SUPPLEMENT28-PAGE

Free with

INCLUDING…

First-hand testingtesting insightsinsights The TSR2’sTSR2’s weaponsweapons The replacement candidates Rare archive imagery TEST PILOTS “A great ‘might have been’ ”

Roland Beamont takes TSR2 XR219 into the air from Boscombe Down during the winter of 1964-65. Strictly speaking, there were no TSR2 prototypes and XR219 was the fi rst of the development batch, XR219-227. KEY COLLECTION

II TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 Whatever the rights and wrongs of its cancellation, few would disagree with former BAC test pilot Don Knight’s view of the TSR2. We gathered his recollections of the stillborn programme — and look back at the thoughts of his late colleague Jimmy Dell WORDS: DENIS J. CALVERT

s is often related, Jimmy Dell made XR219’s sixth flight the British Aircraft and then 11 more. Corporation TSR2 had Don Knight, BAC’s deputy chief but a short flying career. test pilot at Warton, piloted XR219 AOnly one aircraft, XR219, took to on flight 12 from Boscombe Down the air and made just 24 test flights and on flight 23 from Warton, which between 27 September 1964 and was intended to be the main base for 31 March 1965. Had XR219 flown the type’s flight testing. Aeroplane earlier, and thus become more had the privilege of meeting Don to established in the test programme discuss the TSR2 programme and his before Harold Wilson’s government involvement with it. “‘Bee’ as the boss came to power in October 1964, had was definitely in line for the initial the second aircraft XR220 not had test flying”, Knight recalls, “but would an unfortunate ground accident at in time move on and Jimmy was to Boscombe Down — one of the rare take over. In the end, Jimmy did more. occasions where a Mach 2 bomber It was the start of a handover.” genuinely ‘fell off the back of a lorry’ Although his first TSR2 flight — and had Australia put its faith in was on 10 February 1965, Don’s the type rather than in the General involvement with the aircraft started Dynamics F-111, things might well at Buffalo, New York, in October- have turned out differently. As it November 1962. “Much Lightning was, an aircraft that promised so work was still going on at Warton, so much including ‘Mach 2 from a grass someone had to stay behind and carry strip’ and that was so central to the on with it! So, I wasn’t really involved RAF’s future long-term planning was closely with TSR2 until quite late. cancelled on the grounds of necessary Although that’s not strictly true, budgetary savings, the manufacturer because I had an involvement in 1962, BAC having been unable, perhaps two years before. A lot of simulation wisely, to offer the government a work was going on. fixed-price contract. “There was some concern about Only six people ever flew the TSR2. TSR2’s lateral stability, particularly For the record, these were pilots in the landing configuration. BAC Roland ‘Bee’ Beamont, Jimmy Dell organised with Cornell Aeronautical and Don Knight and navigators Don Laboratory [CAL] in the United Bowen, Peter Moneypenny and Brian States involvement in a research and aircraft stability in roll, yaw and ABOVE: McCann. By the time of cancellation programme using their highly- pitch. It had wingtip tanks modified Test pilot Don on 6 April 1965 the programme modified variable-stability T-33 to act as airbrakes which could be Knight made two had achieved momentum and was [NT-33A 51-4120, fitted with an operated differentially to get the TSR2 lights before the programme’s beginning to open out. XR220 was F-94A Starfire nose]. This was not desired effects. The rear cockpit stick cancellation. Today on the point a programme was linked normally to the control he is the sole of making its specifically surfaces. Considering the range of surviving TSR2 delayed first flight Much Lightning orientated towards configurations, some marginal, the aircrew member. BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE and several more work was still going TSR2, but we aircraft was clearly restricted to very DEPARTMENT, WARTON development did assessments good weather conditions. batch (DB) on at Warton, so I of handling “I flew about 60-odd aircraft were and stability configurations, and to maintain identifiable on the wasn’t really involved over a range of impartiality wasn’t allowed to know line at Weybridge. with the TSR2 until configurations until the end what they represented. Roland including those Each was given a number which I was Beamont made quite late of interest for asked to assess on a scale of one to the early flights TSR2. I did the 10. I was also divorced from any post- of XR219, some of which could assessment flying from the T-33’s flight discussion — I would come into fairly be described as eventful. This front seat on this programme. the room and they’d all stop talking! was the result of ‘bell mode’ engine “The aircraft was much modified ‘Your job is just to tell us what it’s vibration at certain power settings, with front stick movements operating like, and to rate it’. This went on for and undercarriage problems which servos through a computer, whose about three weeks. included an inability to retract on numerous individual parameters could “The initial work done on early flights and severe structural/ be set and adjusted in flight from the simulators at Warton was led by undercarriage oscillations on landing. rear cockpit to vary control sensitivity a chap called Arthur Barnes. I

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT III TEST PILOTS

Don Knight in the From left to right, Jimmy Dell, front seat of the Don Knight, Roland Beamont and Cornell Aeronautical navigator Don Bowen. Laboratory’s variable- BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE DEPARTMENT, WARTON stability NT-33A 51-4120, with Cornell’s Ed Smith in the rear. VIA DON KNIGHT

ABOVE: had worked a lot with him, as he in Weybridge but then partially to that all the expertise was with English Beamont and developed simulator technology. dismantle the aircraft, truck it to Electric at Warton. In the case of the Moneypenny taxi It was all fairly crude by modern Boscombe Down and reassemble it MoD, accusations include delays and in at Warton on 22 February 1965, standards — none of your moving for its fi rst fl ight. This has always cost effects due to changes and too cockpits or anything like that. His XR219’s 14th fl ight, seemed a political decision and one many different departmental fi ngers and the TSR2’s fi rst initial approach was to obtain an that had a critically detrimental in the pie. supersonic and acceptable match on the simulator impact on the programme’s progress. I “Regarding the fi rst fl ight there fi rst cross-country with the Lightning, which was fl ying, asked Don how he saw it. was a suggestion at one stage that, sorties. with known characteristics. Once he as the VC10 was fi rst fl own out of BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE DEPARTMENT, FARNBOROUGH managed to do that he could insert Brooklands, we should do likewise a range of the expected derivatives “Well, there’s quite a story there, with TSR2. Wisley, too, was ABOVE RIGHT: for TSR2 for pilots to assess as ‘yes, because years later I attended a ‘TSR2 considered but was a short strip. We XR219 on fl ight that’s acceptable’ or ‘no, that’s not with Hindsight’ symposium run by always felt that, if common sense had seven, dated 22 acceptable’. Particularly in more the RAF Historical Society. I was prevailed, TSR2 would have been January 1965, marginal cases, there was emphasis only a pilot at the time of TSR2, but assembled at Warton — assembled, approaching with the port main on the effects of the pilot in the a lot came out about the politics. It tested and fl own all at one site. You undercarriage leg loop and the consequent variation in is generally accepted that the TSR2 could argue that, having ruled out at less than the response times [for example, the risk project was used to further the Brooklands and Wisley, there was optimum angle. of pilot-induced oscillation]. I did a government’s aim for rationalisation logic in choosing Boscombe Down for Roland Beamont lot of work with Barnes on that, so I of the aircraft industry. Although the fi rst prototype with its extra-long was in command was the natural to go to Cornell when a massive programme, it seems the runway and its proximity to Vickers as with Peter Moneypenny as they had a real fl ying programme.” whole way of operating wasn’t entirely lead contractor.” navigator for the XR219’s fi rst fl ight was delayed sorted out and optimised either in As an aside, there was a precedent fi rst time. by many factors. A crucial one was industry or at the MoD. There were for the less-than-obvious choice of BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE the decision to carry out TSR2 fi nal issues put down to the fact that the location for XR219’s fi rst fl ight. The DEPARTMENT, WARTON assembly at the Brooklands plant prime contractor was Vickers, but English Electric P1A prototype,

IV TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 WG760, had been taken to Boscombe investigating the Olympus 22R shaft avionics that would be fitted to later Down in summer 1954 to make its issues, which were having such an DB aircraft. As Don recalls, it had first flight, this before the Warton impact on flight-testing. The cause a ‘Blue Circle’ nose, named after runway was extended and the site was an excitation of the low-pressure a brand of concrete. Despite that, developed into the major test centre shaft giving rise to huge stresses and Jimmy Dell did some low-level flying it is today. eventual failure — the so-called bell with it, particularly on flight 16 on XR219 was dogged with mode vibration. Although design and 26 February 1965, when he took the restrictions on its Olympus 22R manufacturing changes to the shaft aircraft down to 200ft. But this was (Mk320) engines. The units fitted were implemented as a result, TSR2 essentially flying by hand and eye, for the first flight, numbers 22218 engines had limitations imposed rather than with the benefit of TFR. and 22221, were signed off by Bristol throughout the remainder of the “It was really all to assess the ride. It Siddeley Engines Ltd (BSEL) on 27 type’s test programme. was a flight ‘Bee’ did at high speed September — a Sunday — for a single As Knight says, “There were over the Lake District and Jimmy flight later that same day. It seems quite a number of restrictions that was flying chase in the Lightning. that the Olympus’s vibration problem were accepted for the first flight. A windy day, and ‘Bee’ was sitting was understood but certainly not fully Then they had to fix the problem serenely in the TSR2 enjoying a good resolved either on XR219 or XR220 with undercarriage retraction. ride and Jimmy was having rather a by the time of the programme’s The retraction sequence was very nasty ride in the Lightning. cancellation. Don recalls, “The engine complicated: on “A lot of effort was still restricted. We weren’t taking take-off, the gear A windy day, went in to push off at 100 per cent power; 98 per cent, had to rotate to the programme something like that.” align with the leg and ‘Bee’ was sitting along, to ensure Did the limitations affect use in and then move key requirements afterburner only, or in cold power as forward. There are serenely in the TSR2 would be met well? “There were limitations too in pictures of ‘Bee’ — the gradual cold power. I can say from memory with the gear only and Jimmy was progression of that there were still engine vibration partly extended having a nasty ride in air speed, flutter issues when XR219 flew, with special for a ‘tippy-toe’ work was very warning lights for the pilot to reduce landing, one wheel the Lightning much short- power if certain levels were exceeded. above the other.” circuited, and ‘Bee’ was at the sharp end of those Don’s principal task on the they took the aircraft up to 600kt.” decisions. BSEL had an engine blow programme was to be the avionic The supersonic corridor over the BELOW: up on a Vulcan testbed [XA894 on 3 suite which had been installed in Irish Sea was conveniently close to Undercarriage problems bedevilled December 1962] at Filton. There was XR221 and was being ground-tested Warton and Beamont took XR219 the TSR2’s light- a lot of nervousness about the state of at Weybridge. “The way it worked through Mach 1 on flight 14 on testing, due the engine.” was that, although everybody involved 22 February 1965. Using reheat on not least to the would participate in the overall number one engine only — number complexity of the programme, there was to be a lead two was in dry thrust — speed was retraction sequence. One camp within the company and pilot for each main task. For the increased to Mach 1.12 at 29,500ft This is almost certainly light ive the ministry felt it prudent to take a handling and initial testing it was before afterburner was cancelled. on 14 January 1965, more conservative approach and to Beamont and became Jimmy Dell. This also marked XR219’s delivery to when the port main wait until the problem was resolved My primary project was going to be Warton, where flight-testing was to gear leg failed to before making the first flight, but such XR221, the aircraft designated for be based, and BAC workers turned retract and Beamont were the pressures — and the ever- initial avionics system clearance.” out to greet ‘their aircraft’. had to make a present risk of cancellation — that the XR219 was very much an “I came into the programme ‘tippy-toe’ landing back at Boscombe programme could not wait. aerodynamic prototype, lacking the proper quite late”, Knight continues. Down. “Yes, it was under threat”, says terrain-following radar (TFR), head- “I had these early involvements as BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE Knight. “I think you could sum it up sisplay (HUD) and other advanced we discussed, and then became DEPARTMENT, WARTON up by saying there were teething problems, with the undercarriage as well as with the engines. On landing there was a sudden vibration on touchdown. I seem to remember it was something like +/-2g lateral at the cockpit — disorientating but of fairly short duration.” Following XR219’s first flight, which was of 14 minutes’ duration and involved no more than a couple of circuits of Boscombe Down, the aircraft was laid up for more than three months before making its second flight on New Year’s Eve. This time was used to give engineers the chance to address the most pressing issues and to replace both engines. BSEL and the National Gas Turbine Establishment had spent much time

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT V TEST PILOTS

The result of XR220’s roll-over at Boscombe Even early on in testing, the TSR2 Down on 9 September 1964. It is not believed demonstrated the good low-level ride that this image, showing the tarpaulin-covered that would have been so valuable in fuselage on its side, has been published its intended role. KEY COLLECTION before. BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE DEPARTMENT, WARTON

They were playing pool, the TV was on with the budget speech and they caught the announcement, as Jimmy Dell described it, of ‘sixpence on fags, tuppence on beer and, by the way, we’re cancelling TSR2’

involved with the avionic systems in Bowen was the Vickers man and was The impressions of Don and other the simulator at Weybridge. XR220 ‘Bee’ Beamont’s navigator. We started pilots who fl ew XR219 were that it and XR221 were still a few months to spread the experience, fi rst with handled much like ‘a big Lightning’, away, so there was a lot of learning Peter Moneypenny and then with which is surely meant to be taken as still to do.” Brian McCann.” a compliment. “A bit heavier than Don’s fi rst fl ight in XR219 was a Lightning, but the characteristics BELOW: on 10 February 1965. His second were very similar. I think people Some of BAC’s trip took place six weeks later, on Both fl ights were essentially for expected it might be slightly more fi nest: TSR2 XR219, 27 March, and would turn out to familiarisation purposes, although of a handful because there was no Lightning F6 XR755 be XR219’s penultimate fl ight. In there were some test points involved. autostabilisation at that stage, and yet and Canberra B2 each case his navigator was Peter “I did two taxi runs, for familiarisation it was good.” WD937 together at Moneypenny, and he was briefed on the ground, before my fi rst fl ight. Don also fl ew Lightning or Warton. BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE by Jimmy Dell. “Peter Moneypenny My fi rst fl ight was from Boscombe Canberra chase on XR219 for DEPARTMENT, WARTON was the number two navigator. Don Down, the second from Warton.” several of its test fl ights. Of his fi nal Lightning chase sortie on 8 March 1965, a day when XR219 fl ew twice, he recalls, “I can’t be certain which one I chased as I only have overall duration times in my logbook, not starts and fi nishes. It was my second fl ight that day in two-seat Lightning XM967 and I was accompanied on that occasion by a fl ight test department engineer.” Many, many years ago the author was given a black and white photo of a seemingly near-complete TSR2 airframe, lying on its side on the concrete with infl atable air bags under it and a large crane towering above. This could have been a shot of a part-completed airframe, taking during the mass scrapping that took place after cancellation at Warton and Samlesbury. Or was it of XR220, taken at Boscombe Down in the aftermath of its 9 September 1964 roll-over accident while being delivered from Weybridge in a semi-

VI TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 Jimmy Dell in the cockpit of XR219, in which he made a dozen lights. BAE SYSTEMS HERITAGE DEPARTMENT, WARTON dismantled state by articulated truck? It turns out it was the latter, with the suggestion that the image had been taken by an insurance assessor as part of a (probably expensive) accident claim. Don Knight remembers it: “They had the drama with the second aircraft when it fell off the truck at Boscombe Down. Fortunately, it landed on the tailplane spigot that was the strongest part of the airframe. I understand it was on an articulated truck that just got too much angle on when reversing.” “It was quite an exciting ride” In the event, the damage incurred and the time taken to effect a repair s chief test pilot at BAC Warton, much bigger aircraft, of course. But — well, meant that XR220 would never Jimmy Dell lew TSR2 XR219 12 you’ve seen the aircraft. When you’re strapped fly, becoming the victim of a cruel times, this representing exactly half in it’s got such a long fuselage and you can’t twist of fate. Jimmy Dell and Peter the total of 24 lights achieved over see anything of the aircraft. Even if you really Moneypenny were to make its first Athe aircraft’s short lying career. Sadly, Jimmy screw yourself round, you can just about see a flight from Boscombe Down on 6 died on 25 March 2008, but Aeroplane was bit of it. There was no rearwards view, but we April 1965. Don remembers, “They fortunate to have been able to interview him had rear view mirrors, so most of what you saw were there to fly the aeroplane, but it at IWM Duxford on 16 December 2005 on the was out of the front. You had a super view had a snag — a fuel pump required occasion of the roll-out of restored TSR2 because the nose slopes down very sharply, so to be changed. They decided to go XR222, the fourth development batch aircraft. it was great particularly for high-speed, and get a bite of lunch while this Don Bowen was the navigator for Jimmy’s low-level lying for which it was primarily was going on, so they went down irst TSR2 light on 15 January 1965, but for designed. You really had a panoramic view.” to a local pub to get a sandwich, later lights he was accompanied by either Don The TSR2 was always a political aircraft. It and while they were there they Bowen or Peter Moneypenny. Dell took over had its friends but also its enemies, ever ready ’phoned Boscombe Down to see if the prime responsibility for handling trials from to highlight any problems or delays and to the aeroplane was fixed and it wasn’t. ‘Bee’ Beamont at a time in the programme underline cost over-runs. Cancellation came So, they were playing pool, the TV when conidence was building, and sortie little more than six months after the irst light, was on with the budget speech and frequency and sortie lengths were increasing. I but those closest to the programme remained they caught the announcement, as asked Jimmy how XR219 handled when taken enthusiastic and supportive, opining that the Jimmy described it, of ‘sixpence on down to low level, the environment for which it problems encountered were no more than fags, tuppence on beer and, by the was designed. Could he compare the ride with might be expected at that early stage. way, we’re cancelling TSR2’! They that of any other front-line RAF aircraft? “They certainly weren’t show-stoppers”, said thought, ‘Let’s get back and get “Well, I never lew a Buccaneer”, he replied, Dell. The bell-mode resonance was fairly easily this thing airborne’, but when they “but I lew other aircraft at low level and this sorted out. The undercarriage problems — it arrived at Boscombe Down they were was superb because the design of the wing was a bogie undercarriage with two wheels forbidden to do anything and that had a cushioning effect. We weren’t supposed either side. And when you lowered the was the end. But what a way to hear.” to go below 200ft, but I took it lower. It was undercarriage, it came down — the Even now, opinion on the TSR2 quite an exciting ride because you sat there undercarriage is like this [he gesticulated to remains divided. Those who flew it with your arms folded.” indicate the position of the undercarriage, seem agreed that it showed every sign He really had that much conidence in it? which extended from bays in the fuselage] and of being an excellent airframe with “Yes, you had to have. You wouldn’t do the test as you touched down the rear wheels touched great handling and performance, but if you hadn’t. But what amazed me was, initially irst. It was an alignment problem. The there’s an equally strong point of view of course, watching when everything is going undercarriage was very lexible and of course that, however good the airframe, the alright, you didn’t notice much outside your you were in this long nose and you were going avionics would have been 10 years peripheral vision. But once you got used to it from one side to the other. Only for about three behind it in development. Don’s you found you could see a lot more because or four cycles, but initially when it happens you thoughts: “A great ‘might have been’. you weren’t just concentrating on looking wonder what the hell is going to happen next, There were undoubtedly things to straight ahead. You could see a wider angle. and whether the thing is going to disintegrate sort out on it, but there was nothing And when we were going up through the about your ears, but that was easily sorted out that looked fundamental to me from Pennines about Mach 0.9, I’d set 250ft, so the by itting a jury strut, which stiffened up the a flying point of view. Systems-wise, autopilot was on, and it was amazing how undercarriage and stopped it happening.” they had the undercarriage problems, much you could see. I remember seeing a van And what about the likely date for entry into but that was engineering. Personally, coming along the road which was crossing my RAF service, had the project been allowed to I always wondered a bit about the path and I could even read the maker’s name continue. “Probably mid-seventies. It would engine installation — a long tube with on the side, which amazed me because lying have had to undergo so many tests to satisfy so the engine going in from the back. I at that speed at that height it was only because many people. But I was anxious to try and get wondered if that might require a bit of you felt relaxed because the autopilot was the Americans to have a trip in it, because they attention when it came to operational doing all the work for you.” came across to look at it, but I think politics usage. But I don’t think there was The comment has often been made that the stepped in and they weren’t allowed to ly it. I anything that couldn’t have been TSR2 handled like a big Lightning. How much think they would have been very impressed sorted out during development.” truth was there in that statement? “It was a with the performance at that stage.”

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT VII HUD TRIALS ROOM FOR A VIEW?

A TSR2 engineer recalls a notable head-up display development challenge WORDS: MICHAEL WILSON

BELOW: he TSR2 marked the re-engineering: think of the models A PDU (pilot’s beginning of the global of the solar system on display in display unit) for change from analogue to museums and the complexity of the TSR2’s HUD on test at Sydenham. digital technology, freeing gearing needed to change the daily attack example. The fi rst, XR219, was It contained a Tdesigners to explore new performance and yearly movement of the planets fl own successfully many times; XR220 3in high-intensity paths and levels. The problem with around the sun. Analogue equipment was about to fl y, while XR221 was cathode-ray tube. analogue devices is that any desired can also suffer from drift, where the some way down the line. My initial BAE SYSTEMS changes to their mode of operation design settings can change after a brief as a fl ight-test instrumentation can generally be accomplished only time due to wear and tear. Digital engineer in BAC’s electrical technical by time-consuming mechanical devices, on the other hand, are always offi ce in Weybridge was to join in either totally correct because each is planning the airborne instrumentation designed with a built-in degree of needed to check the performance of accuracy by way of sequences of ones the navigation and weapon delivery and zeros, or don’t work at all because systems in accordance with a schedule of a malfunction or design error. prepared by all parties. We were to Yes, they can suffer interference, but do that in conjunction with English we’re talking theory here. A further Electric at Warton, Lancashire, which complication is that operation in was in my view really the senior conjunction with analogue devices can technical partner in terms of military be complicated, even impossible and aircraft work. rarely satisfactory. The TSR2 was the world’s second aeroplane to benefi t from the new In the operational system, digital technology, the fi rst being the North signals from the various mission American A3J Vigilante carrier-borne boxes were routed to the Verdan bomber, cancelled in that role because (versatile digital analyser) central of diffi culties with stores ejection. But computer, a US Autonetics system it was Europe’s fi rst digital aeroplane. adopted by the UK’s Elliott Brothers Nine two-seat development batch (later Elliott Automation) where they aircraft were ordered, the fi rst being were processed as necessary before devoted to exploring the fl ight being routed to the two-man crew envelope and general handling, the via navigation and weapon delivery second to validating the AFCS (auto- screens. For fl ight-test purposes, fl ight control system), and the third signals of particular interest generated being the fi rst fully equipped nav- by the nav-attack equipment were

VIII TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 The sole fl ying TSR2 prototype at low level. The aircraft was fi tted with a head-up display, but at this stage it was really only a weapon aiming sight. KEY COLLECTION

sampled at a general rate of two them: AFCS, Doppler-monitored exactly what the pilot saw: a real-time words a second by a specially built inertial navigation system, line-scan, view of the outside world overlaid piece of fl ight-test instrumentation sideways-looking radar, forward- with all the symbology needed to known as a buffer unit, in which looking radar, head-up display, accomplish the mission. Anomalies signals could be slowed before being moving map display, radar altimeter could then be investigated on the fed into a US-supplied Ampex and central computer, not to mention ground by checking individual boxes industrial tape recorder. the instrument landing system. or in conjunction with the stage IV In addition to assessing the The HUD brought together for test rig, in which the boxes comprising reliability and accuracy of the airborne the pilot mission-critical data and the entire system were set up on system for the fl ight test evaluation guidance information from the benches and connected together in team, there was the need to check totality of the nav-attack system. Thus such a way that individual elements the electrical compatibility of the it was vitally important that it be could be checked in a way not possible different systems boxes with one recorded for post-fl ight analysis by the in the cramped conditions in the another. And there were a lot of assessment people who wanted to see aeroplane’s equipment bay.

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT IX HUD TRIALS

ABOVE: The Cintel HUD, one of the many according to whether a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’ sacred space reserved for the ejection NA39 Buccaneer innovations on the new bomber, was ride was chosen, dependent on aircraft envelope, an imaginary ‘tube’ which development aircraft a major development of the wartime speed and g-loads. the seat and pilot occupied during XK487 played its part, being gunsight/camera recorder. Cintel was We had to meet a particular ejection. It was a diffi cult decision, fl own during the a UK company, Cinema Television, challenge in recording the HUD involving politics, policies, insurance TSR2 programme formed by John Logie Baird of display: how to capture and record and much else — all far above my level by Ferranti from television fame, later absorbed the outside-world scene without of seniority. I decided to sound out the Turnhouse. into the Rank Organisation. The interfering with the pilot’s view or individual whose views and decision VIA GRAHAM PITCHFORK display was, I recall, recessed into causing injury during an ejection. A would carry immense weight and could the instrument panel coaming. Its beam-splitting mirror in the line of short-circuit the lengthy decision- symbology was to be projected onto sight could be used to divert outside- making process. the rear face of the pilot’s windscreen world/symbology data to a locally David Morgan was the Vickers and there aligned with the outside- mounted video camera, but could it be project pilot assigned to fl y the nav- world view. Duplicate information, done? At this point some remarks on attack trials, and we agreed to meet though not the outside world, was the electronic world might be in order. informally at the aeroplane itself. We provided for the rear-seat occupant. As noted earlier, the 1950s marked discussed the challenge at some length, In terrain-following mode the the transition between analogue him sitting in the cockpit and me forward-scanning radar looked for and digital; in standing on an obstructions along the line of travel engineering It was claimed access ladder and — the fl ight-track vector. When terms, between leaning over the BELOW: obstructions were detected the radar thermionic valves that the TSR2 would fuselage side into Of 20 TSR2 PDUs computed a pull-up command at pre- and solid-state the cockpit well. built, just three determined distances and clearance devices known be unviable because We manoeuvred survive, including heights, computed in conjunction with as transistors. a representative this one in BAE of the mean time Systems’ Rochester the forward-looking and altimeter Actually, the camera into all collection. radars. The climb and subsequent TSR2’s designers between failures of possible viewing BAE SYSTEMS pushover manoeuvres could be set had no choice but regions and to embrace the solid-state devices discussed methods new technology. by which it could Indeed, for an aeroplane with such an be mounted. It was clear that, without extensive electrical power demands the expense and time involved in just one item — cooling air for these designing a dedicated camera mounted heat-generating devices — would in the equipment bay with split mirror probably have ruled them out. As it in the cockpit, the outside-world view is, one authority claimed that the new could be captured only by permitting a bomber would be unviable because small breach of the ejection envelope. MTBF (mean time between failures) Some tooth-sucking ensued, after of solid-state devices would be which Dave expressed himself satisfi ed unacceptably short to complete that there was no alternative and any lengthy mission. nodded the slight intrusion through To return to the HUD — such is the stuff of which test-pilots challenge, we were forced to are built. He felt that the camera could consider a variation of the World be dismounted at a moment’s notice War Two gun-camera as the from a frangible mount in the event a only feasible option by which rapid exit was called for. Presumably, the imagery could be recorded. with the possibility of personal injury But this involved violating the and legal implications in mind,

X TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 he subsequently cleared the as-yet crossing just as his long-nose Bentley LEFT: undesigned installation with peer swept into view. With just seconds A diagram showing opinions, because I had no comeback to spare he did the natural thing and the positioning of the HUD installation, from higher-ups. In fact, the TSR2 hauled back on the steering wheel. which was far from was cancelled within a short time Not responding to such commands, ideal. The Triplex of our meeting. And now, for those the car sped through the obstruction glass used for the still querying the title of this article, in a shower of broken wood. TSR2’s cockpit it comes from the effort involved in Cancellation of the TSR2 glazing was very trying to find ‘room’ for something that programme was announced by the new thick, hardened against high-speed needed ‘a view’. Labour government in April 1965. birdstrikes and A number of trials aircraft were Within a month or so I was invited to covered in a gold dedicated to supporting the TSR2 join The Aeroplane’s rival journal Flight ilm to protect flight-test programme. One of them International to replace respected against nuclear lash was a Comet 4 based at Boscombe aviation journalist and technical guru, — all of this caused Down in which a representative nav the late Bill Gunston, who had left multiple relections off inner and system and associated monitoring to join IPC’s newly launched Science outer surfaces and equipment had been set up on Journal. Early in 1966 I flew with a distortions at high work-stations along the length of the press party to join a presentation in speed. This required fuselage, rather like those in larger Toulouse of Dassault’s proposed TSR2 a complex optical ASW aircraft such as the Nimrod. Since its design was based on replacement, a Rolls-Royce Spey- system for the HUD, The principal goal of the Comet analogue technology, incompatible engined version of France’s Mirage the positioning of which so far from trials was to check the accuracy of the with the TSR2’s digital AFCS, IV nuclear bomber. It was the first the windshield Doppler-monitored inertial navigation signals from the two radars were of a long line of candidates put up to rendered it large system. Actual speed over ground and fed directly to the HUD, bypassing replace the TSR2. and heavy. distance flown, calculated electronically the Buccaneer’s own flight control From the published evidence, the BAE SYSTEMS from accelerometer signals in the system. Thus, in contour-following TSR2 was outstanding in every way. INU (inertial navigation unit) is missions the pilot had to fly manually Yes, it was expensive, partly because highly accurate in the short term but according to the HUD commands. It of the many support projects involved is subject to drift over long periods, was tiring and demanding, and called — the Buccaneer and Comet were while Doppler is less accurate over for a level of trust in the system as the not the only ones — and perhaps with short periods but has better long-term mountaintops could be obscured by the HS681 and HS1154 it was simply performance and so can correct the mist or cloud. a bridge too far. But it had come to inertial data. the notice of savvy Americans that To gain some familiarity with the the Brits could still do world-class complete system I took a flight in the I cannot let these recollections go engineering, something that was good Comet to see the different systems in by without recording an amusing and for the future and for collaborative action, supplementing the ground- quite possibly apocryphal account of projects such as the McDonnell based stage 4 rig. The trial involved an incident involving the Buccaneer Douglas AV-8B Harrier II and cruising up north to a convenient which was doing the rounds at the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning navigation waypoint and back, twice, time. The story goes that, on one II. More than that: UK leaders to check the long-term accuracy of occasion following its arrival back in the global technical, industrial, the system. late during the final flight of the educational and other fields had Another trials aircraft was a day, the aircraft was landed back at begun to see what could be Buccaneer in which a development Turnhouse and parked. The pilot done with new technology. forward-looking radar and HUD clambered out, climbed aboard his BELOW: had been installed in a representative car still clad in flight overalls and ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The sole Hunter T12, XE531, saw TSR2 radome, on loan to Ferranti. It roared off home. Bodily seated in the The editor thanks Chris Bartlett, much use on TSR2 was flown out of the company’s flight- car, he was mentally caught up with curator of the BAE Systems HUD development test centre at Edinburgh’s Turnhouse 450kt contour flying. Such a pity that Rochester Avionic Archives, for his work. airport during 1963 to get some the barrier came down at the level help with photos for this article. VIA TONY BUTTLER experience in contour-following. The jet was big and tough and could carry the considerable weight and volume of development and recording equipment at representative speeds, heights and g-forces in advance of the TSR2 taking the air, providing valuable experience in automatically generating flight profiles at low level. It would be a good tool for crew physiological investigation as well. Flying was conducted over Schiehallion, a 3,500ft ‘Munro’ (with peaks more than 3,000ft high) in Scotland noted for its smooth shape which made for fewer ‘jiggles’ in the interrogating radar beam and thus in the command symbols that were presented to the pilot.

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XI WEAPONS

STRIKING POWER The range of weapons that would have been carried by the TSR2 proliferated during the early 1960s — some being practical propositions, others less so WORDS: CHRIS GIBSON

he TSR2’s raison d’être was retaliation of the Trip Wire policy to susceptible to changes in temperature weapons delivery, specifi cally one of fl exible response. The third, and shock, so internal carriage in a nuclear weapons, onto also driven by the USA, was the temperature-regulated weapons bay enemy targets, but as the cancellation of Skybolt in December was preferred. Another aspect of the Tgeopolitical situation changed in 1962. Lastly came the 1968 decision early weapons was their size, which the years following the Suez Crisis to withdraw British forces from east resulted in a draggy shape. Red Beard of 1956 its role, or rather proposed of Suez. Throughout this period was 12ft long with a diameter of 2ft roles, changed. The weapons altered the tasks assigned to the RAF, and 4in and a rather bluff nose. to refl ect these and, of course, weapons requirements, changed. In The TSR2 was designed for high- developments in weapons themselves. the midst of this was the TSR2. speed fl ight — Mach 1.7 — to its As the only game in town after the target, the last 200nm at low level. 1957 White Paper, the TSR2 and its Flight at that speed would have caused weapons refl ected the overall effort in Developed to meet operational external stores to heat up and therefore weapons development. requirement OR1127, Red Beard the delicate Red Beard required During the lead-up to this period, was deployed in 1961. Like many internal carriage, for which the TSR2’s ABOVE: the United Kingdom had a wide- British nuclear weapons it was weapons bay was designed. Red Beard A rendering of a ranging guided weapons industry, euphemistically known as a target was intended for a loft delivery that Strike Command which from April 1957 felt the impact marker bomb, allowing it to be listed required the aircraft to approach at TSR2 carrying the of four linked events. The fi rst was in ship stores without revealing its low altitude, usually around 200ft, air-launched BAC that month’s Defence White Paper identity as a 15-kiloton (kT) weapon. and at a predetermined range, pitch Blue Water, one which, despite the received wisdom Red Beard was to arm the Canberra, up into a 45° climb and release the of many weapons that were proposed that Duncan Sandys was pro-missile Scimitar and Buccaneer, none of weapon, maximising the distance for the type in the and anti-aircraft, saw guided weapons which were supersonic. Only the from the detonation and allowing the strategic role. being cancelled. The second was Scimitar carried it externally. Early aircraft to escape the effects of the ADRIAN MANN 1961’s move from the massive nuclear nuclear weapons were delicate and explosion. That climb took the aircraft

XII TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 up into the engagement envelope of for Red Beard. Another could go on enemy defences. each inboard wing pylon, although This was solved by way of a lay- high-speed flight was time-limited down delivery whereby the aircraft to protect the WE177s from kinetic released the parachute-retarded heating. In addition to British- weapon as it passed over the target at designed nuclear bombs, the RAF had high speed. There were down-sides access to Project E weapons, whereby to this: the aircraft might not escape US weapons could be delivered by the blast, Red Beard was not robust British aircraft in time of war. These enough to survive the impact or the included the B28 and B43 that could shock of retarder chutes opening, have been carried internally and and it was not designed for external externally, as per WE177. carriage in supersonic flight. The 1950s saw the rise of the guided A new requirement, ASR1177, weapon whose development went was drafted for an improved kiloton hand-in-hand with new strike aircraft bomb. The Atomic Weapons Research such as the TSR2. Guided stand-off Establishment took the US W59 weapons allowed strike aircraft to avoid warhead for Skybolt and substituted entering the enemy’s air defence zone. the US explosive for a more stable The American AGM-112 Bullpup British one, less susceptible to shock. was intended for the TSR2 and would The resulting RE179 fission package, enter service with the Fleet Air Arm’s also known as Cleo, was much smaller Buccaneers, but the Air Staff was not than Red Beard’s and formed the basis particularly enamoured with it. Nor of the WE177 series, designed for the did the French AS30 appeal as its rigours of lay-down delivery. 7nm range and optical guidance would Three variants, require the aircraft A, B and C, At least two to enter the were developed, enemy’s defended ABOVE: Two WE177 mock-ups, possibly the B or C variants, in although the 10kT WE177As, or even zone. the weapons bay of the TSR2 mock-up at Warton. The aircraft A version would Meanwhile, could carry two A variants in tandem or two B or C models principally be used a stick of four, would at Vickers’ plant side-by-side. BAE SYSTEMS VIA JOE CHERRIE by the Royal Navy in Weybridge, as a nuclear depth be required to ensure Barnes Wallis had bomb. The B, with destruction of vast or been examining a yield of 450kT, ways to provide was the first to hardened targets stand-off. He enter service came up with a with the RAF in 1966 as a strategic weapon he called Apple Turnover, but ‘gap-filler’ until the Polaris came into which Vickers named the Momentum service, while the 190kT C was a Bomb. Wallis’ intention was to avoid tactical weapon. To accommodate the the pitch-up required to deliver larger warhead, the WE177B and C weapons by the loft technique. The were longer — 11ft 1in rather than the Momentum Bomb was conceived to 9ft 4in WE177A — but maintained attack targets while the strike aircraft the same maximum diameter of 16in. remained below the radar horizon. The 10kT WE177A was originally The unpowered weapon was fitted intended for RAF service, its yield with small wings or long strakes with limited by Prime Minister Harold a symmetrical aerofoil section plus Macmillan who was concerned that a basic tail unit. It did not require in the new era of flexible response a the attacking aircraft to climb before higher yield would lead to escalation weapons release. into full-scale nuclear war. The TSR2 was to overfly the This brought a further complication. target at low level and release Some targets in eastern Europe, such the Momentum Bomb at a pre- as airfields and missile silos, were determined point down-range of the vast or hardened to the extent that target. After release, the elevators nothing but a direct hit, even with a commanded the bomb to enter a climb nuclear warhead, would be effective. that became ever steeper and turned At least two WE177As, or even a stick into a loop. At its apex, the elevators of four, would be required to ensure reversed and commanded the bomb destruction of the target, delivered by into a gently sloping flight path to the the TSR2 using the lay-down or loft- target on the reciprocal bearing to the bombing technique to minimise the aircraft’s flight path — that is, behind aircraft’s exposure to air defences. it. Being unpowered, the weapon relied The TSR2 could carry two on the momentum from its launch and WE177As in tandem or two longer low-drag shape to carry it to the target. ABOVE: American weapons were available to the RAF under Bs or Cs side-by-side in its weapons For targets off the aircraft’s ground Project E. This photo shows a B43 ‘shape’ on the starboard bay, thanks to the bay being sized track, Wallis suggested the aircraft inboard pylon of the TSR2 mock-up. BAE SYSTEMS VIA JOE CHERRIE

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XIII WEAPONS

performed a turn onto a bearing whose version designated AJ168 but known As noted above, the WE177A reciprocal took the Momentum Bomb as TV-Martel, the name Martel being with its 10kT yield was the model onto the target. derived from Missile, Anti-Radiation, originally intended for RAF use, so The Admiralty and Air Staff in Television. The TSR2 would have where does the 450kT WE177B fi t 1962 drew up a joint requirement, used both TV-guided and anti- in? In 20-odd years of researching NASR1168, to cover a powered guided radiation weapons but if the Martel’s UK aerospace matters, the events weapon for use by strike aircraft such use on the TSR2 had mirrored that on of January 1963 and the resulting as the TSR2 against ships, bridges and the Buccaneer, only three TV-Martels ministerial correspondence provide other pinpoint targets. This prompted could be carried as one wing pylon the only instance of what this writer tenders from Bristol and de Havilland would be required for the missile’s can describe as a governmental ‘fl ap’. with the former datalink pod, and Her Majesty’s Government had in proposing the Skybolt was never more likely one 1960 ordered the Douglas AGM-48 Tychon and the on each inboard as the UK’s deterrent. Better known latter the RG10. a serious option for pylon. as Skybolt, it was an air-launched The Tychon was a As a tactical ballistic missile (ALBM) and the modular weapon the TSR2, but the strike aircraft, British examples were to be carried by whose seeker and the TSR2 would Bomber Command’s Avro Vulcans. warhead could aircraft did enter have toted the The existing Vulcan B2 with two be swapped out the strategic nuclear air-to-ground Skybolts would in turn be replaced by to provide TV weapons in the long-duration patrol missile carriers, or anti-radar deterrent business RAF’s arsenal known as ‘Poffl ers’, based on either guidance and including 1,000lb highly modifi ed Vulcans and Victors conventional or nuclear warheads, bombs, with six in the weapons bay or a transport — the VC10 being the plus the option for a reconnaissance and fi ve under each wing. Rockets front-runner, carrying eight Skybolts. pack. The TSR2 could carry up to four were to go in underwing pods, the The Ministry of Aviation had in Tychons on the wing pylons Matra pods being loaded with 68mm 1960 examined arming the TSR2 with de Havilland’s RG10 became part SNEB rockets. For a better idea of Skybolt. With a payload in excess of of an Anglo-French project based the probable weapons fi t, examine 20,000lb it could carry a pair. Proposals on the Matra AS37 anti-radiation photographs of types such as the involved the simple expedient of missile. The deal basically involved Buccaneer or Jaguar with their stores mounting a Skybolt on the fuselage Matra developing the AS37 as laid out around them, the centreline, but this blanked off the an anti-radiation missile while de Jaguar typifying the loads of TSR2’s Doppler antenna, affecting Havilland developed a TV-guided the 1970s. the aircraft’s navigation system, while the airframe covered the Skybolt star-tracker window. Fitting a Skybolt under each wing cured these problems but caused aerodynamic interference with the tailplane, while the wing structure might need strengthening. The third option was overwing carriage, which solved the aerodynamic interference of the tailplane, but transferred the problem to the tail fi n. The wing structure would need strengthening, too. One further feature of the overwing 1 x Red Beard pylons would be the need to invert the aircraft to get an astro fi x and launch the Skybolts. The UK and US Skybolts were to be identical apart 2 x WE177A from the warhead with the attachment lugs and interfaces on the upper side of the missile, which would need to be mounted upside-down with the star tracker pointing to the ground. 2 x WE177B and C Launch would involve the aircraft rolling inverted and maintaining this attitude until the missile had achieved RIGHT: a fi x, when it was released. The TSR2’s weapons 1 x B43 Skybolt was never a serious weapon bay was 20ft long option for the TSR2, it being a tactical and sized to carry strike and reconnaissance type, but Red Beard. It could in early 1963 the aircraft entered the accommodate two strategic nuclear deterrent business. WE177s, one B47, 6 x 1,000lb GP bombs six 1,000lb general- President Kennedy cancelled Skybolt 0 Feet 10 purpose bombs or a outright on 22 December 1962, fuel tank. leaving the UK without a deterrent CHRIS GIBSON 0 Metres 3 as Macmillan had put all of Britain’s

XIV TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 AIR DEFENCE VARIANTS

n his 2010 book TSR2: Britain’s Lost Bomber, Damien Burke presented the results of extensive research in the BAE Systems archives. With regard to the air defenceI TSR2, what was revealed was more than an interceptor: it was a long-endurance air defence platform. Although initially aimed at Soviet bombers with stand-off weapons coming across the North Sea, that would have changed. Converting the TSR2 into an air defence aircraft could have been easy, substituting the strike aircraft’s forward-looking radar for 0 Feet 10 an airborne interception (AI) radar. The Ferranti FLR had evolved from the AI23 used 0 Metres 3 in the Lightning, but things are never that simple. In the late 1950s and early ‘60s, interceptors worked with an air defence ground environment comprising early warning radars and ground controllers to co-ordinate interceptions. By the end of the 1950s the Soviets had adopted stand-off weapons and low-level incursion, depriving the controllers of early warning. The obvious solution was airborne early warning aircraft but at the time such systems were in their infancy. Vickers had examined an AEW system for the carrier-borne Types 582 and 583 that employed a fi xed, electronically scanned radar antenna mounted along the centreline of the Type 583, which could patrol in a ‘racetrack’ pattern between the fl eet and any approaching enemy. When applied to the TSR2 the ventral antenna, associated hardware and fuel tank in the weapons bay meant that the air-to-air weapons were carried on the wing pylons. If two pylons were to be used for long-range fuel tanks this left room for a payload of two Diagrams of the TSR2 air defence variants. The upper drawing shows the version with the AAMs, the standard load for RAF ventral blade antenna and underwing Red Tops while the lower one illustrates the conformal interceptors. An alternative was to fi t the antennae behind the cockpits and modifi ed forward fuselage. CHRIS GIBSON radar antennae aft of the cockpit in an extended forward fuselage, allowing the weapons bay to be used for a pair of Red Fleet Air Arm to arm its Hawker P1154 was the Radar Red Top that used the seeker Top IR-guided AAMs. fi ghters. These included the air-launched from the French Matra R530, or even the If a radar-guided weapon was to be Sea Dart and SIG-16, both modifi ed SAMs, R530 itself. To complete the weapons employed, the companies had a number of and Blue Dolphin, a radar-guided version of system, an AI radar was required, possibly in them on the drawing board, all aimed at the Red Top. An alternative to the Blue Dolphin the form of the AI25 intended for the P1154.

nuclear eggs in one basket. The Nassau UK faced being without a credible Whitehall some surprising projects Agreement of 21 December resulted deterrent for almost a decade. came out of the woodwork of the in the UK acquiring the Polaris SLBM The resulting fl ap in the fi rst week British aviation design offi ces. The (submarine-launched ballistic missile) of 1963 saw ministry offi cials and diktat was that existing or earlier system, which unfortunately would not senior RAF offi cers casting around development work should be used. enter service until 1969 at the earliest. for a weapon that became known as Some, such as One Club A and B, The RAF’s deterrent comprised Yellow the ‘gap-fi ller’. The cheapest, simplest were cobbled together from the parts Sun freefall bombs and the 100nm- and ultimately easiest solution was bin while others had been in progress range Blue Steel stand-off missile that, to use the WE177B. The impression as design studies for the TSR2. due to improved Soviet air defences, gained from ministry documents is On the more realistic front, a was approaching obsolescence even that, indeed, it had put all their eggs number of nuclear-capable guided before it entered service in 1963. The in one basket, but as calm returned to weapons were being developed in

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XV WEAPONS

TSR2 was designed to penetrate at this was suggested as a weapon for low level with the WE177. There was the TSR2. Studies involved the TSR2 a school of thought that a stand-off carrying a single Blue Water ventrally range of 50nm was suffi cient as that or on the inboard underwing pylons. would keep the TSR2s out of range of Changes included increasing the Soviet air defences. length of the dual-mode rocket motor Having scrapped the Z34, Avro’s by 4ft, rotating the rear fi n assembly WRD examined the Z122, a Blue by 45° and, to allow ventral carriage, Steel shortened by 5ft (1.5m) to be making the upper two fi ns fold fl at carried semi-recessed in the TSR2’s against the aircraft’s underside. A more underside. Realistically the Z122 was tailored approach saw Blue Water’s a non-starter, so WRD returned to warhead and systems installed in a the scaled test vehicles used for Blue new airframe more suitable for ventral ABOVE: the UK at the start of the 1960s by the Steel development, basing the 20ft- carriage on the TSR2. This comprised Hawker Siddeley’s guided weapons divisions of British long Z128A on the 19/15 test vehicle a fl attened fuselage with double delta AJ168 TV-Martel Aircraft Corporation and Hawker by adding a 5ft bay to house a Skybolt wings and the dual-mode rocket being tested on a de Havilland Sea Siddeley Aviation. For the ‘gap-fi ller’, or Polaris warhead. As noted above, motor replaced by two rocket motors Vixen trials aircraft. the weapons research division (WRD) the Air Staff wanted a range of 50nm enclosed in the fuselage, one each side As well as the TSR2, at the Avro plant at Woodford had but the Z128A could achieve 70nm, of the systems bay. the AJ168 was to more than 50 design studies on stand- so the WRD was asked to reduce One other interesting missile from be carried by the off weapons to choose from. BAC’s the range, achieved by reducing the the Stevenage offi ce was a small air- Buccaneer, Nimrod Bristol Division had been working on size of the fuel and oxidiser tanks launched ballistic missile which, at 19ft and Phantom, although it did not ramjet-powered stand-off weapons and shortening the airframe by 3ft to 8in long, was tailored to fi t the TSR2’s enter service on the while the Stevenage Division had produce the Z128B. weapons bay. This single-stage missile latter two types. examined rocket-powered missiles. was to use a Polaris re-entry vehicle BLUE ENVOY COLLECTION Hawker Siddeley’s de Havilland (RV) boosted into a ballistic trajectory Division at Hatfi eld proposed the Even before it was cancelled, as an by four rocket motors housed within Megaton Martel based on the insurance against Skybolt’s potential a 26in (66cm)-diameter airframe. AJ168 missile, whose 50nm range cancellation the Air Staff had issued When launched at low altitude the was considered ideal if delivered at OR1182 for a long-range stand-off 5,000lb missile would have climbed low level. The Megaton Martel saw weapon. Two missiles were proposed: to an apogee of over 250,000ft before the AJ168 airframe being stretched Bristol’s ramjet powered X-12 and the RV separated to re-enter and by 1ft 10in to accommodate a the Avro WRD’s turbofan-powered impact 350nm down-range. As with WE177B warhead. The Air Staff were W140. The X12 was 40ft 6in long the Skybolt, range was dependent unconvinced by its performance, which with a ventral ramjet while the W140 on launch altitude, something that despite having a speed of Mach 1.2 at was 37ft 4in long with a ventral also mitigated against Skybolt on launch slowed to Mach 0.4 at the end RB153 turbofan. Both were aimed at the TSR2; one was designed for low of its fl ight, making it vulnerable to the ‘V-bombers’, but brochures were altitude, the other for high altitude. anti-aircraft fi re. prepared showing their use on the One of the more interesting The Hatfi eld design offi ces TSR2. Its 89ft length allowed large proposals for the TSR2 arsenal was proposed two ALBMs for the TSR2. stores to be carried but these weapons Grand Slam, designed by BAC’s The fi rst was outlined in DH report were pushing that to the limit. The Bristol Division. This was not the RG17, which described a missile that unmodifi ed W140 could be carried 22,000lb earthquake bomb, but a 20ft- weighed 4,600lb, was 19ft long and ventrally, but the X12 had to be long, 7,500lb rocket-powered bomb. had a diameter of 28in. It stated that mounted, inverted and canted, on the Released in a loft manoeuvre, Grand a low-altitude launch would give the inner wing pylons. Slam was boosted to around 70,000ft RG17 a range of 120nm, or 200nm The main effort went into a weapon by a modifi ed Stonechat rocket motor using in a loft manoeuvre. As with that WRD had intended for the TSR2 from the Falstaff research rocket, Skybolt, inertial guidance would be from the start: W170. During the which would then separate, allowing used with the short fl ight time having original work on a weapon for OR339/ the RV to coast up to an apogee of minimal effect on the accuracy. de OR343, WRD asked the Admiralty almost 200,000ft. During this climb Havilland also proposed Hatchet, a about a stand-off weapon for the Fleet and subsequent re-entry, the RV would smaller unguided ALBM fi tted with Air Arm’s Buccaneers and had taken have dispensed decoys to counter a WE177 warhead and a Foxhound a Blue Steel fuselage shortened by Soviet defences before detonating its rocket motor from the Seaslug SAM 10ft and fi tted it with a Bristol BT-3 megaton warhead as an air-burst. RIGHT PAGE: to give a range of 55nm. Thor ramjet to produce the Z126. This The fact that the TSR2 was Even before the Avro at Woodford had been proved too long for the Buccaneer, designed as a weapons system means ‘gap-fi ller’ fl ap, ordered to concentrate on bringing so a further 5ft was removed from the TSR2 formed it cannot be discussed in isolation. The the basis of many the Blue Steel stand-off weapon into the airframe and an updated ramjet, weapons intended for it were many design studies RAF service, but when the call came BS1014, integrated into the rear and varied, and that variety increased by weapons from Whitehall it was ready. In fact, fuselage to produce the W170A for in the three-year period between the developers. its WRD had designed a stand-off both the TSR2 and Buccaneer. scrapping of Skybolt in late 1962 and The need for a weapon for Avro’s proposal for OR339 Meanwhile at Stevenage, BAC had the cancellation of the aircraft itself deterrent system in 1958 in the form of the Z34, based been working on a surface-to-surface in the pre-Polaris in April 1965. Two weapons emerged era saw numerous on a winged Red Beard with a rocket missile called Blue Water, but this from this effort and entered service. missiles being motor. Interestingly, the Air Staff had been cancelled in August 1962. Neither the WE177 nor the proposed for the had dismissed stand-off weapons for Six months later, it dusted off earlier AJ168 Martel was ever used aircraft. CHRIS GIBSON OR339/OR343 on the basis that the plans for an air-launched version and in anger by the RAF.

XVI TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 Even before the ‘gap- ller’ ap, the TSR2 formed the basis of many design studies by weapons developers. The need for a deterrent system in the pre-Polaris era saw many missiles being proposed for the aircraft. CHRIS GIBSON

Avro Z122 Compact Blue Steel

Avro W130

Bristol Strike Missile

BAC Air-Launched Blue Water (one round plus slipper tanks)

BAC Air-Launched Blue Water (two rounds plus ventral tank)

0 Feet 10

0 Metres 3

BAC Grand Slam I (plus slipper tanks)

Avro W140 (plus slipper tanks)

BAC ASM based on Blue Water components

Bristol X12 modified for TSR2

BAC Air-Launched Ballistic Missile

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XVII THE REPLACEMENTS AFTER the EAGLE

The machinations over replacing the cancelled TSR2 turned into a saga in t low-level strike aircraft rather by default, but — via the F-111K and a host of ot

ABOVE: “Unless we abandon almost all our the ‘big three’ — TSR2, P1154 and cheaper than the TSR2. Perhaps TSR2 — or Eagle current commitments outside Europe HS681 — Defence Secretary Denis a wider, less partisan look at the — XS944 in the we shall need an aircraft of the TSR2/ Healey hot-footed it to Washington alternatives, and successors, is required. markings of No F-111A class for the strike/reconnaissance to buy their American equivalents or 237 Operational THE F-111… AND ITS Conversion Unit, role in the 1970s and no alternative substitutes in the form of the F-111, earmarked as the aircraft will suffi ce.” F-4 and C-130 at the expense of PECULIARITIES OCU for the type. It fantastic British aircraft. But is this Denis Healey, 31 March 1965 went on to fulfi l that view realistic? The British types were The United Kingdom had a long role for the RAF’s challenging designs, with the HS681 relationship with the General Buccaneers. CHRIS SANDHAM-BAILEY he British aviation enthusiast tactical transport possibly the most Dynamics F-111, one that ended with suffers a strange affl iction: challenging of all. A retired Hawker the departure of the last US Air Force BELOW: TSR2. Put two of them Siddeley engineer has described an F-111E from RAF Upper Heyford F-111K — or in a room and eventually audible sigh of relief in the plant in December 1993. It started with a Merlin — XV884 Tthey will discuss the subject: why when the HS681’s cancellation was rather intriguing visit in December in No 12 Squadron its cancellation was a mistake, what announced. The F-4K Phantom was 1964 to GD’s Fort Worth, Texas, colours. This serial was allocated to a wonderful aircraft it was, why already on order for the Royal Navy plant by a 20-strong RAF technical the fi rst production Wilson, Callaghan and Healey and the C-130 Hercules — well, team headed by the Deputy Chief of example. — especially Healey — should be that was on its way to becoming the Air Staff (DCAS), Air Marshal CHRIS SANDHAM-BAILEY denounced as enemies of the people, the standard tactical transport of Sir Christopher Hartley. The purpose or at least the aviation industry, and the western world. The F-111, on was to investigate the possibility of what a waste it all was. the other hand, was an unknown making the F-111 a joint US/UK The received wisdom has been that quantity that was touted as a swing- project. This visit caused a buzz at in early 1965, in the wake of cancelling wing ‘wonder-plane’ but much, much GD. It was the earliest indication that

XVIII TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 the EAGLE

led TSR2 turned into a saga in themselves. In the Buccaneer, the RAF ended up with a splendid he F-111K and a host of other contenders — it took a long time to get there WORDS: CHRIS GIBSON

British government enthusiasm for the TSR2 was on the wane and that A General Dynamics artwork showing the there might be a possibility of selling F-111K in RAF service. The odd colour the F-111 to the British. scheme may be an attempt to replicate the ‘shit ’n custard’ (dark earth/light stone) The following April, Denis Healey schemes used on RAF aircraft ‘east of Suez’. announced that the TSR2 would be GENERAL DYNAMICS VIA JOE CHERRIE cancelled and that an option had been taken on 10 F-111As, to be procured at a considerable cost saving, quoted as being around half that of the TSR2. The Air Staff Requirement for TSR2, ASR343 issue 2, was effectively rewritten around the F-111A as issue 3 and by June 1965 Minister of Aviation Roy Jenkins headed for Fort Worth with a four-man team. Jenkins informed the Americans that, “Britain’s chances of buying F-111s would be better if we could sell some British- made products”. He was hoping to sell ejection seats and “weapon systems” to the US aerospace industry in what are now called offsets.

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XIX THE REPLACEMENTS

F-111K PECULIAR COMPONENTS

ABOVE: The British government signed for which of the ‘peculiar’ components thanks to components from Strategic Based on the fi rst 10 F-111As in March 1966, could be built in the UK. September Air Command’s FB-111A and the F-111A, with the intention of taking another 1966 saw the F-111K receive the go- incorporating British-furnished the F-111K’s ‘peculiarities’, 40 if authorised by 1 April 1967. By ahead for production, but then came equipment (BFE). Two variants were shown in blue, June 1966 the designation F-111K the ‘peculiarities’. envisioned: strike/reconnaissance, of included the was being used in correspondence The F-111K was to be the which 40 were to be procured, and undercarriage and representatives of the Ministry F-111A, as projected for the USAF’s trainer/strike, comprising the balance. from the FB-111A, of Aviation and British aviation Tactical Air Command, modifi ed The fi rst two F-111Ks off the line a new forward companies were in discussions about to operate at higher gross weight were to be examples of each, UK1 equipment bay with a strike/recon aircraft and UK2 a in-fl ight refuelling probe, a removable trainer/strike jet. UK1 was to be used reconnaissance for airframe and weapons separation pallet in the testing while UK2 was to be an weapons bay and avionics testbed. a centreline pylon As for the peculiarities — described extending from the weapons bay. by GD as confi guration departures — GENERAL DYNAMICS VIA of the F-111K, the main change was JOE CHERRIE the incorporation of the FB-111A’s main and nose landing gear for the RIGHT: higher gross weight, eight wing pylons The two F-111Ks (with the inboard pairs pivoting) and under construction at the time of the a BFE reconnaissance pallet for the order’s cancellation weapons bay, which could be fi tted in January 1968 with a centreline pylon. Many of the comprised one changes were forward of the cockpit, trainer and one the radome being based on that fi tted strike version. to the F-111D and FB-111A plus GENERAL DYNAMICS VIA JOE CHERRIE a new forward equipment bay. This housed a retractable in-fl ight refuelling

XX TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 probe on the upper centreline and a trio of F95 cameras, one vertical and two oblique, in its lower section. One of the more detailed peculiarities was the modification of the weapons bay doors on the strike/ recon variant to allow a centreline pylon to be fitted. The pylon, designed by GD’s Convair Division, was to be mounted on four tubular supports that formed a truss to place the top of the pylon flush with the inboard bay doors that were to have cut-outs to seal around the pylon. This new pylon was to carry the datalink pod for the AJ168 TV Martel, the F-111K’s weapon for its main role of long-range anti-shipping strikes east of Suez. The underwing pylons, four pivoting and four fixed, were to be fitted with British ERU115 ejector release units. The four inboard pylons could carry the same 600-US gallon (2,271-litre) fuel tanks earmarked for the FB-111 as well as British weapons such as the AJ168 Martel. Another ‘configuration departure’ from the F-111A was the proposal to fit the strike/recon variant with the night illumination system from the proposed RF-111A, installed on the centreline aft of the main undercarriage bay. The USAF tested the sole RF-111A during 1968 before Oddly enough, the British Air Staff had been involved in giving up on the project as being just the RAAF process and advised that it should opt for the TFX too complicated. as early as September 1963! The RAAF was impressed with

Some sources have stated that the the TSR2, but was unimpressed with the cost F-111K was to use the longer wings of the FB-111A, but in fact it was to that has prevailed until recent times. had advised that the RAAF should ABOVE: employ the standard F-111A wing. Another air force had a similar opt for the TFX as early as September F-111C A8-127 This may be derived from the Royal requirement to ASR343, in other 1963! The RAAF was impressed with carrying 24 Mk82 bombs. There is an Australian Air Force’s F-111Cs being words intervention east of Suez from the TSR2, considering it the most irony in the British fitted with the longer wing, but there mounting bases around the Indian capable aircraft available for its needs, Air Staff having was an option to fit extended ferry Ocean, and the Royal Australian but it was unimpressed with the cost, recommended the tips to the F-111A’s wings, increasing Air Force also required a Canberra stating that it was the same price as type to the RAAF the unswept span from 63ft (19.2m) replacement. The RAAF’s needs a Boeing 707 airliner and that not before the TSR2 to 70ft (21.3m). Another possibility were defined by requirement AIR 36, everyone felt a light tactical bomber was cancelled. is that, on cancellation of the British and it was involved with the TSR2 was “worth this kind of money”. Costs RAAF order, the UK1 and UK2 airframes in more than mere observer status being quoted in Australian archives were used to produce FB-111As, or Mountbatten’s famous five-card show that for 24 aircraft the TSR2 suggesting some commonality with trick. The Indonesian confrontation cost almost twice the TFX, A£110 the FB-111A. of 1961-66 was under way during the million and A£60 million respectively. The F-111K as the replacement for AIR 36 selection process, providing Another factor was time, as the the TSR2, and its subsequent demise, it with an element of urgency as RAAF wanted the Canberra replaced is rarely discussed or examined. Of Australia’s requirement was driven by as soon as possible. Therefore, it opted course, the ultimate replacement was a need to counter Tupolev Tu-16KS-1 for the RA-5C, which was, in the the Panavia Tornado, but that process ‘Badger-Bs’. These posed a threat as words of the Australian evaluation took many years. By the time it they were armed with AS-1 ‘Kennel’ team, “the quickest and most effective entered service in 1981, the surviving stand-off missiles and had entered means of providing the RAAF with TSR2s had become well-established service in 1961. a strike/reconnaissance force”. The museum pieces, monuments to the The RAAF’s selection process for Vigilante came at the bargain price, pinnacle of valve technology and a Canberra replacement included the when compared with the TSR2, of venerated by the faithful. TSR2, TFX (F-111), Mirage IV, RA- A£88 million. Perhaps the story of the TSR2’s 5C Vigilante and F-4C. Its preferred The Australian government thought follow-on can be enhanced by casting choice was the Vigilante. Oddly otherwise, preferring the TFX. To the net wider than the narrow UK- enough, the British Air Staff had been support this, it stated that to use an oriented — blinkered, even — view involved in the RAAF process and aircraft as expensive as the TSR2 to

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XXI THE REPLACEMENTS

deliver high explosive was folly. In fact, If the RAAF’s road to meeting its terrain avoidance. Through its deputy treasury secretary C. L. Hewitt AIR36 requirement was convoluted, advanced bombing modes it “would said, “If defence is being planned in the British experience was ostensibly give the RAF early and realistic terms of non-nuclear war, then TSR2 quite clean-cut. Realistically the F-111 experience for TSR2 crews”, with is very much too expensive to think was the only game in town when it the bonus that it could be fi tted of using in conjunction with high came to meeting ASR343 issue 3. with TSR2 sub-systems. The ‘Thud’ explosive.” Healey’s order for the replacements for could also provide groundcrews with As for the RA-5C, E. J. Bunting, the ‘big three’, including the F-111, training in the “handling of integrated secretary of the Prime Minister’s suggests it was a foregone conclusion weapons systems.” offi ce, described it as coming a “long that the F-111 would be bought, Sir Theo, or rather Republic, may way third to the TFX and TSR2” and but that was not necessarily the case. not have been too wide of the mark as that the Australian Air Department Alternatives, some more plausible than a pair of British types were earmarked “have been led up the fi nancial path others, were available. as TSR2 trainers: the BAC Lightning by US fi nancial interests”. Bunting for pilots and the two-seat Hawker also pointed out that the Vigilante F-105F THUNDERCHIEF Hunter (or the putative Folland Gnat would require in-fl ight refuelling and, T2) for navigators. The F-105F could if tanker aircraft were factored in, The ‘Thud’ might be unfamiliar have provided pilot and navigator that would mean a 25 per cent cost in the TSR2 saga. In reality, it training in a single platform. increase, making the TSR2 look “not wasn’t exactly a direct replacement, so much more expensive”. Hewitt but it provides an interesting WARTON’S P28 stated that there was little point in example of the machinations of opting for an aircraft that neither the the British government. Republic’s No Canberra could ever be described RAF nor the USAF — alongside two-seat F-105F was suggested as the poor man’s version of anything, whom the RAAF would no doubt be by Conservative MP Sir Theo but perhaps the Warton plant’s P28 operating in a war — had any interest Constantine on 1 April 1964 as a comes closest to the poor man’s TSR2. in. The Vigilante would need to be possible TSR2 trainer, what would be The P28 dated back to the OR339 fi tted with low-pressure tyres, anti- the mid-sixties equivalent of a LIFT period around 1958. In the fall-out lock brakes and a braking parachute (lead-in fi ghter trainer) for strike from the TSR2’s cancellation in 1965, to allow it to operate from airfi elds in aircraft. The Thunderchief would it was briefl y resurrected as a Canberra Australia and south-east Asia. have been fi tted with TSR2 systems B2 re-engined with Speys. The most That is how the RAAF came to and, in the light of a series of studies, obvious change was to the wings, with have a fl eet of F-111s. As the F-111C, the Olympus BOl 21 engine. 6ft (1.8m) clipped from each. They RF-111C and F-111G, the type were given powered ailerons and new served Australia well, despite delays, 500-gallon (2,273-litre) fi xed tip tanks BELOW: from 1973 until 2010. The RAAF (or As a trainer, according to that replaced the 122-gallon (555-litre) The third production rather, the Australian government) Constantine who was parroting a drop tanks. The engine nacelles would F-105F, serial had also opted for the F-111 on cost Republic sales representative, the be redesigned to take the larger Rolls- 62-4414. The two- grounds long before the TSR2 was F-105F could “provide the most Royce Spey turbofan, probably the seat Thunderchief was touted as a cancelled. Its experience with the advanced tactical training under all- 201 as used on the F-4K. The forward possible TSR2 lead- F-111 could serve as an example of weather conditions”. The F-105F was fuselage was based on the Canberra in trainer. what may have happened with the fully combat-capable and possessed PR9’s fi ghter-style cockpit, but with a USAF RAF had the F-111K continued. high performance at sea level with terrain-following radar in the nose. At the rear the tailplanes were from the PR9 with an extended tailcone fi tted. MIRAGE IVO AND IVS

While not quite in the same class as the TSR2 or F-111, the Dassault Mirage IV fi gures in the RAF and RAAF’s procurement process, although the British took the Mirage IV further than the Australians. The Mirage IVA was designed from the start to carry the AN-11 and AN-22 nuclear weapons for France’s Force de Frappe in the deterrent role. The prototype made its fi rst fl ight on 17 June 1959 and the type entered service with the Armée de l’Air in October 1964. It remained in use until its deterrent role (as the Mirage IVP with the ASMP missile) was taken on by the Mirage 2000N in 1996, the reconnaissance Mirage IVP being retired in 2005. The Mirage IV toted its payload, nuclear weapons or the CT-52 reconnaissance pack, in

XXII TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 BAC would have replaced the Mirage IV’s Atar turbojets with the Rolls-Royce Spey turbofan; the differences can be seen in this drawing. CHRIS GIBSON

MIRAGE IVA (ATAR)

0 Feet 10

0 Metres 3

MIRAGE IVS (SPEY)

RIGHT: This interesting diagram shows radius of action fi gures for the TSR2 alternatives, based on data in the Australian archives. The Australian selection process is of interest because the RAAF and RAF envisioned similar operational roles for their Canberra replacement — long-range strike in the Far East. Without that role, neither the TSR2 nor the F-111K was required. CHRIS GIBSON a ventral recess but could also carry bombs on wing pylons in lieu of drop tanks and electronic warfare pods, although this was a rarity. The Mirage IVO had been proposed to the RAAF as a Canberra replacement, but the RAAF was never convinced by it, stating that it lacked range and was a “more old-fashioned type of aircraft that merely fl ies rather fast into the waiting anti-aircraft missiles”. In the Mirage’s defence, the RAAF studies and analysis pre-date With the exception of the Buccaneer, radius of action fi gures those conducted by the RAF and the are from RAAF Report of the Evaluation Team, August 1963 Armée de l’Air. It was to be fi tted with a Cyrano II radar in the nose, the

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XXIII THE REPLACEMENTS

modifi cations to suit. Systems were to be based on those used on the Hawker P1154 V/STOL fi ghter, plus the Antilope terrain-following radar rather than the Ferranti equivalent developed for the TSR2, no doubt installed as per the Mirage IVO. As far as the Australians were concerned, what had put them off the Mirage IV was its lack of range, poor low-level performance and the need to improve the region’s airfi elds to cater for the aircraft’s less-than- ideal take-off performance. By the time the Mirage IV was being proposed by Dassault and BAC to replace the TSR2, these were being addressed by the substitution of the SNECMA Atar engines for Rolls- Royce Speys.

The Atar 09K, rated at 11,000/15,960lbf (the second fi gure is with reheat) would be replaced with the Spey, rated at 12,250/20,500lbf. A 2ft (0.6m) fuselage extension and modifi ed intakes were required to handle the almost 30 per cent increase in mass fl ow of the Spey turbofan. The fuselage stretch would allow more fuel to be carried but still not enough to meet the 1,000nm (1,852km) range requirement of ASR343. Of course, the Mirage IV had been ABOVE: refuelling probe being relocated to Variously described as the Mirage designed from scratch as a high- BAC pushed hard forward of the cockpit. IVK (no evidence has been found altitude supersonic bomber rather for the Dassault Dassault and BAC’s proposals of this designation in offi cial use), than as a low-altitude strike aircraft. Mirage IV — this is for a Spey-powered variant of the Mirage IVS (for Spey) or Mirage IV*, The ride at low level would be bumpy, an early IVA version — as an alternative Mirage IV in the aftermath of the France’s big delta was to be modifi ed but in tests conducted during 1963, to the F-111K after TSR2’s cancellation have been for British use in the usual style the French aircraft’s performance in cancellation of the described as a ‘spoiler’ to prevent the — fi tting British engines, weapons the low-altitude environment proved TSR2. KEY COLLECTION UK buying the F-111 for the RAF. and systems — with airframe better than expected.

NAMING THE F-111K on these shores in the mid-sixties, this very apt name meant nothing to the British, but the British suggestion meant an awful ne interesting aspect of the TSR2/F-111K story is the lot to the Australians. background to the RAF service names of these The RAF had policies for naming aircraft. Despite its ‘F for Oaircraft. The name Eagle has been widely accepted fi ghter’ USAF designation, the F-111K was a bomber and as the name to be applied to the BAC type, but what therefore should have been named after a British or about the General Dynamics jet? The intention was for the RAF, Commonwealth inland town. Richmond was duly selected. The RAAF and USAF to adopt the same name for the F-111, but the RAF’s case was that it was common to towns in all three USAF was not interested in naming the type — the Aardvark countries, so an ideal name as far as it was concerned. Again, moniker, so long a nickname, was only applied offi cially upon its the USAF showed little interest, but the Australian Air Staff was retirement by the USAF — while the RAAF’s suggestions made aghast at the suggestion. Australia, it explained, had a game little sense to the RAF. The UK Air Staff opined that since they called Australian Rules Football with a team called Richmond had called the Canberra after the Australian capital it would be and it had a “strong and partisan” supporter base, as did its a case of quid pro quo if the F-111 were named London, while sporting rivals. So, Richmond was off the list. there was a town called London near Dayton, Ohio, home to After much to and fro the British Air Staff eventually decided the USAF’s Wright-Patterson AFB. to continue the avian theme and that Merlin was a fi ne name for The RAAF’s suggestions included names in the many the F-111K. Aside from the irony that the merlin is the smallest aboriginal languages of Australia, but it fi nally opted for Taipan, of the falcon family, it was deemed ideal as the RAAF would referring to the particularly fearsome — and venomous — think it was named after the Rolls-Royce engine. In the end the Inland Taipan snake. With little knowledge of Australian wildlife RAAF didn’t name its F-111Cs, unless you count ‘Pig’.

XXIV TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 SUCCESSORS AND ALTERNATIVES

Shown here are the various alternatives, successors and proposals to follow the cancelled BAC TSR2. These include types considered by the RAF and the RAAF. The ultimate alternative for the RAF was the Buccaneer S2B, the ultimate successor the Tornado GR1/GR4. Of note is the size of the TSR2 in comparison with the other types, especially the F-111K and Tornado. This may allude to the size of the electronics required to provide the specifi ed capability. A revolution writ large in airframe size.

Top to bottom: BAC TSR2 General Dynamics F-111K Dassault/BAC Mirage IVO (Provisional) North American RA-5C Vigilante Blackburn Buccaneer S2B McDonnell Douglas F-4C Phantom Blackburn P150 BAC P28 Phase 3 Panavia Tornado GR4

0 Feet 10

0 Metres 3

AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018 TSR2 SUPPLEMENT XXV THE REPLACEMENTS

Brough’s proposals found favour until the Treasury strong-armed the RAF to accept the Buccaneer S2. One intriguing question arising from the Buccaneer’s adoption in lieu of the F-111K refers to Sir Theo Constantine and his F-105F. Might it have made the grade? Despite the Air Staff ’s misgivings, the Buccaneer proved ideal for the strike role in the north-west European theatre and even ventured into the TSR2’s putative stamping ground during the 1991 Gulf War. All this work on replacing the TSR2 ABOVE: BUCCANEER although none of these came to was fruitless. As its role had all but Buccaneers of No fruition, possibly due to Air Staff bias disappeared by late 1967 there was no 208 Squadron, Mountbatten’s ‘bird’ took the place against the original naval Buccaneer. need for the TSR2, the F-111K or a RAF, fl ying over of the cancelled TSR2 and F-111K The P145 built on the experience direct replacement. The commitment Egypt during a detachment mainly because it could conduct the with the Buccaneer S2B but had a to east of Suez had been scrapped. to Cyprus. The western Europe/north-east Atlantic- new radar and a bogie undercarriage, Western Europe and the north-east type proved an focused roles that the UK’s new combined with rocket boosters, that Atlantic was the RAF Buccaneer’s outstanding servant NATO-oriented defence posture allowed operation at higher all-up operational area for much of the Cold to the air force. demanded. It was also available for the weights. Blackburn’s P149 added War. Inadvertently successful or ideal KEY COLLECTION RAF as the carrier force wound down, a Q-band ground-mapping radar, from the start? The Buccaneer is yet with the Fleet Air Arm’s force of Ferranti’s FLR (forward-looking radar) another question that can be debated Spey-engined Buccaneer S2As being and an RB162 turbofan that replaced at length, but until the Tornado transferred to the RAF and additional the rockets in the rear fuselage. The arrived in the eighties, it was new-build S2Bs being acquired for the P150 that followed, also known as the the ideal alternative. RAF in Germany to meet ASR391. Buccaneer 2**, was a supersonic variant While the Buccaneer S2A and S2B of the Buccaneer with a new thinner ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: provided the strike capability, Hawker wing, stretched fuselage and reheated The author thanks Damien Burke, Siddeley produced several design Speys combined with new nav/ Tony Buttler and Joe Cherrie for studies aimed at the roles intended attack systems. As alternatives to the their help in the preparation of for the cancelled TSR2 and F-111K, cancelled TSR2 and F-111K, none of this article.

AST355: BIRTH OF A SUPER TSR2? s ever, as soon as an aircraft was under development to were satellite communications and data distribution, no doubt to meet an Air Staff Requirement, its replacement was exploit new sensors such as reconnaissance radars, infra-red already being examined. This was the case with the line-scan and high-resolution cameras. TSR2/F-111K that were under development to meet Having read the Air Staff’s wish list, the impression gained is ASR343A (issues 2 and 3 respectively). In mid-1961 a draft Air Staff that AST355 would have been very ambitious and repeated the Target, AST354, was being discussed for a follow-on to TSR2. To perceived mistakes made with the TSR2. This was not the case, as avoid confusion with AST345, for what became the Harrier, the AST355 was sent back to the drafting team with the advice that it designation was changed to AST355. lacked ambition. The Air Ministry’s assistant scientifi c advisor The basic premise of the staff target was that the resulting (operations), J. E. Henderson, went as far as stating, “We must aircraft, and one aircraft it would be, should be multi-role and make a bold and major step forward, instead of asking for the capable of application to a range of roles including nuclear strike, marginal increases in speed and altitude of this AST”. In similar battlefi eld interdiction, suppression of enemy defences and vein, Air Cdre I. G. Esplin, director, operational requirements (air), ‘destroyer’ in the air defence role — air-to-air operations against wrote in AST355, “we had set our sights too low.” enemy aircraft. Effectively, it meant a Super TSR2. Or perhaps the What Henderson and Esplin wanted was higher and faster — Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA). 150,000ft and Mach 3.5 — and, as the DCAS had said, to forget AST355 also suggested that the low/fast fl ight regime might about the carriers and mounting bases. On the offensive side, be too vulnerable to improved air defences, so a high/fast new weapons were required such as stand-off missiles but the regime, 70,000ft and Mach 2.5, might be more apt. However, “newly discovered ‘Laser’ techniques should be carefully the type should also be capable of high-speed automatic examined”, especially for illuminating and the destruction of terrain-following fl ight and have STOL (short take-off and materials. The 16,000lb (7,257kg) weapons load should be mainly landing) performance! In addition, some form of compatibility air-to-surface guided weapons rather than bombs for the strike with the Royal Navy was required although the DCAS, Air role or air-to-air guided weapons in the destroyer role. Marshal Sir Ronald Beresford Lees, saw little future for the This perceived lack of ambition prompted the withdrawal of carrier force. AST355 in December 1962 and the drafting of a new, As with all staff targets, AST355 was a wish-list for the future, unnumbered, AST incorporating the higher performance fi gures used to identify areas for research. Among the items on that list and new technology outlined by Henderson and Esplin.

XXVI TSR2 SUPPLEMENT AEROPLANE SEPTEMBER 2018