New TSR2 info.

I stumbled on this very recent addition to the TSR2 wiki article, apparently added recently from info released from Archives in the middle of this year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BAC_TSR-2#Recent_information

So WI Macmillan hadn't limited the yeild of tac nukes to 10kt, and let the TSR2 carry the 2 x 200kt bombs and 2 x drop tanks instead of 4 x 10kt nukes? Would that have been one less straw to break the camels back, and get the TSR2 into service?
 
They would have been great in RAAF service.

Would the money wasted on the F111K and AFVG, if it had been invested in the TSR2 been enough to get it into service?
 
Two interesting points in British Secret Projects: Bombers Since 1949, Tony Buttler

Page 109

'However, from the moment (May 1960) Watkinson raised the issue of a strategic nuclear role, TSR.2's performance requirements were gradually expanded (instead of simplifying the aircraft's systems to keep the costs down).'


'Page 112

A month later (November 1963) the Germans showed an interest in the aircraft as a replacement for the F104G; possibly 400 aircraft might be needed. Federal Minister of Defence Herr von Hassel and his party saw the prototype at Weybridge in May 1964 but there were concerns in the British Cabinet about repercussions in the UK if the Germans were allowed to buy an aircraft capable of delivering nuclear bombs, despite the fact they were still under United States custodial arrangements.'


Does make you wonder what could have happened if the specification hadn't been upped
 
The TSR.2 for the Luftwaffe? I imagine there might be a few people who have a problem with that in the UK - World War II was still very much in many people's minds......
 
The TSR.2 for the Luftwaffe? I imagine there might be a few people who have a problem with that in the UK - World War II was still very much in many people's minds......

Like this?

TSRLuft1.png
 
I do believe it, Trekchu. I just figure that some people might take a bit of offense with arming the Luftwaffe with nuclear-capable aircraft, that's all. :)

I'm also thinking that if the TSR.2 was built, it might have a few other customers - Australia, Canada, South Africa, Argentina and Israel I can see buying or wanting to buy the TSR.2.
 
I'm also thinking that if the TSR.2 was built, it might have a few other customers - Australia, Canada, South Africa, Argentina and Israel I can see buying or wanting to buy the TSR.2.

Australia-F111, South Africa-Buccaneer are certainly potential TSR2 customers, but did Canada have Canberras to replace? I doubt Argentina would have the money, and Israel lacked the doctrine in the late 60s. Germany's purchase of US aircraft was tied up in war reparations arrangements, so I doubt it would go to the TSR2 for that reason.
 
Australia-F111, South Africa-Buccaneer are certainly potential TSR2 customers, but did Canada have Canberras to replace? I doubt Argentina would have the money, and Israel lacked the doctrine in the late 60s. Germany's purchase of US aircraft was tied up in war reparations arrangements, so I doubt it would go to the TSR2 for that reason.

Canada used its CF-104s as nuclear strike assets at the time, don't forget, they were doing exactly the job the TSR.2 was designed for. Argentina was in the mid-70s asking about buying Avro Vulcans, so I don't think they are THAT broke. Israel after Yom Kippur would probably want something they can use to deliver low-yield nuclear weapons across medium-long distances accurately, in order to intimidate the Arabs. Again, that's exactly what the TSR.2 was designed for.
 
Argentina was looking at buying a second-hand, obsolescent 50s bomber, if they were a potential TSR2 customer they would have been looking at the F111F, or at least the F4E, instead.

In the early-mid 70s the existing Israeli airforce could reach the vast majority of potential targets with Mirage5/A4/F4. Attacking targets further afield such as Osiraq and Tripoli, for which the TSR2 would be used, didn't arise until the 80s.

Canada could have selected any number of aircraft to drop its dual-key nukes but used the F104. I'd imagine that is because Canada's nuclear strike role was one of tactical support rather than theatre/semi-strategic strikes. For Canada to require a long-range, heavy-payload, all-weather, blind-first-pass strike aircraft it would need to re-define it role from tactical to theatre nuclear strike.
 
Drool!:D Thats so cool! I wonder how many TSR2 the Luftwaffe could afford. Would the TSR2 cheaper or more expensive the the Tornado?

Most likely the price per unit is lower for the Tornado. One of the reason is that it’s a smaller aircraft and the Tornado was made by a multi-nation consortium. Although that isn’t always a guarantee for a lower price there were more units assembled than would be of the TSR2.
 
Top