As I read it, XR219 was rescued from a gunnery range at Shoeburyness, where some wicked, wicked people declined to actually hit it with their guns. XR 220 went to Cosford and XR222 went to Duxford.
I remember asking you about 2-3 years ago on your discord to make a video on this plane. You said you had a long list of video ideas and that you would add the tsr2 to it. It's great to see you have kept motivated and have been putting amazing effort into making videos on every vehicle in that long list since. Keep it up Nick!
German here. The big problem with low level terrain-following-flight to avoid enemy radar is - there must be terrain! The german tornado units of the luftwaffe showed great success when flying missions over germany, in scotland or in canada - but in the most part of eastern europe and especially russia, there was a certain "lack" of hills and mountains... and the later use of british tornados in irak showed, that the efficiency of low-level-attacs are very much dependent from the terrain... And then the idea of airborne early warning was spreading around, and as much the capabilities of the radar systems for low-level-flights were improving, also the capabilities for airborne radar systems with look-down-shoot-down-capabilities were improving. And the range of the TSR-2 was not long enough to attac russian soil and made it back, and for attacking russian troups in middle europe, the range was bigger than needed... The whole TSR-2 project was a "one-trick-pony" - delivering an atomic bomb (or two) - and nothing else. The "conventional bombing" capabilities were bad, the internal bomb bay restricted the selection of weapons. And for recon a low and fast flying high-speed fighter is great for tactical photographic reconnaissance - but this kind of recon was in those days just becoming more and more irrelevant. The recon-role of the TSR-2 was - finding targets for TSR-2 with bombs... The whole requirement that was the base of this TSR-2 project was formulated by men who were thinking about the defence of "the empire" and trying to maintain great britains role as a atomic-power... and men trying to consolidate, unifie and defend the british aircraft industy againt the competing big companies from the usa and france. And so they forced the british aircraft industry in the long-lasting, slow development of an aircraft with high performances, brilliant ideas and technical solutions - but with only one mission - atomic-bombing - and so only few possible customers... and that at astronomic costs. What was the secret of the succes of the Canberra, the Hunter, the Jaguar? Multi-purpose and affordable prices and so exports and income for the british aircraft industry. The TSR-2 was a "white elephant", beautyfull but useless and a vaste of valuable time for the british aircraft industry.
The smaller swing-wing Panavia Tornado was a far more versatile design than the TSR-2. Not only could Tornado deliver nuclear strikes as required for the TSR-2, its sound base design allowed the Tornado to be adapted as the main air defence interceptors for the RAF, something the TSR-2 could never do.
This is one of the most elegant birds ever made... I mean, I generally love what the French do for sheer grace (Dassault's "if it's pretty it'll fly well") but this is one case where I feel the Brits out-graced the French
@@BluegatorProductions It was built, but never lived up to the hype of its overinflated performance specs... it was a plane but not a great plane, mediocre and ridiculously overbudget for its lackluster performance.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke It wasn’t lackluster, he even says in the video that all the issue were fixed and they were going to test the second prototype.
As a young child in England I have three memories of news headlines from the early 1960s - the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Kennedy Assassination, and the TSR-2 Cancellation. Only the last one made me cry.
september 11th 2001 and the day after, lyndie england and a pounding and george w bush ending his term with a banana in his hand "miss me yet" also gulf war 1 on tv, demonic visitation in the form of holographic toys floating around me in orbit, and the single event that led to my circumcision an f* crown of thorns poking out in a kiddie urinal, i remember it well and i was scared, i think they put it [the prepuce] in formaldehyde
The bit about the F-111 being more expensive than the TSR-2 is exactly the same as what happened with the hawker nimrod. The project was cancelled in 2011 as the government deemed it would be cheaper to buy the upcoming E-7 from the US, only for the E-7 to take 13 years to be delivered & be more expensive than continuing the Nimrod project
To be honest the Nimrod MRA4 was a totally bizarre program. the plan was to refurbish the fuselages of 1960/70 aircraft and fit new wings & engines. This was aimed to cut costs with approx 200 aircraft development & procured for 2.8 billion at the time. However the need to strip and prepare fuselages, non-common fittings on these for the original wings, in sufficient time & money allocated for system development, issues with engine installation etc lead to near decade long delays and absolutely massive cost increases. Finally the MRA4 program was shut down in 2010 with existing airframes scrapped. This was immediately controversial, as £4 billion had been spent, and the aircraft was apparently on the verge of entering service. Many charged that the MoD had wasted an immense amount of money and left the UK without a maritime patrol capability for no reason. Others claimed that the aircraft was still far from being truly operational, as BAE had yet to solve numerous design flaws, including landing gear that didn’t work, leaking fuel pipes, and overheating engines. To fix these would have taken another £1 billion, and required several more years. This later position seems more likely and it’s important to state if it had been purchased they would have gotten something like 9 aircraft for several billion - 5-6 billion perhaps so verging on nearly a billion each! This was a procurement failure caused by massive manufacturer cost overruns because the idea of using old aircraft elements at all was honestly stupid in this context. The P-8 is a far better aircraft & far cheaper and the RAF was probably always going to have to buy it as as wouldn’t have been able to afford the numbers of nimrods to meet basic requirements. The aircraft was an expensive skinker and shows a level of incompetence & wishful thinking in procurement that echoes that present in the TSR2 program.
The Nimrod AEW3 was a separate aircraft cancelled in 1986 due to massive cost overruns and delays plus the fact its radar system just didn’t work. E-3 sentry aircraft were bought instead not E-7s, you seem confused.
@@garydownes2111 WR0NG AB0UT NIMR0D BUT C0RRECT AB0UT AWACS, THE TW0 RADARS 0N NIMR0D AEW, FR0NT & REAR, W0RKED FAR BETTER THAN THE AWACS. THE PR0BLEM WAS THAT THE C0MPUTER SUPPLIED BY GEC (UK N0T RELATED T0 GE USA) WAS FAR T00 BIG AND PARTICULARLY T00 HEAVY AND HAD INSUFFICIENT CAPACITY T0 ANALYSE THE RADAR RETURNS. THE C0MPUTER WAS YEARS 0UT 0F DATE. GEC WAS 0N A "C0ST PLUS C0NTRACT" AND THEY PUT JUNI0RS 0N THE PR0JECT, SENI0RS WENT 0N FIXED PRICE C0NTRACTS. FATHER IN LAW WAS PART 0F THE M0D PR0CUREMENT TEAM F0R NIMR0D AEW. P0LITICS, THE CE0 0F GEC WAS BIG FRIEND 0F MARGARET THATCHER, HENCE BECAME A "L0RD".
The TSR-2 and the A5 Vigilante are examples of how the current knowledge will result in similarities in design from different groups. Just because you have the same answer, doesn't mean you copied from your classmates.
The US still flies Canberra today, though in a modified form. Martin licensed the design from English Electric and produced it as the B-57. It became outdated as a bomber, but not as a reconnaissance aircraft. The RB-57F has newer engines and *significantly* longer wings, making it excellent at high-altitude flights. That ability plus the ready availability of space parts from mothballed bombers has allowed NASA to keep their fleet of Canberras flying.
The USA also took the Victor design for the escape capsule and put it in the F111. I sat beside the engineer who designed it while we were on a BA Flight to Australia.
It’s outdated as a reconnaissance aircraft too. Like the U-2.. it can only fly over permissive airspace. The reason it’s still used is because its operating costs are much lower than newer faster aircraft. Much like the B-52 and C-130 which are solidly 1950s designs.
I'm now curious about the Canberra bomber and its Soviet counterpart, the Il-28 Beagle. Any chance you could consider covering both of these jet bombers? There is something very engaging about these types of post-WW2, twin-engine jet bombers. I think it was due to the WW2-era German Arado twin-engine jet bomber and how both British and Soviet designs looked like perfected counterparts/successors of the German WW2 Arado example.
My grandad Saw it and then in his later years in the RAF Was in the "smash and crash" aircraft breakup squadron and nicked a couple parts from it. Safe to say they are on a plaque in my living room now😃
@@sidefx996it’s an awkward story to tell to those who want to play the victim narrative about the big bad US and ignoring the changing strategic realities - the US cancelled a lot of big projects too for the exact same reasons. The BONE was only brought back as a political talking point but it should have joined that group.
The Canberra really is one of the all time greats. The US even built around 400 under license as the B-57. They were flying in the USAF up till the early 80s. Around a thirty year career in the US. Around 50 years with the RAF. It really is one of the best designs ever.
The first jet bomber the Americans had was the Canberra, but why do they always have to change the name, like in the Pacific they re named all the British aircraft carrier's as the kamikaze bounce off the British aircraft carriers as they had steel decks decks unlike the wooden Americans aircraft carriers
@@JimIAmDaniels "Martin B-57 Canberra" if you want a proper name. You are crying over things that every nation with a budget does all the time. Go complain about the CF-18 next.
I love how this and the Arrow look like sister aircraft. If we had a fleet of these and the Arrows, all with that beautiful bright white paint, it would have looked like the Angels from Captain Scarlet above.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Could you please elaborate why you state it as a failure? Failure in what other way than that the project was cancelled? You have any info on some design or performance flaw you could share with us?
@@philsspace69 The TSR.2 was unmitigated failure in flight testing. There was absolutely no way it could meet its design performance specifications without major remedial engineering work. BAC asked for both; a reduction in the performance specifications and a massive increase in its design budget and several years extension to its delivery schedule. After this announcement the RAF lost interest in the TSR.2 as it would have been obsolete upon arrival and it could not afford to purchase them in any significant numbers to fill its intended roles.. BAC has never produced a single successful aircraft design on its own.
TSR.2 was an unmitigated failure... BAC was a bin fire, this disaster of a company produced from the merger of four failed British aircraft companies saddled with additional layers of upper management and government bureaucracy was doomed to failure.
I don’t think you really did the Canberra justice, it’s first flight was 1951 and it served in active service until 2006 in 39 squadron Prussia it was never truly made obsolete in fact it continues to fill its roll as a test bed and photo recon platform to this day,
@@richardvernon317 when the Raf inherited camera systems from the usaf u2s they were somewhat surprised to discover the better stability of the Canberra meant they were able to get better images than the u2 could at any given altitude. The reason the Canberra was phased out was extreme flight hours on the by now classic jets and availability of Intel provided by the US via u2s satalites and recon pods etc... It was never a case that it couldnt do the job asked of it... I lived between Alconbury and Wyton in the UK and can tell you the u2 pilots always had a lot of respect for their neighbours Canberra
Please take a look at the weird GAU-8 F-16 gunship concept. I think its suck a radical departure from the norm of aircraft design. It's worth taking a look at.
F-111 pilots: -You're romanticizing the early automatic terrain following systems. B-1 pilots: -You're romanticizing the late automatic terrain following systems. Erich Paul Remark: -You're romanticizing. Period.
Well america pressured and blackmailed britain into not making it as it would of been far more advanced than anything america would have for years. After uk was made to scrap it. The Americans tried to sell them some jets...but they had the harrier in the pipeline
What really caught my attention was the aside at 3:36 showing the Shorts P.D.17 VTOL platform proposed to get the TSR-2 (and presumably other types of aircraft) airborne. There's something very "Gerry and Sylvia Anderson-ish" about this idea. Would you ever consider doing a bespoke video essay about this project? Thanks for sharing this with us! My Like is in the 2.3Ks
13:29 USAF shrugs and looks nervous... They did do that, and on Greenland, and Spain (Operation "Chrome Dome") The 60's weren't good for the B52 or America's international relations.
The UK aircraft industry was doomed after the country's defeat in WW2. After Britain defaulted on its war debts no one would loan them any more money and parliament were forced to cut funding for everything.
I hope one day we get a video showing off what a production model Su-47 and her sister prototype models, the S-22 and the S-32. Yes. They were different models and quite unique!
Controversial comment warning. I believe the RAF dodged a bullet when TSR2 was cancelled. I think the avionics at low level wouldn't have survived the buffet, relying on valves over transistors. Integrated circuits didn't exist. The thing looks to be a maintenance nightmare and the crew's vision and situational awareness were incredibly limited for an aircraft at low level, especially if there's a bandit on its tail. The engines were powerful and very immature, eventually being developed for use in the far more benign environment of Condorde. The internal bomb bay was limited in terms of payload, external carriage of stores would have messed up the already limited wing, even with blown flaps. That's my thoughts, for what they're worth, with the benefit of hindsight.
I doubt there would be many bandits on its tail at mach 1.2 at tree top height, and the ground tracking radar is there to assist with the situational awareness. You fly in high, Dive and Dash over your target, and pull up and away, it's not like you are planning on hanging around at low level. I think that everything else you say is right, It would be a ground crews nightmare to work on and it came when technology was moving to more robust electronics. It would have been effective, but very expensive. But it would have lead to Evolutions of the design over time and who knows what it could have ended up like if it wasn't for those pesky Lockheed execs and their under the table envelopes brimming with cash.
This 100%. it was a lame duck when it flew and they were facing ridiculous costs to develop the shell of the prototypes into actual production & service suitable aircraft. the buccaneer honestly was a far more sensible flexible aircraft suited to modern warfare let alone the tornado etc that followed. the RAF had f-4s that could fill the void also as well as jaguar etc. the cost of the TSR2 would have killed other programs for no benefit.
I mean I'm not an overt fan of this aircraft myself but I do feel like it had grate potential in light of the competitor aircraft that were in development at the time. Name any aircraft put into service ahead of it's competitors that did not suffer development issues that the competitors could take advantage of and correct in their own designs. In my opinion the only reason this aircraft was never going to fly was that politicians both in the UK and US had vested interests in murdering the project. The cause of death for the TSR-2 was the F-111. Both were being developed as replacements for their respective nations at the same time to perform the same roles. The TSR-2 on paper was a far more capable aircraft and airframe while it was more expensive than the F-111 being more capable made up for the cost. When UK politicians looked at the escalating cost of the project having no comprehension of the reasons behind the costs and the needs of the aircraft warranting such a long and expensive development. To them it was all down to money nothing more. So when the US seeing this across the pond politely offered the option to cancel the TSR-2 in favour of purchasing the F-111 instead for the RAF. This move was cheaper but had far more disadvantages than advantages. The move by America was pretending to be nice and business efficient but in truth the US aviation firms were worried that the TSR-2 would outperform their F-111 that they themselves had vested interests in the success of. So getting the TSR-2 killed off was a benefit to them as they would eliminate their biggest competitor and gain more purchases of the F-111 in the process. This level of corporate corruption and sabotage is only more evident that once the TSR-2 was cancelled the US seized the engineering documents of the plane and destroyed them. The only surviving documents were ones that people working on the project had in their personal collection or smuggled to safety fearing this exact outcome. In the end we never got the F-111 either and it proved to be very capable but also a nightmare for maintenance.
@@MarcusRhodes-q2s let’s be honest the very concept of the TRS2 was flawed, how did the RAF think it was an effective use of limited resources to come up with an aircraft more complex & expensive than the F-111 which even the USAF considered itself as perhaps too complex. So called capability advantages of the TSR2 are mainly illusionary as it ignores the TSR2 had no weapons, had no systems etc. in a limited Day 1 tactical nuclear weapon delivery to deep targets maybe but the TSR2 was not a flexible weapon & less suited for conventional tactical role. its expense was guaranteed due to its likely low production order so was never going to threaten the f111 which due to a similar issue wasn’t exported much (Australia). If anything the TSR2 was a manifestation of the RAF, British ministry & industry corruption, of milking the system, too specific requirements, injecting high complexity and ignoring weapon system concept, assumptions spending could go on for ever and that the sun would never set on the British empire..
Still an awesome plane to see, I have seen both surviving TSR-2s, one at Duxford and the other at Cosford. Too sad that after the cancelation also the F-111 was not procured as this was a relatively suitable replacement developed to work in in the same role. But there is something to say for the Tornado and Buccaneer as well as several smaller planes have a higher likelihood of getting trough than a single larger bomber. While the intended role for the TSR-2 would be taken over by ICBMs there was enough scope in conventional smaller conflicts to justify a low level bomber. By the way, it's Pan-Avia and not Pana-Via.
@@Tom-Lahaye if they'd taken a relatively straight F-111 (projected to cost about 40% per airframe the cost of the TSR-2) that might have happened. The F-4 Phantom (which the Royal Navy selected over the TSR-2 - I know a TSR-2 sounds an odd choice but the USN was considering the F-111 at the time) was modified successfully. I'm not sure why the F-111 modification programme was so problematic.
@@Tom-Lahaye much is made of the USA securing the Australian contract with the F-111. If Australia had opted for the TSR-2 then the TSR-2 it might have just been economically viable, but the USA was pushing on an open door as Australia knew the TSR-2 was behind schedule and would also be more expensive. If you look at Parliamentary records, questions were being asked by the RAF in 1963, and the secretary of state for defence in January 1964 and whether to opt for the F-111. And this was after the RN had said no as it wanted something supersonic much sooner than 1970.
My Grandad worked on Canberra, Lightning and TSR2 at Strand rd, Preston. The upshot of this was that many BAC workers moved to the US working for US aerospace companies. My Grandad went to Boeing and later lockheed. So a lot of people also lost family members. Things were different don't forget, when my Dad rang my Grandad in the US it was in the local paper "Preston business man makes transatlantic phone call". The only communication was occasionally by phone and "Airmail" or ""Par Avion" letters, when it came through the letterbox I knew exactly where it was from, do they do these any more?
As a TSR2 fanboi I often wonder how wonderful it really would have been in the end, and I often wonder if all these comparisons of TSR2 vs, such as the Tornado, are like the comparisons between the US Space Shuttle and the Soviet Buran. Reality vs never proven potential. Impossible to prove but worth keeping in mind....
Canada could afford the Arrow easily. Its replacement actually wound up being more expensive. The only thing wrong with the Arrow is that it wasn’t designed and built 5 years earlier.
"...Imagine if a country accidentally dropped nuclear bombs on it's own country..." America be looking around the room hoping no one noticed all the nations they accidentally dropped bombs on.
One of the rare UK examples of a waste of money that should be cancelled actually getting cancelled. People love to harp on about the TSR2, but the reality is if it had gone into production/service than it would have sold zero export units, have been involved in zero conflicts, and have been retired long before Desert Storm. Literally the only affect on history that not cancelling it would have had (aside from costing taxpayers money) would have been that the Vulcans would have been scrapped prior to the Falklands (not a plus point).
Simple reason was the aircraft was totally incapable of meeting the Operational Requirements it was designed to do in the first place!! As soon as the the RAF found out, they told the Government to bin it!!!
@@danieltynan5301 I highly agree. Therre were proposed Buccaneer upgrades that would have been very close except staying subsonic, but that's really a moot point at low altitude. These developments would have then been there when improved engines, that would fit in the aircraft, became available.
As an example, as originally designed, there was a 1.25" clearance between the engines and the structure, by the time the aircraft flew, this clearance was down to .25" which could be problematic on an aircraft where the engines were installed from the rear. If one can find it, I highly recommend the proceedings of the Royal Aviation historical Society symposium on the TSR-2.
After scrapping the RAF was offered the F111 but after a try out it was discovered that the Buccaneer - all ready in service - could fly faster at low level and carry tactical weapons at a tenth of the price. The Buccaneer 2 was on the drawing board as a super sonic aircraft.
Significant development work was put into the F-111, not just a try out. The problem was that the F-111 development program was badly mismanaged and over budget and behind schedule
The A.A. Lightning (aka Aluminium Death Tube) was the only supersonic aircraft that Britain ever produced... they were years behind in supersonic research and relied on the French for this technical expertise..
Actually the TSR.2 looks ALOT Like Lockheed’s follow up the F-104 Starfighter , the CL-1200 “Lancer” interceptor. However, the TSR.2 was a lot larger aircraft as a bomber vs the Lockheed single seat interceptor.
@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Not West Germany by itself. West Germany needed partners to build such an aircraft and Belgium, the Netherlands, and Canada had long since departed from such a venture. France was uninterested in a partnership so without the UK that left only Italy. It would have been shaky at best with that partnership.
In the end, the TSR.2 was *TOO* optimized for its nuclear strike mission. It could only carry at most 11,000 lb. of weapons payload, too. The Brits were *VERY* fortunate to get into the Panavia Tornado program. As such, they applied the development work of the TSR.2 and created a vastly superior swing-wing interdiction airplane that not only could carry up to 16,000 lb. of a large variety of weapons, but also could operate out of much shorter runways than what the TSR.2 could ever do. And could still by viable right now if the RAF decided to keep them operational.
Like the CF105 this was as good as anything the Americans could crank out, it just wasn’t better and the economics didn’t work out. Why don’t more Brits praise the Harrier though? That was the real win.
@@JohnyG29 well the TSR2 couldn’t cruise at medium altitudes or carry heavy loads of conventional bombs and had no developed radar or target system, couldn’t drop lazer guided weapons .. If the F111 was crap what does that make the TSR2? Sure the f111 had serious development issues but it got through those to become an effective weapon that genuinely worried the Soviet block defenses. The TSR2 was an empty shell of an aircraft that struggled to take off due to being overweight and underpowered as a “light” prototype and with an undercarriage & engines that didn’t perform to minimum standards. Sure it had theoretical paper capabilities & super systems to come in some make believe future but really, the f111 gets to to be criticized as it’s a real imperfect aircraft that actually went to war while the TSR2 is a myth, an imagined fantasy where everything was perfect as reality never got to touch anything like real hardware beyond the shiny prototypes.
US manufacturers were not shy at turning up to European meetings and forgetting to recover suitcases left in the corner of the meeting rooms with European political procurement teams. The Starfigher, after one such cash drop was chosen over the more suitable SR177 for the West German Airforce. The F1-11 was sold to airforces in the same manner. I wouldn’t blame General Dynamics alone for the demise of TSR2. The TSR2 still had developmental problems and the new Labour government was intent on killing off as much of the British “blotted” aircraft industry as possible, killing: HS681, P1154 & TSR2 with the same swing of the axe.
By the time the TSR 2 was cancelled it was already obsolete in competition with the F111 which was, in every way, a superior aircraft that was at least one generation ahead of it. The fact that the British government didn't buy the F111 either is a pretty good indication that they weren't serious about the project anyway so the cancellation of the TSR 2 can be seen as something of a mercy killing.
TSR 2 had issues. The most important was range. It could not even get to Germany from the UK unless it had extra fuel tanks or tanker support making it less than strategic. It was large go look at it so not too maneuverable. The lack of range and maneuver meant it would probably not be good at recon either. It was way over budget too expensive. In the end cancelling was the only real option. But the project was not a complete failure. Much of it was used on other future projects such as the Jaguar and Tornado. Both in there own way much better than TSR2.
@@simoncampbell-smith6745 I presume it was expected to fly from Germany not to it. Insufficient fuel seemed to be endemic though (Hunter, Lightning, etc)
@@simoncampbell-smith6745 the Jaguar took on much of the potential conventional strike mission for a much lower price. Ultimately, satellites took on the recon role and the UK did well in that area until the mid-70s in terms of launch but has continued to be a leader in building satellites.
No, it didn't. It was five years behind schedule at least and was cancelled because it was going to be too expensive for the role of light supersonic strike and reconnaissance that would be left. The light supersonic strike role was handled by the cheaper Jaguar which began development right after the TSR-2's cancellation announcement.
One of my favourites fell in love with it ehen i saw it at cosford ultimately they were right missiles where the future of nuclear capability. Its a shame we lost so much aviation progress
Main problem for the TSR 2 was that the prototype was unable to hit the required performance levels by a fair margin and even struggled to hit the revised much lower spec levels. It needed major revision and development which would cost millions without any firm promise of success. The Government cut their losses.
Those who lived through this period will know that Duncan Sandys pronounced his surname "Sands". You should never, ever make assumptions about how English names (of both people and places) are pronounced. To do otherwise is callow and slipshod.
As a Canberra kid who spent 90% of my life in Canberra and moved just over the border in 2008, i am curious as to what part of Canberra you lived in, considering the stupid rivalry between the satellite cities
The cold war made some amazing planes. this and the Lighting were bloody lovely. and it was a 1950's Design ?????? It was amazing what 'Us brits could pull off''. Great upload and Thank you for covering this Bird. Thumbs up dude and stay Sunny side up.
vibrations at the same frequency as the human eye can cause temporary blindness? very interesting, I wonder what other effects certain frequencies would have on the body
IT WAS THE LANDING GEAR THAT WAS AT THE NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE EYEBALL, NOT THE HYDRAULIC PUMPS. THE PUMPS WERE FINE. WE HAVE THE FLYING PROTOTYPE, SO USE THESE TO MAKE NEW JIGS , UPRATE THE ENGINES ELECTRONICS AND RADARS. GOOD TO GO.
TSR.2 was plagued with numerous design flaws that combined made for an aircraft that could barely get off the ground, completely failed to meet its performance specifications and required a complete redesign to meet even a greatly reduced set of performance specs, it is without any doubt one of the greatest blunders in British aviation, and BAC was an absolute bin fire... the merger of four failed companies burdened by additional layers of bloated upper management and government bureaucracy. BAC never produced a single successful aircraft on its own... and its collaborations with the French were also disappointing flops..
Love the TSR2. One of the two remaining prototypes is snuggled up between a Concorde and a Vulcan at duxford. Very fitting :)
If you get the chance you should go and see the other one at Cosford, it's got some of its panels opened so you can see some of the internals
This is one of my lingering memories of visiting Duxford back in 86 .. .This the Comet and of course, Concord.
As I read it, XR219 was rescued from a gunnery range at Shoeburyness, where some wicked, wicked people declined to actually hit it with their guns. XR 220 went to Cosford and XR222 went to Duxford.
There is a cockpit at brooklands in the ww2 wellington hanger
I think i poked it lmao
I remember asking you about 2-3 years ago on your discord to make a video on this plane. You said you had a long list of video ideas and that you would add the tsr2 to it.
It's great to see you have kept motivated and have been putting amazing effort into making videos on every vehicle in that long list since.
Keep it up Nick!
British jets, British cars, British motorcycles - all screwed up by the British politics.
Crap to begin with, the politicians just gave it the coup de grâce.
@@Blackgriffonphoenixgat least for the tsr 2
Good enough for rhe ussr to try to copy it
(First su24 prototypes)
And poor management - UK car & motorcycle industry ignored the Japenese.
Poor UK management continues today.
@@nikolaideianov5092 that was from the American f-111 and f-14
@@AntonyBall-hm4jo US messed up more in Motorbikes, they sold their designs to the Japanese and the tooling to produce it!
Loved that quote by Sir. Sydney Camm... "All modern aircraft have four dimentsions: Span, Length, Height, and Politics..." -- So true.
German here. The big problem with low level terrain-following-flight to avoid enemy radar is - there must be terrain! The german tornado units of the luftwaffe showed great success when flying missions over germany, in scotland or in canada - but in the most part of eastern europe and especially russia, there was a certain "lack" of hills and mountains... and the later use of british tornados in irak showed, that the efficiency of low-level-attacs are very much dependent from the terrain... And then the idea of airborne early warning was spreading around, and as much the capabilities of the radar systems for low-level-flights were improving, also the capabilities for airborne radar systems with look-down-shoot-down-capabilities were improving. And the range of the TSR-2 was not long enough to attac russian soil and made it back, and for attacking russian troups in middle europe, the range was bigger than needed... The whole TSR-2 project was a "one-trick-pony" - delivering an atomic bomb (or two) - and nothing else. The "conventional bombing" capabilities were bad, the internal bomb bay restricted the selection of weapons. And for recon a low and fast flying high-speed fighter is great for tactical photographic reconnaissance - but this kind of recon was in those days just becoming more and more irrelevant. The recon-role of the TSR-2 was - finding targets for TSR-2 with bombs... The whole requirement that was the base of this TSR-2 project was formulated by men who were thinking about the defence of "the empire" and trying to maintain great britains role as a atomic-power... and men trying to consolidate, unifie and defend the british aircraft industy againt the competing big companies from the usa and france. And so they forced the british aircraft industry in the long-lasting, slow development of an aircraft with high performances, brilliant ideas and technical solutions - but with only one mission - atomic-bombing - and so only few possible customers... and that at astronomic costs. What was the secret of the succes of the Canberra, the Hunter, the Jaguar? Multi-purpose and affordable prices and so exports and income for the british aircraft industry. The TSR-2 was a "white elephant", beautyfull but useless and a vaste of valuable time for the british aircraft industry.
The smaller swing-wing Panavia Tornado was a far more versatile design than the TSR-2. Not only could Tornado deliver nuclear strikes as required for the TSR-2, its sound base design allowed the Tornado to be adapted as the main air defence interceptors for the RAF, something the TSR-2 could never do.
This is one of the most elegant birds ever made... I mean, I generally love what the French do for sheer grace (Dassault's "if it's pretty it'll fly well") but this is one case where I feel the Brits out-graced the French
Yeah, she's a beaut
As a French myself, I feel so sad this plane was never built...
@@fridaycaliforniaa236 It was built, it was just never put into service.
@@BluegatorProductions It was built, but never lived up to the hype of its overinflated performance specs... it was a plane but not a great plane, mediocre and ridiculously overbudget for its lackluster performance.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke It wasn’t lackluster, he even says in the video that all the issue were fixed and they were going to test the second prototype.
As a young child in England I have three memories of news headlines from the early 1960s - the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Kennedy Assassination, and the TSR-2 Cancellation. Only the last one made me cry.
september 11th 2001 and the day after, lyndie england and a pounding and george w bush ending his term with a banana in his hand "miss me yet"
also gulf war 1 on tv, demonic visitation in the form of holographic toys floating around me in orbit, and the single event that led to my circumcision an f* crown of thorns poking out in a kiddie urinal, i remember it well and i was scared, i think they put it [the prepuce] in formaldehyde
The bit about the F-111 being more expensive than the TSR-2 is exactly the same as what happened with the hawker nimrod. The project was cancelled in 2011 as the government deemed it would be cheaper to buy the upcoming E-7 from the US, only for the E-7 to take 13 years to be delivered & be more expensive than continuing the Nimrod project
To be honest the Nimrod MRA4 was a totally bizarre program. the plan was to refurbish the fuselages of 1960/70 aircraft and fit new wings & engines.
This was aimed to cut costs with approx 200 aircraft development & procured for 2.8 billion at the time.
However the need to strip and prepare fuselages, non-common fittings on these for the original wings, in sufficient time & money allocated for system development, issues with engine installation etc lead to near decade long delays and absolutely massive cost increases.
Finally the MRA4 program was shut down in 2010 with existing airframes scrapped. This was immediately controversial, as £4 billion had been spent, and the aircraft was apparently on the verge of entering service. Many charged that the MoD had wasted an immense amount of money and left the UK without a maritime patrol capability for no reason. Others claimed that the aircraft was still far from being truly operational, as BAE had yet to solve numerous design flaws, including landing gear that didn’t work, leaking fuel pipes, and overheating engines. To fix these would have taken another £1 billion, and required several more years. This later position seems more likely and it’s important to state if it had been purchased they would have gotten something like 9 aircraft for several billion - 5-6 billion perhaps so verging on nearly a billion each! This was a procurement failure caused by massive manufacturer cost overruns because the idea of using old aircraft elements at all was honestly stupid in this context. The P-8 is a far better aircraft & far cheaper and the RAF was probably always going to have to buy it as as wouldn’t have been able to afford the numbers of nimrods to meet basic requirements.
The aircraft was an expensive skinker and shows a level of incompetence & wishful thinking in procurement that echoes that present in the TSR2 program.
The Nimrod AEW3 was a separate aircraft cancelled in 1986 due to massive cost overruns and delays plus the fact its radar system just didn’t work. E-3 sentry aircraft were bought instead not E-7s, you seem confused.
Treasury parsimony plus wishful thinking - not a good mix.
@@garydownes2111 WR0NG AB0UT NIMR0D BUT C0RRECT AB0UT AWACS, THE TW0 RADARS 0N NIMR0D AEW, FR0NT & REAR, W0RKED FAR BETTER THAN THE AWACS. THE PR0BLEM WAS THAT THE C0MPUTER SUPPLIED BY GEC (UK N0T RELATED T0 GE USA) WAS FAR T00 BIG AND PARTICULARLY T00 HEAVY AND HAD INSUFFICIENT CAPACITY T0 ANALYSE THE RADAR RETURNS. THE C0MPUTER WAS YEARS 0UT 0F DATE. GEC WAS 0N A "C0ST PLUS C0NTRACT" AND THEY PUT JUNI0RS 0N THE PR0JECT, SENI0RS WENT 0N FIXED PRICE C0NTRACTS. FATHER IN LAW WAS PART 0F THE M0D PR0CUREMENT TEAM F0R NIMR0D AEW. P0LITICS, THE CE0 0F GEC WAS BIG FRIEND 0F MARGARET THATCHER, HENCE BECAME A "L0RD".
@@garydownes2111 Nimrod MRA4 was binned because the aircraft was almost unflyable!! BAe totally cocked the redesigned wing up.
The TSR-2 and the A5 Vigilante are examples of how the current knowledge will result in similarities in design from different groups. Just because you have the same answer, doesn't mean you copied from your classmates.
Unless you're in the Soviet Union.
@@mookie2637or your name is Chengdu.
@@mookie2637nah they just spyed to "confirm their design choice"
Meanwhile the designer:"oh yeah we copyed every part of it"
The A5 was successful... the TSR.2 was an unmitigated failure.
@@mookie2637 это называется лицемерием
The US still flies Canberra today, though in a modified form. Martin licensed the design from English Electric and produced it as the B-57. It became outdated as a bomber, but not as a reconnaissance aircraft. The RB-57F has newer engines and *significantly* longer wings, making it excellent at high-altitude flights.
That ability plus the ready availability of space parts from mothballed bombers has allowed NASA to keep their fleet of Canberras flying.
The USA also took the Victor design for the escape capsule and put it in the F111. I sat beside the engineer who designed it while we were on a BA Flight to Australia.
It’s outdated as a reconnaissance aircraft too.
Like the U-2.. it can only fly over permissive airspace. The reason it’s still used is because its operating costs are much lower than newer faster aircraft. Much like the B-52 and C-130 which are solidly 1950s designs.
I'm now curious about the Canberra bomber and its Soviet counterpart, the Il-28 Beagle. Any chance you could consider covering both of these jet bombers?
There is something very engaging about these types of post-WW2, twin-engine jet bombers. I think it was due to the WW2-era German Arado twin-engine jet bomber and how both British and Soviet designs looked like perfected counterparts/successors of the German WW2 Arado example.
Certified Avro Arrow moment
"There never was an Arrow" :)
My grandad Saw it and then in his later years in the RAF Was in the "smash and crash" aircraft breakup squadron and nicked a couple parts from it. Safe to say they are on a plaque in my living room now😃
Ground Air missiles really did a number on magnificent aircrafts of the time
The XF-108 is the one I miss the most but it was cancelled before it really existed.
@@Justanotherconsumer and it’s big brother, the Valkyrie
@@sidefx996it’s an awkward story to tell to those who want to play the victim narrative about the big bad US and ignoring the changing strategic realities - the US cancelled a lot of big projects too for the exact same reasons.
The BONE was only brought back as a political talking point but it should have joined that group.
The Canberra really is one of the all time greats. The US even built around 400 under license as the B-57. They were flying in the USAF up till the early 80s. Around a thirty year career in the US. Around 50 years with the RAF. It really is one of the best designs ever.
There are still 4 or 5 B-57's at the Davis-Monthan boneyard in Arizona.
The aircraft was obsolete as a front line Bomber and photo recce bird in 1956!!!!
Canberra was obsolete on arrival, but it was cheap and versatile
The first jet bomber the Americans had was the Canberra, but why do they always have to change the name, like in the Pacific they re named all the British aircraft carrier's as the kamikaze bounce off the British aircraft carriers as they had steel decks decks unlike the wooden Americans aircraft carriers
@@JimIAmDaniels "Martin B-57 Canberra" if you want a proper name.
You are crying over things that every nation with a budget does all the time.
Go complain about the CF-18 next.
Extraordinario video. El comentario final de Sir Sydney Camm lo dice todo. Qué extraordinaria perdida.......
Bro got war thunder test flight vocal at the start of the vid
I immediately recognised that and smiled
@@thefirstsurvivor7240 Same
Aren't they originally from Gaijin's older game "Birds of Steel"?
I love how this and the Arrow look like sister aircraft. If we had a fleet of these and the Arrows, all with that beautiful bright white paint, it would have looked like the Angels from Captain Scarlet above.
I’ve seen the TSR.2 in person on a visit to duxford’s D-Day 80th air show, truly a stunning piece of kit, such a shame that we never adopted it.
Luckily this doomed aircraft was canceled, and the RAF was never burdened by this unmitigated failure of an aircraft.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke Could you please elaborate why you state it as a failure? Failure in what other way than that the project was cancelled? You have any info on some design or performance flaw you could share with us?
@@philsspace69 The TSR.2 was unmitigated failure in flight testing.
There was absolutely no way it could meet its design performance specifications without major remedial engineering work.
BAC asked for both; a reduction in the performance specifications and a massive increase in its design budget and several years extension to its delivery schedule.
After this announcement the RAF lost interest in the TSR.2 as it would have been obsolete upon arrival and it could not afford to purchase them in any significant numbers to fill its intended roles..
BAC has never produced a single successful aircraft design on its own.
@@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke So the statement that it had better performance than the Tornado is false?
@@philsspace69 YES, the Tornado had superior performance compared to the TSR.2
Planes can break hearts too 💔 F politicians 🖕
TSR.2 was an unmitigated failure... BAC was a bin fire, this disaster of a company produced from the merger of four failed British aircraft companies saddled with additional layers of upper management and government bureaucracy was doomed to failure.
I don’t think you really did the Canberra justice, it’s first flight was 1951 and it served in active service until 2006 in 39 squadron Prussia it was never truly made obsolete in fact it continues to fill its roll as a test bed and photo recon platform to this day,
39 Sqn disbanded 2 years ago.
Definitely one of the best British designs of all time.
Nothing fancy, just absolutely top shelf quality work.
@@BigKelvPark Canberra was phased out of RAF service in 2006. I saw the last one take off from RAF Marham.
Canberra was obsolete as a Photo Recce bird in 1956!!!
@@richardvernon317 when the Raf inherited camera systems from the usaf u2s they were somewhat surprised to discover the better stability of the Canberra meant they were able to get better images than the u2 could at any given altitude. The reason the Canberra was phased out was extreme flight hours on the by now classic jets and availability of Intel provided by the US via u2s satalites and recon pods etc... It was never a case that it couldnt do the job asked of it... I lived between Alconbury and Wyton in the UK and can tell you the u2 pilots always had a lot of respect for their neighbours Canberra
Please take a look at the weird GAU-8 F-16 gunship concept. I think its suck a radical departure from the norm of aircraft design. It's worth taking a look at.
she had the same fate as the canadian arrow, and beauty too
Yes, it was a notable failure like the Arrow, it is what happens when a relatively small country's reach extends far beyond its grasp.,
F-111 pilots: -You're romanticizing the early automatic terrain following systems.
B-1 pilots: -You're romanticizing the late automatic terrain following systems.
Erich Paul Remark: -You're romanticizing. Period.
Pffff yeh what strategic nuclear bomber would accidentally drop bombs in their own country… look up America’s missing nuclear bombs…
#BrokenArrow
1:41: Thank Sir George Nelson. He was English Electric’s chairman.
Yes he did the video I requested!!!
BTW I have seen this beautiful aircraft in the raf aerospace Cosford museum
I love this video! please continue to post videos like this :)
My dad actually got the chance to see one flying when it was test flown.
Well america pressured and blackmailed britain into not making it as it would of been far more advanced than anything america would have for years. After uk was made to scrap it. The Americans tried to sell them some jets...but they had the harrier in the pipeline
I was fortunate to see XR219 on one of its test flights - awesome!
What really caught my attention was the aside at 3:36 showing the Shorts P.D.17 VTOL platform proposed to get the TSR-2 (and presumably other types of aircraft) airborne. There's something very "Gerry and Sylvia Anderson-ish" about this idea. Would you ever consider doing a bespoke video essay about this project?
Thanks for sharing this with us!
My Like is in the 2.3Ks
this is probably one of my favorite aircraft, really reminds me of the f-111 aadvark which is also one of my favorites.
such a shame it got cancelled.
13:29 USAF shrugs and looks nervous... They did do that, and on Greenland, and Spain (Operation "Chrome Dome") The 60's weren't good for the B52 or America's international relations.
After the war the UK built lots of different flying and floating white elephants.
The UK aircraft industry was doomed after the country's defeat in WW2. After Britain defaulted on its war debts no one would loan them any more money and parliament were forced to cut funding for everything.
I hope one day we get a video showing off what a production model Su-47 and her sister prototype models, the S-22 and the S-32. Yes. They were different models and quite unique!
Controversial comment warning.
I believe the RAF dodged a bullet when TSR2 was cancelled. I think the avionics at low level wouldn't have survived the buffet, relying on valves over transistors. Integrated circuits didn't exist. The thing looks to be a maintenance nightmare and the crew's vision and situational awareness were incredibly limited for an aircraft at low level, especially if there's a bandit on its tail. The engines were powerful and very immature, eventually being developed for use in the far more benign environment of Condorde. The internal bomb bay was limited in terms of payload, external carriage of stores would have messed up the already limited wing, even with blown flaps.
That's my thoughts, for what they're worth, with the benefit of hindsight.
I doubt there would be many bandits on its tail at mach 1.2 at tree top height, and the ground tracking radar is there to assist with the situational awareness. You fly in high, Dive and Dash over your target, and pull up and away, it's not like you are planning on hanging around at low level.
I think that everything else you say is right, It would be a ground crews nightmare to work on and it came when technology was moving to more robust electronics.
It would have been effective, but very expensive. But it would have lead to Evolutions of the design over time and who knows what it could have ended up like if it wasn't for those pesky Lockheed execs and their under the table envelopes brimming with cash.
This 100%. it was a lame duck when it flew and they were facing ridiculous costs to develop the shell of the prototypes into actual production & service suitable aircraft. the buccaneer honestly was a far more sensible flexible aircraft suited to modern warfare let alone the tornado etc that followed. the RAF had f-4s that could fill the void also as well as jaguar etc. the cost of the TSR2 would have killed other programs for no benefit.
I mean I'm not an overt fan of this aircraft myself but I do feel like it had grate potential in light of the competitor aircraft that were in development at the time. Name any aircraft put into service ahead of it's competitors that did not suffer development issues that the competitors could take advantage of and correct in their own designs.
In my opinion the only reason this aircraft was never going to fly was that politicians both in the UK and US had vested interests in murdering the project. The cause of death for the TSR-2 was the F-111. Both were being developed as replacements for their respective nations at the same time to perform the same roles. The TSR-2 on paper was a far more capable aircraft and airframe while it was more expensive than the F-111 being more capable made up for the cost.
When UK politicians looked at the escalating cost of the project having no comprehension of the reasons behind the costs and the needs of the aircraft warranting such a long and expensive development. To them it was all down to money nothing more. So when the US seeing this across the pond politely offered the option to cancel the TSR-2 in favour of purchasing the F-111 instead for the RAF. This move was cheaper but had far more disadvantages than advantages.
The move by America was pretending to be nice and business efficient but in truth the US aviation firms were worried that the TSR-2 would outperform their F-111 that they themselves had vested interests in the success of. So getting the TSR-2 killed off was a benefit to them as they would eliminate their biggest competitor and gain more purchases of the F-111 in the process.
This level of corporate corruption and sabotage is only more evident that once the TSR-2 was cancelled the US seized the engineering documents of the plane and destroyed them. The only surviving documents were ones that people working on the project had in their personal collection or smuggled to safety fearing this exact outcome.
In the end we never got the F-111 either and it proved to be very capable but also a nightmare for maintenance.
@@Tommy-he7dxPrototypes are subject to change, I suspect the wing area and many of the issues you mentioned would have been addressed and resolved.
@@MarcusRhodes-q2s let’s be honest the very concept of the TRS2 was flawed, how did the RAF think it was an effective use of limited resources to come up with an aircraft more complex & expensive than the F-111 which even the USAF considered itself as perhaps too complex.
So called capability advantages of the TSR2 are mainly illusionary as it ignores the TSR2 had no weapons, had no systems etc. in a limited Day 1 tactical nuclear weapon delivery to deep targets maybe but the TSR2 was not a flexible weapon & less suited for conventional tactical role. its expense was guaranteed due to its likely low production order so was never going to threaten the f111 which due to a similar issue wasn’t exported much (Australia).
If anything the TSR2 was a manifestation of the RAF, British ministry & industry corruption, of milking the system, too specific requirements, injecting high complexity and ignoring weapon system concept, assumptions spending could go on for ever and that the sun would never set on the British empire..
Ah the classic warthunder audio 0:01
country:
has no manufacturing because its cheaper to buy from someone else.
value of currency goes down.
why do they keep doing this?
That’s not how it works.
Wow! I hope this is in DCS to test it!
Still an awesome plane to see, I have seen both surviving TSR-2s, one at Duxford and the other at Cosford. Too sad that after the cancelation also the F-111 was not procured as this was a relatively suitable replacement developed to work in in the same role.
But there is something to say for the Tornado and Buccaneer as well as several smaller planes have a higher likelihood of getting trough than a single larger bomber.
While the intended role for the TSR-2 would be taken over by ICBMs there was enough scope in conventional smaller conflicts to justify a low level bomber.
By the way, it's Pan-Avia and not Pana-Via.
@@Tom-Lahaye the Jaguar too
@@wbertie2604 Indeed, the Jaguar I forgot in the bombing/ground attack role.
@@Tom-Lahaye In some ways, the Jaguar looks like a baby TSR-2.
@@Tom-Lahaye if they'd taken a relatively straight F-111 (projected to cost about 40% per airframe the cost of the TSR-2) that might have happened. The F-4 Phantom (which the Royal Navy selected over the TSR-2 - I know a TSR-2 sounds an odd choice but the USN was considering the F-111 at the time) was modified successfully. I'm not sure why the F-111 modification programme was so problematic.
@@Tom-Lahaye much is made of the USA securing the Australian contract with the F-111. If Australia had opted for the TSR-2 then the TSR-2 it might have just been economically viable, but the USA was pushing on an open door as Australia knew the TSR-2 was behind schedule and would also be more expensive.
If you look at Parliamentary records, questions were being asked by the RAF in 1963, and the secretary of state for defence in January 1964 and whether to opt for the F-111. And this was after the RN had said no as it wanted something supersonic much sooner than 1970.
The TSR2 is to Britain what the CF-105 Arrow was to Canada and we all know which country was to blame!
Canada couldn't afford to buy either plane... you can't blame them for having a small military budget..
My Grandad worked on Canberra, Lightning and TSR2 at Strand rd, Preston. The upshot of this was that many BAC workers moved to the US working for US aerospace companies. My Grandad went to Boeing and later lockheed. So a lot of people also lost family members. Things were different don't forget, when my Dad rang my Grandad in the US it was in the local paper "Preston business man makes transatlantic phone call". The only communication was occasionally by phone and "Airmail" or ""Par Avion" letters, when it came through the letterbox I knew exactly where it was from, do they do these any more?
13:30 is that a reference to the b-52 that accidentally dropped bombs on America
They accidentally dropped bombs all over the Earth.
I wonder how much “square space” that plane takes up
Great video.
I learned today.
Thanks
As a TSR2 fanboi I often wonder how wonderful it really would have been in the end, and I often wonder if all these comparisons of TSR2 vs, such as the Tornado, are like the comparisons between the US Space Shuttle and the Soviet Buran. Reality vs never proven potential.
Impossible to prove but worth keeping in mind....
Early testing revealed that TSR.2 an embarrassing failure, cancellation was inevitable.
It looks like the TSR2 was "Arrownized".
TSR.2 was a bodge job... and like the Arrow its country couldn't afford to build a plane that no one wanted..
Canada could afford the Arrow easily. Its replacement actually wound up being more expensive.
The only thing wrong with the Arrow is that it wasn’t designed and built 5 years earlier.
I knew Concorde used fighter engines, I didn't know it was actually a bomber.
The SNECMA-Bristol Olympus engines were civilian airliner engines... completely different than the Vulcan engines.
"...Imagine if a country accidentally dropped nuclear bombs on it's own country..." America be looking around the room hoping no one noticed all the nations they accidentally dropped bombs on.
British: 'Where should we test our new bomb?" "Let's see, Australia sounds like as good a place as any".
One of the rare UK examples of a waste of money that should be cancelled actually getting cancelled. People love to harp on about the TSR2, but the reality is if it had gone into production/service than it would have sold zero export units, have been involved in zero conflicts, and have been retired long before Desert Storm. Literally the only affect on history that not cancelling it would have had (aside from costing taxpayers money) would have been that the Vulcans would have been scrapped prior to the Falklands (not a plus point).
If it was so good, it wouldn't have been cancelled for being completely useless in the combat doctrine of the era and afterwards.
Not just politics, if you dig into the details, there were both technical and management problems that doomed the project.
Simple reason was the aircraft was totally incapable of meeting the Operational Requirements it was designed to do in the first place!! As soon as the the RAF found out, they told the Government to bin it!!!
They should have built a better version of the buccaneer.... Would have given 90 percent of the plane at 1/2 the cost....
@@danieltynan5301 I highly agree. Therre were proposed Buccaneer upgrades that would have been very close except staying subsonic, but that's really a moot point at low altitude. These developments would have then been there when improved engines, that would fit in the aircraft, became available.
As an example, as originally designed, there was a 1.25" clearance between the engines and the structure, by the time the aircraft flew, this clearance was down to .25" which could be problematic on an aircraft where the engines were installed from the rear.
If one can find it, I highly recommend the proceedings of the Royal Aviation historical Society symposium on the TSR-2.
@@MrCateagle more just cramming in afterburners.... More electronics.... De aircraft carriering it....
When you understand the nuclear mission didn't really prioritise the return journey. We weren't as deluded as everyone else on that one I guess.
depends entirely where you intend to land
denver international par example
After scrapping the RAF was offered the F111 but after a try out it was discovered that the Buccaneer - all ready in service - could fly faster at low level and carry tactical weapons at a tenth of the price. The Buccaneer 2 was on the drawing board as a super sonic aircraft.
Significant development work was put into the F-111, not just a try out. The problem was that the F-111 development program was badly mismanaged and over budget and behind schedule
The F-111 at low level can manage Mach 1.2. it's very much faster than the Bucc.
The A.A. Lightning (aka Aluminium Death Tube) was the only supersonic aircraft that Britain ever produced... they were years behind in supersonic research and relied on the French for this technical expertise..
Picking up some F8 Crusader vibes.
Actually the TSR.2 looks ALOT Like Lockheed’s follow up the F-104 Starfighter , the CL-1200 “Lancer” interceptor.
However, the TSR.2 was a lot larger aircraft as a bomber vs the Lockheed single seat interceptor.
I love Tornados... a jet that might not have existed if TSR-2 did enter service
Germany would have built the Tornado either way, the TSR.2 would have no effect on this decision.
@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke
Not West Germany by itself. West Germany needed partners to build such an aircraft and Belgium, the Netherlands, and Canada had long since departed from such a venture. France was uninterested in a partnership so without the UK that left only Italy.
It would have been shaky at best with that partnership.
In the end, the TSR.2 was *TOO* optimized for its nuclear strike mission. It could only carry at most 11,000 lb. of weapons payload, too.
The Brits were *VERY* fortunate to get into the Panavia Tornado program. As such, they applied the development work of the TSR.2 and created a vastly superior swing-wing interdiction airplane that not only could carry up to 16,000 lb. of a large variety of weapons, but also could operate out of much shorter runways than what the TSR.2 could ever do. And could still by viable right now if the RAF decided to keep them operational.
@@Sacto1654 this 100%
Like the CF105 this was as good as anything the Americans could crank out, it just wasn’t better and the economics didn’t work out.
Why don’t more Brits praise the Harrier though? That was the real win.
@@Justanotherconsumer it was inferior to the f111 and it had issues.. 🤷♂️
@@garydownes2111 the F111 was crap tbh.
@@JohnyG29 well the TSR2 couldn’t cruise at medium altitudes or carry heavy loads of conventional bombs and had no developed radar or target system, couldn’t drop lazer guided weapons ..
If the F111 was crap what does that make the TSR2?
Sure the f111 had serious development issues but it got through those to become an effective weapon that genuinely worried the Soviet block defenses.
The TSR2 was an empty shell of an aircraft that struggled to take off due to being overweight and underpowered as a “light” prototype and with an undercarriage & engines that didn’t perform to minimum standards.
Sure it had theoretical paper capabilities & super systems to come in some make believe future but really, the f111 gets to to be criticized as it’s a real imperfect aircraft that actually went to war while the TSR2 is a myth, an imagined fantasy where everything was perfect as reality never got to touch anything like real hardware beyond the shiny prototypes.
US manufacturers were not shy at turning up to European meetings and forgetting to recover suitcases left in the corner of the meeting rooms with European political procurement teams. The Starfigher, after one such cash drop was chosen over the more suitable SR177 for the West German Airforce. The F1-11 was sold to airforces in the same manner. I wouldn’t blame General Dynamics alone for the demise of TSR2. The TSR2 still had developmental problems and the new Labour government was intent on killing off as much of the British “blotted” aircraft industry as possible, killing: HS681, P1154 & TSR2 with the same swing of the axe.
Same story as the Canadian Avro Arrow.
the renders look like irl film another great video as always
By the time the TSR 2 was cancelled it was already obsolete in competition with the F111 which was, in every way, a superior aircraft that was at least one generation ahead of it. The fact that the British government didn't buy the F111 either is a pretty good indication that they weren't serious about the project anyway so the cancellation of the TSR 2 can be seen as something of a mercy killing.
It was a decent plane but… it wasn’t that different from the F-4 in capabilities.
TSR 2 had issues. The most important was range. It could not even get to Germany from the UK unless it had extra fuel tanks or tanker support making it less than strategic. It was large go look at it so not too maneuverable. The lack of range and maneuver meant it would probably not be good at recon either. It was way over budget too expensive. In the end cancelling was the only real option. But the project was not a complete failure. Much of it was used on other future projects such as the Jaguar and Tornado. Both in there own way much better than TSR2.
@@simoncampbell-smith6745 I presume it was expected to fly from Germany not to it. Insufficient fuel seemed to be endemic though (Hunter, Lightning, etc)
@@simoncampbell-smith6745 the Jaguar took on much of the potential conventional strike mission for a much lower price. Ultimately, satellites took on the recon role and the UK did well in that area until the mid-70s in terms of launch but has continued to be a leader in building satellites.
The TSR2 was not a mistake. It was an incredibly advanced and capable aeroplane. The government sold the programme out because of American pressure.
No, it didn't. It was five years behind schedule at least and was cancelled because it was going to be too expensive for the role of light supersonic strike and reconnaissance that would be left. The light supersonic strike role was handled by the cheaper Jaguar which began development right after the TSR-2's cancellation announcement.
@@wbertie2604 Wrong
@@modelrailwaynoob in what way?
BAC, the result of the merger of 4 failed companies was a bin fire... TSR.2 a total cock-up, a proper bodge job.
then it simply wasn't fit to survive
One of my favourites fell in love with it ehen i saw it at cosford ultimately they were right missiles where the future of nuclear capability. Its a shame we lost so much aviation progress
I saw the last tsr 2 at duxford airport in the uk
Correct and what a beautiful plane it is.
Cancelled as ground to air missiles made its task redundant.
Ask Gary Powers.
And the introduction of ICBMs... which gobbled up everyone's budgets.
The important thing is this: to be able at any moment to sacrifice what we are for what we could become.
What the hell was that plane in the square space sponsor😂😂
Main problem for the TSR 2 was that the prototype was unable to hit the required performance levels by a fair margin and even struggled to hit the revised much lower spec levels. It needed major revision and development which would cost millions without any firm promise of success. The Government cut their losses.
I love Britain, it's wonderful, except for the political leaders.
Those who lived through this period will know that Duncan Sandys pronounced his surname "Sands". You should never, ever make assumptions about how English names (of both people and places) are pronounced. To do otherwise is callow and slipshod.
English has inconsistent pronunciation?
Well call me fish…
@@Justanotherconsumer In this case, it's a a very old name, dating back to around the time of the Norman conquest and so has suffered a lot change.
Visited XR220 in Duxford. Lovely bird.
Whether it was a good piece of military hardware or not, the TSR.2 was ugly AF.
As a Canberra kid who spent 90% of my life in Canberra and moved just over the border in 2008, i am curious as to what part of Canberra you lived in, considering the stupid rivalry between the satellite cities
Be not angry that you cannot make others as you wish them to be, since you cannot make yourself as you wish to be.
Fun fact, if it had been adopted it is theorised that the name would have been ''Eagle'
03:37 sorry what!?
Never seen that, who thought it'd be a good idea to give a jet a flying surfboard to takeoff from?
That's crazy..
Amazing Video
why did english electric name a plane after the most BORING place in Australia? why wasn't a plane named after Perth?
Turns out my grandad lived nearby when they were testing it and it flew over his farm so low all the pigs stood still they were so scared lol
Wings and nose cone remind me of the Jaguar A/C. If the Jag had half the potential of the TSR-2 it would have been more venerable than it already was.
The B-58 is nice but calling it the Hustler and advertising it for international sales was probably a bad idea.
The cold war made some amazing planes. this and the Lighting were bloody lovely. and it was a 1950's Design ?????? It was amazing what 'Us brits could pull off''. Great upload and Thank you for covering this Bird. Thumbs up dude and stay Sunny side up.
It is one neat looking plane. Looks lot like slightly nicer Mirage F1.
the start had the war thunder 'do you read over'
Like the Canadian Arrow?
And the XF-103 and the XF-108 and the XB-70 and the Sukhoi project 100 (T-4)?
@@Justanotherconsumer just read about the T4. Reminds me of the B-70
Honestly from the front view it looks like a penguin of death
vibrations at the same frequency as the human eye can cause temporary blindness? very interesting, I wonder what other effects certain frequencies would have on the body
The greatest jet that we didn't actually need at all after all!
It doesn't sound like that will ever be on my travel list.
I always loved this aircraft and think it was a crime it was never deployed.
nobody talks about how at the start of the video there's US test flight radio going on.
IT WAS THE LANDING GEAR THAT WAS AT THE NATURAL FREQUENCY OF THE EYEBALL, NOT THE HYDRAULIC PUMPS. THE PUMPS WERE FINE. WE HAVE THE FLYING PROTOTYPE, SO USE THESE TO MAKE NEW JIGS , UPRATE THE ENGINES ELECTRONICS AND RADARS. GOOD TO GO.
TSR.2 was plagued with numerous design flaws that combined made for an aircraft that could barely get off the ground, completely failed to meet its performance specifications and required a complete redesign to meet even a greatly reduced set of performance specs, it is without any doubt one of the greatest blunders in British aviation, and BAC was an absolute bin fire... the merger of four failed companies burdened by additional layers of bloated upper management and government bureaucracy.
BAC never produced a single successful aircraft on its own... and its collaborations with the French were also disappointing flops..
Do you think you'll make a video about the Convair YB-60 someday? I think it would make for an interesting video.
A project beyond its time.
A project beyond the capabilities of the UK aircraft industry.
Eventually in the anime world the TSR.2 was resurrected for “Stratos 4” as the TSR.2MS.
1:20 wrong flag for Germany at that time
Does it matter? We know what flag was used and the symbol bro
@@stuthhamster do you?
Putting the German flag of the time isn't really a good idea
Not the war thunder comms 💀
Such a beautiful machine.