TSR.2 Memories project

Ghost thread bump…..   what ever became of Steve Broadbent and his website please ?

XR219 First Flight

In sorting through, I’ve found another picture which may be of interest. It is a Reuters press photograph of the first flight of XR219 on 27th September 1964.

The Replacement – F1-11

Another picture which may be of interest.
A UPI Telephoto US press photograph, following the UK order for 50 F1-11 aircraft.

I suspect these were taken at BA Taylors yard at West Bromwich, after the sections had been moved from Coleys at Hounslow.
There is a more famous picture of sections lying at Taylors yard and the topography matches these better than the Hounslow site.
Nice collection of pictures, certainly ones I’ve never seen before.

I hadn’t realised so much material still existed and went to Taylors at West Bromwich, I understood there were only a couple of rear fuselage sections which made their way there.
You’re right, there is a picture from Air Pictorial taken in 1973/4 by Elfan Ap Rees at Taylors Yard of the rear section of XR226.
Thanks for your thoughts Mark.

I suspect these were taken at BA Taylors yard at West Bromwich, after the sections had been moved from Coleys at Hounslow.
There is a more famous picture of sections lying at Taylors yard and the topography matches these better than the Hounslow site.
Nice collection of pictures, certainly ones I’ve never seen before.

Its sad to see any aircraft dismembered like that but especially one that never got to flourish or develop its potential

Prototype & Pre-Production Sections in the Scrapyard

Thought these may be of interest or at least provoke some discussion?
I recently acquired these images, which were listed as being taken at Foulness Island in 1964, which obviously wasn’t possible, but they certainly are TSR2 fuselage sections.

They are taken in a scrapyard. I’m guessing RJ Coley’s, Hounslow, some time between September 1965 and when it was cleared in 1972 (after this, these sections moved on elsewhere) – any thoughts.

I’ve studied them carefully and compared them with other pictures I have seen of the fuselage sections after cancellation and the superb pictures Richard Hitchins has already provided and come up with the following serial and probable serial numbers of the sections.

XR22- Rear Fuselage sections
XR225 + XR22- Cockpits
XR225+7+ ?
XS— Rear Fuselage sections
Unknown fuselage nose sections – don’t look like TSR2 – anythoughts?

Stationed at Boscombe Down in the mid 60’s I well remember the noise when the TSR was undergoing trials. Handling Squadron’s Whirlwind was usually towed out and serviced on the grass about half a mile or less from where this manificent beast was being ground run. The sliding side windows on the whirlwind would vibrate madly in their channels and the resonance would almost hurt the ears. I seem to vaguely remember a memo advising people to wear ear defenders. Most certainly the TSR testing crew did. It was rumoured that the inch thick windscreen cracked on occasion due to resonance…anyone confirm this…?
What an exciting place Boscombe was, and no doubt still is. The only drawback, no photography was allowed.

I can confirm the noise aspect, I was indoors in Blackpool and ran outside (keen spotter) to see what the noise was from,TSR2 and Lightning overhead,cant say the date because my logs are stored in a box..somewhere.

Has some on youtube and sure there is more if you search around.

In almost every book or magazine on the subject of the TSR-2 mention is made of the characteristic sound of the TSR-2 both its volume and intensity.
Does anyone know if any sound track has been kept safe over the years?
Thanks for your time and trouble,
Be lucky
David

As far as I remember there were 10 airframes under construction, (plus 3 test front fuselages) & No 5 (XR223 ?) was to be fully instrumented & to have all of the Nav & armament systems installed – so there was a lot of additional orange wiring going in. I can only report up to Jan 64, so do not know after that for sure.
Keith

does anyone out there have any photographs of XR221 (or indeed XR222) apart from during assembly? both aircraft were out of the jigs at cancellation, indeed according to the files XR221 was virtually a completed airframe awaiting checkout ???
‘XR222’ as delivered to Cranfield was pretty much a hybrid of a number of airframes, the main wings being definately XR222, the tips reportedly XR227? and the fuselage ? possibly that of the final test specimen? (the rear fuselage being unmarked is an interesting anomaly as there are photos in the files of the rear fuselage units painted and marked at the factory up to XS660 so XR222 should have borne its serial too!)
i have been looking for any confirmed images for over 15 years now in various archives, they definately seem to have been ‘weeded’ ? hoping someone on here may come up with something ?

cheers, Joe

Suppose it’s a question of what one describes as “completed”…

XR219 was obviously completed to flight standard and XR220 was finally ready for flight on the day that the project was officially cancelled. XR221 was also complete but used for ground-running of systems so technically-speaking it wasn’t yet completed to flight standard. Beyond that it’s less clear. Images of XR222 at Cranfield show the aircraft as more of a semi-complete shell and it is known that some parts were taken from other airframes (didn’t even have a serial applied), so it seems fair to assume that it was assembled specifically for Cranfield from existing components. So I guess one could say that the only “complete” airframes were XR219, XR220 and XR221.

I always understood that only XR219 and XR220 were completed but where I got that impression from now I’ve no idea.

As far as I can determine, neither aircraft was completed. XR222 seems to have been little more than a shell with parts from various airframes which suggests that it was assembled to its final state after cancellation, for Cranfield.

Wow, it does seem an age since I started this thread, and my site expanded far more than I could have imagined, thanks to anyone on here, including Dev One, who has sent stuff.

Glad to see the Ian Allan book is out, must find a copy, I was offered it first off, but it would have been beyond me, glad something came of the idea.

I wonder if a photo of 222 or 223, complete and at Weybridge, will ever turn up!

Steve

It rather depends what you mean by “great aircraft” I suppose. As you say, the aircraft’s systems weren’t spectacular. They were good for 1965 but distinctly low-tech by later standards, and the TSR2’s systems were certainly ambitious – maybe unrealistically so. I don’t doubt for a minute that getting the aircraft’s “kit” up to a good standard for service use would probably have been the project’s biggest problem – but we never got to that stage.

But as an actual aircraft it was outstanding, there’s no doubt about that. It’s the stuff inside the aircraft that might have been the difficulty.

Spanner in the Works

just to be awkward! – My own view is TSR-2 would not perhaps been the great aircraft everyone thinks it would have. When you look at some of the Kit that was in the TSR-2 INS/Navwass SLAR…a lot of it went into later aircraft FGR2/Jaguar. Certainly the INAS in the FGR2 ( not fitted to FG1) was pretty hopeless – nothing like modern GPS. I think the truth would have been the TSR would have been with A+AEE around 1970 probably OCU early mid 1970s first Squadrons 1972 ish. I reckon it would have become “Good” about 1980. given a 20-25 year life it might just have made Gulf War1 and would probably have been very very good by then. With a bit of hindesight this would have been its last push then taken out of service mid 1990’s. – who knows it may even have made a strike on Port Stanley!! Food for thought!!

Yep, maybe you misunderstood what I said. That’s the point – Tornado wouldn’t have happened if TSR2 had survived.

As for names, well yes you’re quite right, the term TSR2 was little more than slang in effect but it eventually became adopted as an easy all-embracing name for the aircraft and project, even though the actual aeroplane was the Vicker-Supermarine Type 571. The “T” stood for “Tactical”. The term “TSR” came from Julian Amery, although when he first used it he even managed to mis-quote his own department’s slang, substituting the term “Support” for “Strike” by mistake. The “2” is an even bigger mystery. Some have suggested it was because in some departments the Canberra had been regarded as “TSR1” but I think this is a specious theory. It probably simply referred to the projected Mach 2 performance of the aircraft.

Names? Well anybody’s guess. Various names have been thrown around but no names were ever suggested or adopted. Maybe the only possible straw to clutch at is the name “Merlin” which would probably have been applied to the F-111K. The name “Eagle” keeps getting thrown about but it’s just one of many that have been mentioned (“Claymore” was another). I suppose it’s more likely than an alliterative name to suit Vickers might actually have been chosen, given the way that Vickers (within BAC) were at the time.