.
In a way this explains why it was cut as strategically it would lock up RAF cash for decades if it went ahead.

Arguably low rate production was the way to square the circle. But this didn't mesh with the mindset of the times.

 

[Hood]

Yes the TSR.2 fanboys forget about the avionics.
The testing programme had barely got going when the plug was pulled, so we have no way of evaluating how the avionics testing would have gone, but its not likely to have been smooth sailing.

Ultimately the mixed analogue-digital systems would have dated very rapidly, as Zen says Jaguar had a better inertial system a decade later. So had TSR.2 entered service in 1970-71, it would be very dated by 1980 - the big choice then for the RAF is how far to strip the avionics out, probably a gutting of the the black boxes and wiring looms.

What if the avionics didn't pass muster, say during trials in 1965-66, would the government realistically let BAC go away and strip out the avionics and get a whole new nav/attack suite in there at £xxx millions? Messers Wilson and Healey would be revving up the angle grinders I think at that point and doubtless the aeronautical and financial press would have been making life hell for BAC.
Another factor - we don't know how reliable the engines might have been either, was that shaft resonance issue really cured?
So sticking plasters seem the best way and buying 50 to salvage some kind of face all round, then maybe the Heath government in 1970-71 buying a second batch of tarted up TSRs (the trade unions would have pressed to keep production going to keep Weybridge and Warton in work, especially if Jaguar had been sacrificed on the TSR altar).

To my mind the TSR.2 was impressive on paper (and sexy to look at) but completely wrong, too big, too heavy and too complicated. It was a 1950s design with 1950s notions of cutting-edge avionics brought to fruition a decade too late. A couple of years after its death BAC's AFVG and UKVG look like dinky toys compared with TSR, lean and mean optimised airframes with miniaturised electronics and good performance and the joys of VG wings.
Arguably TSR was delayed too long and aimed too high, something like UKVG was much more feasible to meet the requirements but of course unobtainable when TSR was sketched out.

 

[JFC Fuller]

There are certain characteristics, driven by the timing of the TSR-2's conception and the period it would have been in service, that would have made it an attractive upgrade target had a life extension been desired following a successful service entry. Much of the aircraft's systems were based on late 1950s technology, the results of this being a cavernous electronics bay behind the cockpit (not a feature of either the Harrier or the Jaguar), the TFR being derived from AI.23 and the VERDAN computer being derived from the one used in the NAA Vigilante. Conceptually, the TSR-2 Nav-attack system was close to that conceived for the OR.324 medium bomber in 1953.

The period after TSR-2's cancellation, really starting before it, saw rapid miniaturisation and performance improvement in airborne computers and the emergence of electro-optical components in aircaft nav-attack systems. As for what this means for a AH TSR-2 upgrade, an engine swap or major structural changes are all highly unlikely and any major change to the nav-attack system layout equally so as a result. That still leaves substantial scope though. The systems proposed or actually used in the Tornado GR.1, in many cases from the same families as systems used in the Harrier and Jaguar, offer a good starting point. For instance, Ferranti FIN1000 inertial system and Elliott 920 series computers replacing the legacy systems for reduced weight and improved reliability and performance. Ferranti Laser Ranger and Marked Target Seeker (LRMTS) would have been desirable but would have needed a fairing under the forward fuselage, this may or may not have required a reworking of the Doppler radar installation. It is notable that the F-111 Mark II avionics package made a transition to these new generation systems very early in the aircraft's life (concurrent with production) demonstrating that this was not an issue unique to the UK.

TSR-2 lacked an onboard jammer and external locations for aerials were few and far between so an external system, similar to Sky Shadow would be attractive. Integration of a laser designator pod (Buccaneers received the AN/AVQ-23 Pave Spike from 1979) would have offered a very substantial uplift in the ability to conduct precision strike missions.

Whether it would have been worth replacing the TFR is an interesting question, the nose area in which it was installed was small so performance would always be limited but there may (or may not) have been utility in replacing it with something derived from Blue Fox technology or some other newer radar technology to provide enhanced performance compared to the original TFR.

Ultimately, a successful TSR-2 would have produced an aircraft with a payload/range/survivability combination greatly superior to that of any other aircraft the RAF pursued after it in the Cold War era. It would have been a very important asset alongside the USAFE F-111s in the European theatre, aircraft that were intended to serve well into the 1990s, until replaced by A-12s, in the deep strike role against targets far inside the Warsaw Pact. The below quote is from Air Vice-Marshal R P O’Brien writing in the RAF Historical Society's The Birth of the Tornado paper.

As regards range, there is no hiding the fact that in the GR1 we are dealing with a tactical aircraft with radii of action of under 400 nmls in the lo-lo context and around 500 nmls hi-lo-hi. Both cases assume a representative war load of four 1000lb bombs and full external defensive aids. This clearly compares unfavourably with claims for the TSR2 of around 1000 nmls lo-lo, or even the Canberra which had a 600 nmls radius under similar conditions. Furthermore, 400 nmls is a best figure, based on maximum use of external tanks and carrying centre line weapons in the strike or attack roles role. In other weapons fits, such as carrying two JP233s, the range reduces to around 280 nmls lo-lo.

 

[uk 75]

TSR2 would have met the requirement for an RAF bomber wing to give NATO a deep strike option into the 70s. Ironically the RAF used 48 Vulcan B2s to fill this role until 1982.
TSR2 would have needed replacing at about the same time.
NATO filled the gap with an extra F111 wing at Lakenheath and then the Cruise Missiles at Greenham Common and Molesworth.
Buccaneer S2 had better range than Tornado.
However, there were more than enough targets in East Germany and Poland for the RAF and Luftwaffe Tonkas.
UKVG with the extra range to get to Murmansk etc would have been the best solution. But by 1968 the UK was flat broke.

 

[Archibald]

Interestingly enough the Mirage IVA avionics were quite austere and basic, even the IVP upgrade was minimalistic on few airframes (19 out of 62).
What's more, every single atempt at replacing the Mirage IV (AFVG G4 G8 ACF 4000) was dismissed at unaffordable. Only fighter strike variants suceeded - 2000N was inferior and Rafale barely a match, range-wise I mean.

VERDAN : Very Effective Replacement of a Dumb Ass Navigator ( I red this I don't know where and a long time ago....)

 

[Archibald]

TSR-2 sounds like the embodiment of the impossibility of putting an efficient guidance system (GPS, cough) in the bombs themselves - or guided missiles.

A piloted aircraft had to do the job of carrying the bombs exactly on target across a hail of sophisticated air defense layers - at a very high risk, flying supersonically at tree tops to try and escape SAMs radars. Always sounded a desperate move to me - the Tornados with the JP233 paid a high toll to Saddam air defenses in the early days of Desert Storm. So did the french Jaguars, at Al Jabber damn it.

LGBs entered the picture on May 10, 1972 in Vietnam - still with mixed results.
Cruise missiles and Firebee drones had similar issues: inertial-stellar guidance (Hound Dog, Skybolt) cost an arm and a leg and still couldn't do better than 1 mile precision on target - or worse.

I red a ton of stuff related to the D-21, Firebee and AQM-91 drones of the 60's and clearly guidance alone drove costs through the roof.

Things started to change with late generation TERCOMs on Tomahawk in the late 70's. The big game changer however was GPS.

 

[Pirate Pete]

I posted the attached old Air Pictorial article in another part of this site in February during another discussion about TSR-2.
I appreciate it comes under ‘wishful thinking’, but it may contribute something to this discussion…

 

[zen]

Isn't this thread Alternative History?

What is theoretical here?

 

[Deleted member 2278]

I could well envision an in-service TSR.2 taking a very staggered route to full operational capability.

Initially very austere avionics-wise, all fitted-for-not-with. Essentially a paper tiger. Later getting a decent enough nav-attack capability, probably not dissimilar to the Tornado's and probably in a similar timeframe, very late-70s/early-80s. Then receiving little incremental improvements throughout the 80s before eventually becoming "the aircraft it was always meant to be" just in time for the Berlin Wall to come down.

With the peace dividend, I would imagine the TSR.2 fleet being dropped like a hot potato, ironically leaving service at pretty much the same time as the Victor K.2s, circa 1993.

Engine or structural changes are highly unlikely to be budgeted, upgrades being limited to radar & navigation systems, a FLIR, probably an ECM pod and a laser target designation capability, much as outlined by JFC Fuller above. Perhaps some cockpit display and ergonomic improvements. Perhaps HOTAS for the pilot? Anything more may possibly be seen in a Raspberry Ripple example but not the wider fleet.

I could see a handful of Vulcan B(MRR).2s/K.2s still being around to be impressed for Operation Corporate as I doubt the TSR.2 would be entirely suitable for Black Buck. The effects of all this on the air-defence picture (no F.3s) and the possible non-existence of a successor for the various 90s & 00s conflicts however, daren't be speculated upon!

 

[zen]

Not so sure about all that.

Firstly this has to pass though a 'eye of the needle' event in history.
1965 to 1966.

For this to go ahead it has to convince the new Labour Government.
Historically they cut this, P1154, and HS.681. Instead suckered into the F4K, F111, AFVG, and Anglo-French Supersonic Trainer.

Then in '66 the whole reason for the F4K is collapsing with the stated end of EoS and the Carriers.
The F111K is itself cut.
And the F4K is spiralling in costs and delayed IOC.
Meanwhile the AFVG is headed to French abandonment, UKVG stumbles onwards.
And the Supersonic Trainer is heading to a back door solution to the MRI requirements the P1154 was supposed to fulfil.

So in '65 we need the government to switch to an austere TSR.2 now, low rate production and where is the money comming from?
Maybe a cut to the P1127?
Cut the Carriers Fleet earlier?

Especially after '66...
Only sacrifice of F4K and Supersonic Trainer could release enough funds.

There won't be finds for MRCA. Let alone ADV.

So maybe a vanilla F4 solves some of this?

But if there is IDS upgrade or batch II TSR.2 (G(S)RA mkII?) It's sucking funds away again.

ADV version of TSR.2 is not impossible really.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Isn't this thread Alternative History?

What is theoretical here?

I started this with a theory of a SLEP for TSR-2, it has since moved on a bit as topics can easily do.

 

[uk 75]

Foo Fighter. I think your question can only be answered the way I and others have. But I can do it a simpler way.
TSR2 goes into service : Never going to happen unless you comprehensively change either UK history and/or the design of the plane itself.
SLEP: see Nimrod for why this really bad idea. The TSR2 engine fit was one of the worst aspects of the plane. Basically, they didnt fit.

 

[Foo Fighter]

One of the things I was wondering about was the very far fetched idea that the design might be revisited in some way, about ten or fifteen years down the line. More modern avionics and engine with perhaps a change in role to a loiter aircraft over the north sea rto visitin instant sunshine over eastern europe as part of a limited nuclear exchange battle. I mentioned the engine as a start because it is one of the simplest things the change when years pass. Not explained well for which I apologise and I understand perfectly the responses and why they were in such a vein. Thanks folks, lots of different views.

 

[red admiral]

It basically ends up as something that delivers the same bomb as a Tornado, but further away, with less accuracy, for significantly greater cost and a much smaller fleet.

 

[zen]

One of the things I was wondering about was the very far fetched idea that the design might be revisited in some way, about ten or fifteen years down the line.

Well in OTL my Uncle stated the Loft Drawings were destroyed so there was no way to resurrect the design.
Had they been saved perhaps...

Rumour has it they did visit one of the completed fusilages and measured everything. But without the tolerences for each parts dimensions it would effectively need the calculations to be redone to replicate the design. Might as well start again.

In fact had the OR.339 started a bit later it would be a VG solution like F111 or Su-24, and use turbofans instead.

Loiter isn't the design's forte. The VC10 with stsnd off missiles was far cheaper per hour to run.

Frankly the requirements needed revisiting as the very basis of the concept was tried with iron in Vietnam and that's why the US drove forward specialist SEAD/DEAD systems instead. Ultimately leading to LO platforms like F117.
And Iraq only rammed it home further. This time the RAF got the message.

Hence why A12 was pencilled in as Tornado successor and then FOC to FOAS.

 

[pathology_doc]

Yes the TSR.2 fanboys forget about the avionics.

It's not that we forget about them. It's that we lament the cancellation of the aircraft before all the problems were brought to light or wrung out. Part of me wishes English Electric had just been left to build its airplane with Vickers being told what to build and how to build it, and without tasks constantly being loaded on that the plane hadn't been asked to do when first green-lit. Another part of me wishes it could have been put on ice for five years while the avionics it REALLY needed came to fruition.

 

[uk 75]

This photograph shows TSR2 and F111 together.
Apart from the obvious size difference the F111 would have been much easier to service.
To me TSR2 will always be the 4th V Bomber. The Vindicator, to borrow from Ian Fleming's Thunderball. In its white scheme especially.

 

[zen]

Don't really agree with that.

Avro's 730 is the V-Bomber successor, and if you're in for a penny....

TSR.2 is the successor to Canberra.....but that in turn is just a successor to the Mosquito.

 

[A Tentative Fleet Plan]

It's probably worth pointing out that the TSR2's avionics are not really worse than any of the F-111 variants, (with the exception of the F-111F with Pave Tack), and managed to function without the addition of LRTMS or FLIR. F-111A to E were all pretty much limited to dumb bombs, unguided rockets and tactical nuclear weapons, albeit they could carry them greater quantities than TSR2.

As for computing power, prior to cancellation Autonetics was offering improved variants of the Verdan, whilst Elliott was offering the MCS 920B and 920M computers, which later found its way onto a variety of combat aircraft, including Jaguar. GEC was in the running with an entirely new 8000 GP (general-purpose) word computer.

Assuming in this universe the requirement for AJ.168 Martel isn't suspended (as it was for a few weeks prior to cancellation) then the TSR2 could arguably have a fairly limited precision strike capability (limited of course by weather, and the ability to acquire targets with the AJ.168s seeker).

Any in service TSR2 is likely to be marred (at least early in its life) by low-MTBF avionics, possibly to the same extent as the F-111D, but it's not like anything else other than an F-111 could have provided comparable all-weather deep-strike capability. It would still require considerable work to be useful in a conventional war (much like the F-111 did with Pave Tack and the Avionics Modernization Upgrade Program which added new radars, Multi-Function Displays, a Ring Laser Gyro INS and GPS).

I fundamentally think the TSR2 is being unfairly compared to much later systems (F-111F with Pave Tack, or perhaps even F-15E with LANTIRN), with capabilities that could only have been dreamed of at cancellation in 1965, let alone in 1957 when the specification was issued.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I think the TSR2 damners forget a lot of things when they try to insult folk with the description 'fanboys' but that is taking this topic into personal slight where I think some of them want it. Oh well, who said progress was real?

 

[uk 75]

Don't really agree with that.

Avro's 730 is the V-Bomber successor, and if you're in for a penny....

TSR.2 is the successor to Canberra.....but that in turn is just a successor to the Mosquito.

Zen you put your thumb on the nub of the TSR2 problem.
Avro 730 is dead before TSR2 development starts. Yes, as you say, TSR2 was supposed to replace the Canberra. But whereas Canberra was similar to Moquito, TSR2 evolves into something closer in size and payload (though not range) to the Valiant.
Thus 50 cancelled TSR2s are replaced by 48 Vulcan B2s.

 

[uk 75]

I think the TSR2 damners forget a lot of things when they try to insult folk with the description 'fanboys' but that is taking this topic into personal slight where I think some of them want it. Oh well, who said progress was real?

Foo Fighter as you will see if you look in my older posts I am definitely in the fan(old)boy camp on TSR2. I still have my treasured Marx toy one from childhood.
It remains a stunning aircraft.
But, like a lot of things, it had serious flaws. Much is written on this site about all aspects of TSR2 so I wont rehash them here.
What is interesting to remember in the light of Tornado and Canberra's long careers is that Industry and RAF were already working on cheaper alternatives and future replacements before TSR2 even flew.

 

[Foo Fighter]

I know but I was not talking about you. In many of these discussions somebody with a fixed PoV states that folk who ask about such a topic are #fanboys' which is a derogatory comment This type of comment is neither factual or meaningful in any topic and something I find to be demeaning to the topic being discussed and the people in it. I will only say shis now. If people have fixed Pov on topics, perhaps they should avoid reading threads with such topics. I know, it sounds like I am taking the whole thing far too seriously but as per usual, it is a Pov.

 

[Foo Fighter]

Just to add, I am not a fanboy of anything, basically I do not know enough about these topics to be so. Lightning is another of these could have been types, a result of it's time and mission profile it simply lived too long but we had little to fill the role. TSR2, Avro Arrow etc. We will always have the problem that changing governments will change any project whenever and however they please. This beyond any technical changes will improve the chances of our serving military personnel to get the job done and get out alive. I wonder how much it will cost to get catapults to the two carriers that need upgrades before either have properly served. I'm sorry if I have annoyed anyone.

 

[Archibald]

One of the things I was wondering about was the very far fetched idea that the design might be revisited in some way, about ten or fifteen years down the line.

Well in OTL my Uncle stated the Loft Drawings were destroyed so there was no way to resurrect the design.
Had they been saved perhaps...

Rumour has it they did visit one of the completed fusilages and measured everything. But without the tolerences for each parts dimensions it would effectively need the calculations to be redone to replicate the design. Might as well start again.

In fact had the OR.339 started a bit later it would be a VG solution like F111 or Su-24, and use turbofans instead.

Loiter isn't the design's forte. The VC10 with stsnd off missiles was far cheaper per hour to run.

Frankly the requirements needed revisiting as the very basis of the concept was tried with iron in Vietnam and that's why the US drove forward specialist SEAD/DEAD systems instead. Ultimately leading to LO platforms like F117.
And Iraq only rammed it home further. This time the RAF got the message.

Hence why A12 was pencilled in as Tornado successor and then FOC to FOAS.

Post 1972 NASA (unlike what a silly stupid dumbarse rumour insinuates) tried to preserve the Saturn V blueprints, tech base, engines, whatever - to try and bring it back in the 80's if needed.
It didn't really worked. At all.
What they found was that the most precious thing is "knowledge inside key people heads" - and the said people moved on to other jobs, then retired, then died. And Saturn V industrial base would have to be rebuilt from scratch.

Same for TSR-2 or Arrow, even at their smaller scales. Once that train has left the station (February 20, 1959 - April 6, 1965 ) the game is over.

 

[kaiserd]

It's probably worth pointing out that the TSR2's avionics are not really worse than any of the F-111 variants, (with the exception of the F-111F with Pave Tack), and managed to function without the addition of LRTMS or FLIR. F-111A to E were all pretty much limited to dumb bombs, unguided rockets and tactical nuclear weapons, albeit they could carry them greater quantities than TSR2.

As for computing power, prior to cancellation Autonetics was offering improved variants of the Verdan, whilst Elliott was offering the MCS 920B and 920M computers, which later found its way onto a variety of combat aircraft, including Jaguar. GEC was in the running with an entirely new 8000 GP (general-purpose) word computer.

Assuming in this universe the requirement for AJ.168 Martel isn't suspended (as it was for a few weeks prior to cancellation) then the TSR2 could arguably have a fairly limited precision strike capability (limited of course by weather, and the ability to acquire targets with the AJ.168s seeker).

Any in service TSR2 is likely to be marred (at least early in its life) by low-MTBF avionics, possibly to the same extent as the F-111D, but it's not like anything else other than an F-111 could have provided comparable all-weather deep-strike capability. It would still require considerable work to be useful in a conventional war (much like the F-111 did with Pave Tack and the Avionics Modernization Upgrade Program which added new radars, Multi-Function Displays, a Ring Laser Gyro INS and GPS).

I fundamentally think the TSR2 is being unfairly compared to much later systems (F-111F with Pave Tack, or perhaps even F-15E with LANTIRN), with capabilities that could only have been dreamed of at cancellation in 1965, let alone in 1957 when the specification was issued.

The point that is that the US , with its far greater technical and financial resources, took time and a lot of money to get equivalents/ contemporaries to the TSR2 like the F-111 and A-6 up to snuff re: avionics capability and reliability in order to deliver the originally intended and required performance (as did the Soviets with their Fencer). We are talking about multiple attempts/variants (some that didn’t really work out, despite some of these variant being built in more than numbers than is likely/ realistic for all TSR2 production), new airframes, complete rebuilds etc.
Beyond the US’s greater resources and Cold War drivers you also had the day to day demands of the Vietnam war as a driver for all these efforts.
In comparison little to none of that is realistic for or applies to the TSR2 in a scenario where it survived its initial cancellation. As other contributors have noted it would have promised to have been a troublesome bottom-less money-pit.
A beautiful elegant troublesome bottom-less money-pit perhaps.

 

[Archibald]

Didn't knew the A-6 had trouble with its attack / nav system. How bad where those difficulties ? The F-111, I know a little better.

The 60's are fascinating because they show how trying to get a very high precision guidance system to put bombs straight on a target remained a colossal headache back then. Guided bombs, cruise missiles, drones and even piloted aircraft all ran into severe avionics issues. Avionics were bulky, unreliable, and even when they worked, getting the bombs right on a heavily defended target remained some kind of miracle.

They tried all kind of different solutions: piloted VERDAN, electro-optical guidance, stellar-inertial, laser... none was mature enough.

 

[Hood]

It's not that we forget about them. It's that we lament the cancellation of the aircraft before all the problems were brought to light or wrung out. Part of me wishes English Electric had just been left to build its airplane with Vickers being told what to build and how to build it, and without tasks constantly being loaded on that the plane hadn't been asked to do when first green-lit. Another part of me wishes it could have been put on ice for five years while the avionics it REALLY needed came to fruition.

Yes I feel EECo should have been left to get on with it. Vickers really wanted to have an outlet for their VG research, they would have been far happier with a VG-winged fighter I think.
TSR.2 straddled an awkward period, too late for airframe and too early for the avionics.

I know but I was not talking about you. In many of these discussions somebody with a fixed PoV states that folk who ask about such a topic are #fanboys' which is a derogatory comment This type of comment is neither factual or meaningful in any topic and something I find to be demeaning to the topic being discussed and the people in it. I will only say shis now. If people have fixed Pov on topics, perhaps they should avoid reading threads with such topics. I know, it sounds like I am taking the whole thing far too seriously but as per usual, it is a Pov.

Rest assured I was not referring to anyone here.
I was referring to those who don't think critically or logically at all about TSR.2, those FB posters who, if you mention TSR will parrot posts along these lines "TSR2 would have been a world beater and was the best aircraft Britain ever built. It was killed by Comrade Wilson who was a KGB mole, who personally ordered every trace destroyed and then who destroyed the industry by ordering aircraft from the USA."
When you point out no such destruction order was issued they try to deny it, they don't even see the obvious contradiction of a KGB agent ordering aircraft from American capitalists. They post that clip of a Lightning chase plane seemingly lingering behind the prototype on a test flight as proof of its awesomeness.
For them the avionics isn't even on their radar when they assess its greatness.

I love TSR.2 as much as the next person, its an impressive beast and I've pawed over it at Cosford about six times. Its a sexy looking bit of kit (kudos for BAC in putting it into anti-flash white). It was cutting edge, the pinnacle was just in sight, just like Concorde. Superbly fine kit but not quite what was actually wanted or feasible.

I don't say TSR could not have entered service and would have done the job it needed to but I do say it would have been a rocky road.