TSR2

by Damien Burke

  The carriage of six 1,000lb HE bombs in the weapons bay. As can be seen, the dished recesses in the bay doors also accommodated the fins of HE bombs. BAE Systems via Warton Heritage Group

  The weapons bay of XR220, showing the dishing and the fin recesses on the bay doors. The bay itself is entirely occupied by two pallets of flight-test instrumentation (anything bright orange on the development batch airframes was flight-testinstrumentation related), and an insulating blanket protects the forward pallet from the expected temperature extremes. Damien Burke

  High-explosive bombs

  In 1959 the ‘dumb iron bomb’ was not considered to be a weapon of any accuracy or particular tactical value, and the OR acknowledged that ‘normal HE bombs can never provide an effective method of attacking targets unless saturation tactics can be adopted …. The main use of these weapons will be for morale or political purposes and therefore a much degraded accuracy can be accepted.’ As with rockets, attacks with bombs would be limited to lightly defended targets, and targets with significant defences or requiring any serious accuracy would need to be hit with a missile instead.

  While the original GOR had asked for carriage of first four, then later six 1,000lb HE bombs, the TSR2 was going to be capable of carrying many more. The weapons bay would hold two triple-ejector launcher units, thus holding the basic requirement of six bombs internally. Underwing carriage of HE bombs was more fluid, the situation changing time and time again until, finally, a maximum load of 10,000lb (4,500kg) HE bombs was decided upon (six bombs internally and one on each under-wing pylon). The large Martel missile pylons were considered to be strong enough to carry up to four bombs each on multiple ejector racks, which would have given a total load of 16,000lb (7,260kg) but no work was authorized on this.

  The effects of high speed and associated heating on external stores meant that the supersonic dash capability at low level would only be available if suitable stores were carried. Strengthened bomb tail units and sleeker nosecones would be necessary; so-called ‘low-drag’ bombs. In the early stages of the project there had been considerable study into the creation of new bombs that could withstand high-speed carriage, with internal reinforcements to permit the fuzing mechanism to survive a high-speed impact. This was necessary if there was to be a delayed detonation to allow the aircraft to escape the blast radius during a low-level lay-down attack. However, with the Air Staff’s edict that no new weapons could be developed specifically for the TSR2, these studies did not directly result in any new bombs. At a late stage the TSR2’s weapons menu was rewritten to include 1,000lb HE retarded bombs to AST.1194 (with integral parachutes for retarded delivery; a much more practical idea than a bomb designed to survive high-speed impact on a hard target), and also a bomblet dispenser to AST.1197 (this became the BL755 cluster bomb).

  Bombs were winched into the aircraft using hoists inserted into the weapons bay through removable panels in the main undercarriage bay walls. BAE Systems via Brooklands Museum

  An underwing pylon with an integral sway brace shoulder, designed for smaller stores such as bombs or rocket or countermeasures pods. A post-cancellation engineering report criticized this pylon design for poor flutter characteristics, so production pylons may well have had a different layout. BAE Systems via Warton Heritage Group

  The two circular panels denote the location of the pylon pick-up points under XR220’s wing. Damien Burke

  A low-drag 1,000lb HE bomb carried underwing. The inner pylon includes large sway braces to cope with the carriage of larger stores, particularly 450gal drop tanks. Outer pylons could carry a single 1,000lb HE bomb, and plans were afoot for larger inner pylons able to carry multiple 1,000lb HE bombs. BAE Systems via Warton Heritage Group

  An illustration from an early (1960) brochure, showing Bullpups as the chosen air-to-surface guided weapons. BAE Systems via Brooklands Museum

  Missiles

  The first missile linked with the TSR2 was the American AGM-12 Bullpup, then being cleared for service on the Scimitar. The Americans had developed this missile in response to the disappointing bombing accuracy they had experienced during the Korean War, and accuracy had been more important to them than hitting power. The Bullpup’s weedy warhead, limited range and the need for the delivery aircraft to continue to fly towards the target during the attack soon made its carriage on the TSR2 an unattractive prospect. Later, in service with the RN, it came to be viewed by many Fleet Air Arm pilots as little more than a marvellously entertaining firework for peacetime practice use, and a liability in combat conditions. The RAF reached a similar conclusion, and by January 1962 had cancelled any plans to acquire Bullpup for any of their aircraft, including TSR2.

  The next missile to be considered, in February 1962, was the French AS.30, a radio-guided visually-aimed HE missile flown all the way to the target by an operator tracking a bright flare on the weapon’s tail until it hit the target. Powered by a solid-propellant rocket motor, the AS.30 weighed in at more than 1,100lb (500kg), of which 500lb (225kg) comprised the HE warhead. It had a range of about 7 miles (11km) and could reach a top speed of Mach 1.5. Having looked into replacing Bullpup by AS.30, BAC Preston believed that, if the existing pylon designs drawn up for Bullpup could be retained, it would be a fairly straightforward swap, though jettison requirements would need some work because the existing jettison guns as used on Canberra pylons were not strong enough to separate an AS.30 safely from a TSR2 at higher speeds.

  A windtunnel model with AS.30 missiles mounted on the pylons originally designed to carry Bullpups. The tactical drawbacks of both Bullpup and AS.30 were considerable for an aircraft like the TSR2, and both missiles were dropped from the project by 1963. BAE Systems via Brooklands Museum

  In December 1962 the RAE produced a paper outlining the amount of development necessary for the TSR2 to carry the AS.30, and the results were a rude shock to BAC and the Air Staff. Instead of being a good option as a cheap interim fit, pending the arrival of a more modern weapon, the AS.30 required considerable development effort to be expended to integrate it with the TSR2. The Air Staff then looked at AS.30 in relation to typical TSR2 mission profiles. The consensus of opinion was that AS.30 would be of marginal use against undefended targets, and a total waste of time against a target with any kind of sophisticated defence, owing to the need to follow the missile while guiding it. Moreover, AS.30 also had kinetic-heating limits that meant it could only be carried while subsonic, 450kt (520mph; 830km/h) being about the upper limit.

  Bristol’s Tychon stand-off missile was one contender for OR.1168, and was offered in nuclear, TV-guided HE and anti-radar versions. This is the TV-guided version. TSR2 could have carried four of these on the wing pylons, but the Tychon lost out to the Anglo-French AS.37 (also known as AJ.168 or Martel). BAE Systems via Brooklands Museum

  The Martel missile was selected for TSR2 use, in both TV-guided and anti-radar versions (the latter is shown here). The datalink electronics for the TV-guided version would have been installed in a weapons bay pack, rather than being carried in an external pod as on the Buccaneer. Damien Burke

  The conventional weapons control panel was another interchangeable role panel located at the bottom left of the navigator’s instrument panel. This mockup has controls and indicators for a maximum of ten bombs, along with controls for missiles (fired singly) and rockets (fired in single, slow or fast ripple modes with any combination of pods). BAE Systems via Warton Heritage Group

  During the period TSR2 was being developed, the AS.30 was entering service with the RAF’s Canberra interdictor squadrons. Initially it was thought some of these stocks could be used if AS.30 capability was to be incorporated within the TSR2, but the rocket motors had limited shelf lives and it was soon realized that, by the time TSR2 entered service, most if not all of the existing AS.30 stocks would also need replacing. In February 1963 the RAF decided there was little point in continuing to consider using AS.30, and that efforts should be concentrated elsewhere, particularly on the AST/OR.1
168 project, and the requirement to carry AS.30 was cancelled in May 1963.

  Projected TSR2 armament loads as of March 1965. Damien Burke

  The neat installation of the 28lb practice-bomb carrier in the weapons bay left room enough for a pair of WE177 practice rounds in the rear portion of the bay. Damien Burke

  The missile developed to fulfil OR.1168 would eventually result in the Martel, the product of an Anglo-French collaboration, available in both TV-guided and anti-radar versions. Development of Martel proceeded independently of the TSR2 programme, and while the TSR2 was expected to carry at least two Martels (both TV-guided and anti-radar versions) on underwing pylons, no serious work to link the two took place before the TSR2’s cancellation. A few weeks before this the Air Staff had decided to accept a suspension of the entire requirement to carry the missile on the TSR2 as a (hopefully temporary) cost-saving measure.

  Practice bombs

  A carrier to hold six AST.1198 28lb practice bombs was developed along with a nuclear-response simulator unit, both to be held within the weapons bay. These would enable the crew to practise the complete nuclear weapons delivery process multiple times on a single training sortie. In addition, one or two practice ‘shapes’ could be carried that would better represent the size and weight of a genuine nuclear bomb. As well as giving more realistic aircraft response to the release, these would also have given groundcrew valuable training in the handling and loading of the real thing.

  Non-conventional weapons

  No serious thought seems to have been given to the carriage of more unusual weapons by the TSR2. Early information-gathering efforts in 1957, while GOR.339 was being drafted, did bring up the possibility of napalm carriage, and this was felt to be straightforward, and BAC were authorized to proceed with design work on napalm carriage as late as March 1965. The RAF was impressed during 1961 by the US Navy’s efforts to develop a slew of modern weapons in the ‘Eye’ series (socalled because they were mostly to be aimed using the Mk 1 eyeball), and a brief note summarizing these is to be found among the papers of the TSR2 Weapons Carriage & Release sub-panel. These were Hawkeye II, an anti-tank bomblet dispenser; Sadeye, an anti-personnel grenade dispenser; Weteye, a chemical weapon dispenser filled with up to 350lb (160kg) of ‘nasty liquid’ and finally Walleye, a free-fall HE bomb with a TV camera in the nose for automatic target homing. As all of these were designed for release at low level they had obvious attractions for TSR2 use, but no work on their use appears to have been carried out.

  CHAPTER TEN

  RAF Service

  While TSR2 never reached squadron service, the RAF had been planning how to introduce it for some time before the project’s cancellation. Consequently there is some evidence for how the TSR2 would have begun its RAF service.

  Initial training

  The RAF was already experiencing difficulties in introducing the Lightning into service, and the sophistication and complexity of the TSR2 was a world apart from that aircraft. The training of systems specialists, as had been required for the Lightning, was going to be necessary, and BAC put forward a plan to train RAF groundcrews at schools set up within BAC and BSEL. BAC Warton would host a Structure and Airframe Installations course; BAC Weybridge would host courses on the Nav/Attack system, AFCS, reconnaissance, communications, armament, and general instrument and electrical installations; and BSEL at Bristol would host courses on the ECU (engine installation being handled at Warton).

  Courses would be laid on for both ground-and aircrews, differing levels of detail being provided and ranging from more general overviews for staff officers to more comprehensive courses for the systems specialists. Most lengthy of all the various courses would be those on the nav/attack system and AFCS, early estimates reckoning that these would take fifty-six weeks. The RAF would be expected to provide lead-in training on basic aspects.

  Electronic Introduction Team

  The Electronic Introduction Team (EIT) was tasked with monitoring, on behalf of the Air Ministry, the development of the TSR2’s electronic systems and any problems associated with their installation in the aircraft. In this manner the RAF would have direct input to and knowledge of the design of the systems, their associated maintenance needs and test equipment. The EIT would liaise with all stakeholder units in the RAF, such as the various units within the CSDE, and was itself a sub-unit of the Radio Introduction Unit at RAF Medmenham. As a small team the EIT had no home base as such, personnel working wherever it made the most sense at various stages in the project, for example BAC Weybridge, with the intention that it would work from RAF Coningsby, Lincolnshire once the aircraft was entering RAF service.

  The stage 3 rig at Weybridge, which enabled the various electronic systems to be connected and operated as a complete system. Similar rigs would have been acquired by the RAF for training use. BAE Systems via Warton Heritage Group

  A building was to be erected at Coningsby to house the ‘Stage 3’ rig (soon given the much snappier name ‘TSR2 Electronics System Servicing and Servicing Development Rig’ by the RAF), and the EIT was to have use of this. An additional rig was to be set up for the Ground Training School, and when it was thought that this would be colocated at Coningsby, the intention was to make the new building large enough to house them both. The EIT would also have use of a complete collection of aircraft equipment broken down into discrete ‘black boxes’, along with both first- and second-line test equipment.

  When the time was right the EIT would have been merged into the Operational Development Squadron (ODS).

  Ground Training School

  While initial training courses were set up by BAC and BSEL, the RAF took over as it became more experienced, and ran its own training. Initial thoughts centred on technical training taking place at the same location as flying training, but at a late stage the decision was taken to house all TSR2 technical training at RAF Hemswell in Lincolnshire because of the lack of accommodation at Coningsby. (Buildings already extant at Coningsby lacked sufficient soundproofing to be suitable for classroom duties.)

  Previously placed under Care and Maintenance after a short period in use as a Thor missile base, RAF Hemswell was reactivated on 31 August 1964, the Ground Training School (GTS) for TSR2 ground personnel being established on 1 October. The first course began on 14 January 1965, and courses continued for some months after cancellation of the project, the GTS not being closed down until 8 September 1965. Hemswell was only ever to have been the location of the GTS, and would never have been home to any actual TSR2s. As well as having a Phase 3 rig as provided to the EIT, it had a variety of demonstration rigs of other TSR2 systems (hydraulics, fuel, electrical, undercarriage and so on).

  Before the project’s cancellation the plan was to move the GTS from Hemswell to RAF Newton at some point from 1970 to 1972. Newton already had suitable training accommodation, whereas putting this in place at Coningsby would have been a significant expense, despite the advantages of having ground crew being trained on a type they could then see in use on the same station.

  Tactical Strike Establishment

  RAF Coningsby was selected as the initial home of the TSR2 at a meeting of the Air Council on 23 May 1963, with the various TSR2-related units on the station to come under the aegis of the Tactical Strike Establishment (TSE).

  The existing Vulcan squadrons would move out, as supporting both TSR2s and Vulcans would be too much of a stretch for the station personnel, especially as none of them would have any significant TSR2 experience to begin with. The intention was that the Vulcans would depart and leave a clear month in which any remaining work on the station infrastructure could be finished off before the arrival of the first TSR2s. In 1963 the RAF’s schedule for Coningsby was that the TSR2 flight simulator would be ready for use in July 1966, and the ODS would form from some time around September 1966 and carry out intensive flying trials and initial Qualified Flying Instructor conversions.

  Several visits to Boscombe Down were made by RAF crews selected for the TSR2,
and various group photographs were taken. These visits continued for some months after the cancellation announcement. via Solent Sky

  The TSR2 was of similar length to a Vulcan, but its much smaller wingspan and height would have enabled greater use to be made of existing hangarage. Damien Burke

  The proposed ASP for RAF Coningsby. A similar ASP was eventually constructed for F-4 Phantom operations. Damien Burke

  Plans were put into place to add a huge expanse of concrete, an aircraft servicing platform (ASP), between the hangars at the western edge of the station and the main runway, to avoid the wasted time and manpower involved in operating from various dispersals scattered around the airfield. Electronics, flight-simulator and support buildings were to be built to the northeast of the ASP, with taxyways linking the hangars to the ASP and the ASP to the runways. Jet-blast and noise deflectors would be positioned around the ASP as well. Land was to be requisitioned at either end of the airfield to permit the construction of barrier overrun areas at either end of the main runway, if shown to be necessary by initial flight trials.