The TSR2 Resurrection Project?

It’s come up in a lot of the threads on the forum but without much detail. Wickipedia mentions it, but as per many with scant detail.

It was the free spending (defense wise) Thatcher governement that was said to have looked into it, but it was short lived with the jigs having been scrapped etc.

Around the same time, the US looked (in brief) at taking the B-58’s out of mothballs and putting them back into service.

As far as I can recall, there was an article in an aviation magazine which explained the saga, but I can’t remember which magazine or when. I can’t recall there being any further detail. It is very interesting if not a little absurd!

This wouldn’t be the article by Graham Wilmer which according to the Frank Barnett-Jones book, appeared in Air Pictorial? No firm date mentioned other than 1981… maybe a lead?

Cheers
Peter D Evans
LEMB Administrator

…and with the help of good’ol Google…

Air Pictorial Magazine – September 1981 issue
“Rebuilding the TSR 2”
http://www.payhost.net/aviation/acatalog/Air_Pic_September_1981.html

…and this detailed list of books/articles may prove of use too…

Cheers
Peter D Evans
LEMB Administrator

:diablo: Certainly not this one …. http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1513373&postcount=25

This is the article, makes interesting reading.

Never could throw them old mags out.:D

Around the same time, the US looked (in brief) at taking the B-58’s out of mothballs and putting them back into service.

In 1981 the B58’s were ingots. Most were melted in 1977/78

Many thanks indeed for the scans Bruggen 130… 🙂

Cheers
Peter D Evans
LEMB Administrator

In 1981 the B58’s were ingots. Most were melted in 1977/78

no clues here, I was just quoting from the International Air Power Review chapter on the B-58, there was a small picture of the B-58 in Vietnam colours as well followng suggestions that it be deployed.

the 1980 story says that the newly elected Regan administration were keen to get them back in but were unware of the extent of the scrapping, 7 exist still now (I assume that these were the only 7 in 1980 as well)

never let the truth get in the way of a good story !!!

remarkable article there as well, thanks for sharing that – I sense a long TSR-2 thread again !!!

Oh, for goodness sake!
TSR 2 had grown into a monster at the time of its fully justified cancellation.
It was the price of a destroyer and hardly able to be considered as a “Tactical “asset. Guys, it was the length of a Vulcan!
If Labour wouldn’t have cancelled it, the incoming Conservative Government would have had to. It was based on supporting an Empire that had dissolved and was a nonsense in a NATO environment.
There were a lot af sighs of relief all round from many in Industry when the thing was finally put out of its misery.

Yes indeed, thanks very much for finding the article and posting it for us all to read. It’s very interesting, if only to confirm that the story didn’t have much “meat” to it, and that it was merely a rather bizarre enquiry from some slightly crazed member of the “Conservative Aviation Committee” (whatever or whoever that is)!

The article makes brilliant reading though, if only for the hilarity of the muddled (if not plain bonkers) statements made by the author. For example, he seems to have completely failed to realise that the aircraft was already effectively in production (Weybridge were busily churning-out the pre-production batch). He then fails to grasp that the Olympus derivative which was unique to TSR2 would have to be re-developed and tested. Next, he claims that TSR2’s role was (and should still be) “carrying the nuclear deterrent to targets East of Moscow” – really? Then he really drifts-off into fantasy by claiming that TSR2 would make a good interceptor, presumably in preference to the Tornado ADV which was only three years away. The funniest line (and perhaps the most ironic) is where he claims that the US has “nothing in its (TSR2) class” … One assumes that Dennis Healey would disagree?!

Brilliant stuff. He seems to have made the assumption that a bunch of engineers could pop-over to Cosford with a tape measure, run back to Warton and assemble a fleet of TSR2’s over a couple of years. Even more remarkable is that there’s no obvious reason why anyone would want to do it, even if it had been remotely possible.

I’ll certainly make sure that the tale is mentioned in my TSR2 book if only for sheer amusement!

I’ll certainly make sure that the tale is mentioned in my TSR2 book if only for sheer amusement!

I actually found this article quite interesting as well as the development history of the TSR2 and the innovations that made it unique.

The article in question merely expresses a point of view that unfortunately does not contain any cost assessments to backup any claims of probability and coincidentally neither does the critics!!

I personally don’t think that including details of this article ‘for sheer amusement’ in your book is warranted or justified.

If your book is a serious study of the development of the TSR2 and the people associated with it then my advice is stick to the facts.

If the TSR2 hadn’t been cancelled what would the aviation press publish when they were short of Material? Every time a magazine hits a dry spell they trott out the TSR2 story, rehash a few interviews and publish the same old pictures.
My view on the TSR2? It reminds me of the fable “The Kings new clothes”
The Little boy suddenly said “Two Concorde engines. Two tiny wings. Were the hell are they going to put the fuel and the bombs?”

Rgds Cking

It’s come up in a lot of the threads on the forum but without much detail. Wickipedia mentions it, but as per many with scant detail.

It was the free spending (defense wise) Thatcher governement that was said to have looked into it, but it was short lived with the jigs having been scrapped etc.

Around the same time, the US looked (in brief) at taking the B-58’s out of mothballs and putting them back into service.

Presumably, the same free spending (defence wise) Thatcher government that brought about the Falklands confict, thanks to the defence cuts being implemented, and the same Thatcher government that the recent release of cabinet papers etc showed the cuts in public (including defence) spending she was prepared to inflict.

I only raise this because lots of people in this parish seems to think that a change to a Tory government in a few months time is going to be a windfall for defence contractors and the armed services.

History suggests this to be a false hope.

If the TSR2 hadn’t been cancelled what would the aviation press publish when they were short of Material? Every time a magazine hits a dry spell they trott out the TSR2 story, rehash a few interviews and publish the same old pictures.
My view on the TSR2? It reminds me of the fable “The Kings new clothes”
The Little boy suddenly said “Two Concorde engines. Two tiny wings. Were the hell are they going to put the fuel and the bombs?”

Rgds Cking

Hear hear, and I wish we would let the darn thing die in dignity!

Why does this old chestnut keep being roasted? Out of some misdirected desire to hark back to the “what-might-have-been” days? With huge problems yet to overcome and with ever spiralling costs there was only one decision to be made.

As Beamont said it was the fatal combination of a brand new aircraft AND a brand new powerplant. It never had a chance and as for now…………those pigs really are aloft!

I personally don’t think that including details of this article ‘for sheer amusement’ in your book is warranted or justified

I take your point but having read the article, I guess it might be a suitably light-hearted story to include. Patently, it was complete nonsense and the absurd comments made by the article’s author make it even sillier. When I asked about the story, I did think that maybe there was perhaps some vaguely serious issue behind it but on the basis of that article it seems pretty clear that the idea was both stupid and pointless, so the best one could do is have a smile about it! Heaven knows there’s an awful lot in the TSR2 story that makes one want to cry, never mind laugh!

Page – I tend to agree with your comment! In my defence, it was not my suggestion to write another book on the subject but I do hope that I can use this opportunity to present a complete and comprehensive look at the whole story, without the usual myths and emotions. I’d like to simply trace the aircraft’s history and the endless manoeuvrings that surrounded it as honestly as I can, and leave it at that. Far too many books and features have been written by people who clearly have an agenda and they inevitably subscribe to the notion that the RAF was somehow denied a world-beating aircraft thanks to the actions of our politicians. Clearly, it wasn’t like that, and the truth of the matter is that the TSR2 was simply a potentially-great aircraft that was wholly unaffordable. If any blame for the aircraft’s cancellation can be attributed, then it has to be shared between politicians, the manufacturers and even the RAF who all made their own contributions towards the aircraft’s inevitable demise. It’s a sad story but not quite the scandal that many people try to imply.

Why does this old chestnut keep being roasted?

Because this single event did indeed signal the effective end of the British aircraft industry. The many highly able and experienced teams involved in the design of the aircraft scattered all over the world and with them went any chance of another British potential world-class aircraft.

No-one can genuinely understand British aviation without an interest in, and some knowledge of, the TSR2 story. By all means take a view one way or the other but don’t belittle or ignore the significance of it.

Because this single event did indeed signal the effective end of the British aircraft industry. The many highly able and experienced teams involved in the design of the aircraft scattered all over the world and with them went any chance of another British potential world-class aircraft.

No-one can genuinely understand British aviation without an interest in, and some knowledge of, the TSR2 story. By all means take a view one way or the other but don’t belittle or ignore the significance of it.

Sorry, but I was in no way belittling or ignoring the significance and fully agree with you. My point had more to do with the sense that somehow we could re-awaken that period and that project.

It was a moment in history and signifies exactly what you say but we can never go back and millions of words have been written about it and I am not sure how much more can be contributed, however erudite the contributions might be. That was all I meant by “roasting the chestnut”.:)

I think perhaps there’s a plausible case for roasting the chestnut properly, rather than merely toasting it repeatedly on just one side 😉