RAF Grantham / Spittlegate did have a based unit called 3 FTS. But 3 Sqn was never based there. Grantham is in God’s own county of Lincolnshire – I don’t understand the connection with “Northumberland”.

H

So sad. I can’t think of anything to say – that hasn’t already been said here….

RIP Richard.

H

There is an “engine shock load” protocol. However, as the engine had already stopped running it is most likely not required in this case. So, as Prop Strike said (and with a name like that they, should know!!). Fitting a ready-to-go engine would save time – if the engine had to be removed for checks. 

The engine frame and bulkhead, I would suggest, would need inspection – as I said in a previous thread on this incident. Engine removal for access to carry out the two checks seems to me to be a requirement. In other words the engine would have to come out anyway. But refitting the original engine, in this case, is a matter of choice I would suggest.

H

Hi Josh,

I’m a Senior Aerospace Engineering Manager. I think I can help….

Edited by hypersonic….

My original reply Dated: 10 Oct 24 and Timed: 19.22 was an offer of help. I’m afraid that offer has now been rescinded. The job offer that you, Josh, could have been considered for was offered elsewhere, and accepted, at 14.30 today.

Unfortunately, Josh didn’t respond, at all, to my genuine offer of help.  

Post edited: 14 Oct 24 and Timed: 15.20.

H

John,

Just received the latest edition of Aeroplane magazine (Nov 24). Having read the article about your project. I was struck by the decision to give the completed project, when it is completed, the identity of EE944. In particular how, the late sister of the original 944’s pilot has helped, through her estate, to fund the project.

Her estate will also go on to fund other Bomber Command Association projects, as well in the future.

Keep up the good work.

H

An individual proposed the idea, in 1979, to restart the TSR-2 project. Reportedly with updated systems. The plan was to use XR220 and XR222 as prototypes.

It is my considered believe that the idea was never going to work because:-

• The lack of drawings would require a prototype to be reverse engineered. In order to create the drawings.
• Platform Design Authority (DA) approval would be required. As a licenced build.
• Original retained systems and newly installed systems would require their DA approval. In order to support the project and contribute to the Platform Safety Case.
• A production location would be required. At the time there was only three contenders – Brough, Warton and Woodford.
• A projected sales figure would be needed (in order to identify the profit margin).

There would be no sales (or builds) because:-

• A potential customer, the RAF for example, would be banned from buying the product by the government. International sales wouldn’t get UK government approval either.
• BAE “owned the rights” and would be banned, by the government, from allowing them to be passed on.
• System DA’s would find it very difficult to work on a project that had previously been terminated.
• All three production locations, mentioned above, were owned by BAE. They were busy anyway doing their respective day jobs.

So, it is not surprising his fanciful idea came to nothing.

One final point. A few years ago, I read an article in a Key Pubs magazine (Aeroplane?) about the TSR-2 project. They claimed the type was to be allocated the name “Merlin”. I had never heard that fact before. Or seen it mentioned since. Other sources have since mentioned the name “Eagle”. Also never heard before.

H

Stunning photographs…

The metal wing and tailplane Mod’s had escaped me thus far, I’m afraid. Interesting subject to have read up on.

H