An ‘Inexcusable Muddle’

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30275, 30 October 1963, Page 11

An ‘Inexcusable Muddle’

(N.Z Press Assn.—Copyright) LONDON, Oct. 29. In spite of Air Ministry claims, the TSR2 “manned missile” would not be able to operate in forward areas, the “Daily Express” aviation correspondent, Chapman Pincher, claimed today. Pincher called the TSRZ planning of the Royal Air Force an “inexcusable muddle.” He explained his claim that the new machine would not be able to operate in the way for which it was originally designed—to support troops in battlefield areas. Pincher said: “This ’allsinging all-dancing' machine, which is literally worth more than its weight in gold. Is jam-packed with complex electronic equipment which must all be checked for efficiency before it sets off on its mission. “For this purpose, the Air Ministry planners devised a self-propelled ‘check - out trailer.’ This trailer can test the radars, bomb-sight, television equipment, jamming gear, the bomb-bay, cameras and ejection apparatus. Must Be On Airstrip "It can start the engines and jack up the aircraft, hundreds have been ordered,” he said. “Because this heavy trailer must be on the forward airstrip when the TSR2 arrives, another transport plane has to be available to carry it “But when the TSR2 is ready for service in 1967, and for several years afterwards the only plane capable of doing the transport job will be the Whitworth Gloster Argosy. “And the Argosy needs a properly - surfaced landing strip 1000 yards long. In

short, because of this planning blunder the TSR2 will not be able to operate in the forward areas in spite of claims by Air Ministry experts yesterday. “It will have to be operated from big runways in the rear where it can be serviced ...," Pincher said. Details Revealed Some details of the TSR2 —on which £400,000.000 will go on development—were revealed by the Air Ministry yesterday. The TSR2 is due to make its maiden flight early next year. Twenty development and three production aircraft have already been ordered, and a full production contract for the first batch is under negotiation. Although its actual performance still is secret, it is officially admitted that speed over rooftops and treetops will be at least 760 miles an hour. At high altitude this will increase to 1300-1400 miles an hour—twice the speed of sound. The equipment of the TSR-2 possibly will make it the greatest flying machine designed. On a low-flying mission, bad weather or poor visibility will prove no deterrent. Forward-looking radar will guide it in relation to the contours of the ground. Automatic navigation will keep the bomber on track. From both these devices, information will flow into batteries of computers which will feed the automatic pilot with instructions. So delicate is the radar which keeps the bomber at safety height that it can detect even an electric power cable in its perth. And if this radar should fail the aircraft is automatically put into climb to a safe altitude It will carry a crew of two, but they will do little more than monitor its flight. The TSR-2 will have two Bristol Siddeley Olympus 22R turbo-jet engines. One

of these has devetoped enough power to fly a Vulcan, one of Britain’s fourengined V-bombers. A similar engine is being used for the Anglo-French supersonic airliner, the Concord. The first of the bombers is nearing completion at a closely-guarded workshop at Weybridge, Surrey. Each one has a £2,000,000 price ticket on it.

The “Daily Sketch” defence correspondent said the TSR-2 was so technically advanced and so bristling with radars and computers thai men were almost superfluous.

Strapped into the refrigerator. air-cooled cabinet of the “flying dart” the crew became almost observers of events, ready to take over only in emergency or in a change of plan, be said. “The Times” aviation correspondent said that with the TSR-2 bombing errors 'had been reduced from the hundreds of yards of World War Il to “tens of feet.” More Versatile The “Financial Times” said the TSR2 would be much more versatile than the American TFX which was why, on present estimates, it was much more expensive. The “Daily Tedeg-aph” air correspondent said details of the TSR2. and the fact that so much of the plane and its electronic weapon-delivery systems had already been proven tn testa in other aircraft, made Australia's acceptance of the TFX “more difficult to understand.”

The TFX was to have variable geometry—which meant its wings could be moved backwards or forwards in flight for fast or slow flight, the correspondent said. But no country had yet been able to produce a workable plane using this system. It was the opinion of experts that Australia had been “grossly misled" on the 1967 delivery date promised by ths Americans, he said.