FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1959
1959 - 0142.PDF
54 FLIGHT, 9 January 1959 TSR.2 OUTCOME OF O.R.339: A MULTI-PURPOSE AIRCRAFT FOR THE R.A.F. ON January 1 a statement of great interest and importancewas made by the Minister of Supply. It said that, subjectto satisfactory negotiations, the development of the new R.A.F. aircraft, the TSR.2, "would be undertaken jointly byVickers-Armstrongs and English Electric, the main contract being placed with Vickers-Armstrongs and the work being sharedbetween the two companies on a fifty-fifty basis. A joint project team drawn from both companies is being established at Vickers'works at Weybridge for the execution of the project." The Minister's statement continued: — "Subject equally to satisfactory negotiations, the development of theengine for the new aircraft will be undertaken by Bristol-Siddeley Engines, the new company formed out of Bristol Aero-Engines andArmstrong Siddeley Motors, subsidiaries respectively of the Bristol Aeroplane Company and the Hawker Siddeley Group. Both theseengine companies have indicated that they are now proceeding to a complete financial integration. "The TSR.2 is a tactical support and reconnaissance aircraft. Thespecification was originally based on General Operational Requirement No. 339. In the course of study it has been found technically possibleto incorporate in the final Operational Requirement modifications which will greatly increase the usefulness of the aircraft in limitedoperations and for close support of the Army, particularly by reducing the length and strength of runways required for take-off. While theTSR.2 will be capable of performing the r&les of all the various marks of Canberra, it will, by reason of its greater flexibility and higher generalperformance, be far more versatile and more in the nature of a general- purpose tactical aircraft." What the Announcement Implies It is well over a year since companies started work on projects tomeet O.R.339, and during this period much has been suggested of "battles in Whitehall"; the announcement is already unofficiallyclaimed to represent "victory for the air marshals" and to have caused "a red face for Mr. Duncan Sandys, the Defence Minister,who told the RAF, it would get no more manned bombers." In actual fact, all concerned have co-operated closely to ensurethat the R.A.F. will get the best weapon system at the earliest date for the least cost. But deciding upon the best weapon system has proved to be alabour of Hercules; and changing requirements, new techniques and the impossibility of accurately forecasting the situation of adecade hence have combined to render this project much more difficult than any which the Air Staff or the industry have pre-viously had to face. The sketches below suggest some of the solutions which may have been examined. A This is a straightforward application of the VTOL principlepropounded by Dr. A. A. Griffith. Fifty or more small turbojets of high thrust/weight ratio would be used as lift engines, and twoof the Bristol-Siddeley engines—doubtless derived from the Olympus 15R—would provide cruise propulsion. This aeroplanewould weigh about 60,000 lb, have a crew of two, fly at up to Mach 2.5 at the tropopause or Mach 1.5 at sea level, have amaximum tactical radius approaching 1,000 miles and be about 75ft long. These figures are likely to be in the neighbourhood ofthotfe required, and similar characteristics may be assumed for the other suggested projects. If lift engines are to be used theymay well be by Rolls-Royce. B Here the N.G.T.E./R.A.E. scheme of jet deflection isemployed. Two engines would be used, each with a valve box through which the jet could be deflected almost vertically down-ward in line with the e.g. to provide lift approaching the weight. Such valves would probably be upstream of afterburners. Alayout of this kind is very attractive; it would not be a VTOL, but—provided the overall thrust/weight ratio could be kept high—it would certainly get off in a few hundred yards. C Here the polymophic formula of Dr. Barnes Wallis—whoworks for the TSR.2 main contractor—is employed to give excel- lent all-round performance. It does seem, however, that thisconcept would be better suited to a long-range transport than to a rough-and-tumble military machine designed for arduousoperations at all levels. Moreover, it would probably need an air- field not inferior to the present NATO platform.D This unlikely-looking contraption is an outgrowth of German projects of 1944-5, the main advance being the incorporation ofGriffith hit engines in the lower component to confer VTO ability. The TSR.2 would be the upper machine, devoid of landing gearand designed to come back to its mother and latch on at about 300 m.p.h.—which should be no more difficult than air refuellingis today. On the other hand, the TSR.2 could have an under- carriage and return to a proper airfield after completing itsmission. The lower platform-like machine would be an aeroplane in its own right, and could well double as the squadron transportand resupply vehicle. £ A manned missile, this is a development along the lines ofBloodhound. It stands on its tail and is launched by a gimballed boost rocket in the same way as Bomarc or a ballistic missile.Landing would be effected by skids and parachute (or perhaps by a proper landing gear on a hard runway).These ideas show the diversity of possible vehicles. In addition there are other concepts. In 1941 this country flew aircraft whichshed an auxiliary wing after take-off—deliberately that is. In recent months F-lOOs, Mig-19s and other aircraft have beenlaunched from zero-length mountings by high-thrust boost motors; here the only ground equipment needed is a launcher(weighing under a ton) and a crane. The French Baroudeur is a neat way of taking off from a trolly designed for rough terrain,and any fixed-wing aeroplane can be pulled up inside a hundred yards by a suitable arrester gear. Whatever form TSR.2 will take it is likely to differ radicallyfrom anything else in the world. Some opinions on the implica- tions of this aircraft are given in a leading article in this issue. Some hypothetical solutions to the problems posed by O.R.339. All these machines would be roughly the same size as the Avro Arrow, have a crew of two and a pair of reheated Bristol-Siddeley Olympus turbojets for cruise propulsion. Each is discussed in the text above o6o* • t /— y^WW
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
