Back in the late 60’s, early 70’s, debate raged in Australia which one should we choose, so with the advantage of hind sight, did we make the best choice? I must admit that at that time I thought that the TSR2 was the better choice, but now I’m not so sure.

By the accounts of the test pilots, the TSR2 was a staggeringly fine aircraft to fly.

the F111 was the yank version of the TSR2

the TSR2 was killed off by a fifth column operating in Whitehall that sought to destroy the ability to produce an effective aircraft

wookiemeister said:

the F111 was the yank version of the TSR2

the TSR2 was killed off by a fifth column operating in Whitehall that sought to destroy the ability to produce an effective aircraft

.Why did “they” do that? was it just for the money?

I’ve lived out the brave new world of free enterprise under the auspices of thatcherite edicts

first destroy manufacturing

destroy unions/ infiltrate unions/ blacklist unions

attack single mothers

attack the working wage

destroy the education system

encourage self interest and hold it up as good and holy.

her son became a arms dealer and has been caught with his pants down trying to overthrow a government and then slunk away leaving his employees high and dry. mark thatcher epitomises the natural conclusion of thatcherite Britain.

margaret thatcher did did more damage in her time in power than perhaps any other british leader

bob(from black rock) said:

wookiemeister said:

the F111 was the yank version of the TSR2

the TSR2 was killed off by a fifth column operating in Whitehall that sought to destroy the ability to produce an effective aircraft

.Why did “they” do that? was it just for the money?

money I would say

the british military helicopter industry went the same way years later

I reckon we should just go for a nuclear cruise missile fleet and we wouldn’t have to worry about planes, ships or submarines.

rumpole said:

I reckon we should just go for a nuclear cruise missile fleet and we wouldn’t have to worry about planes, ships or submarines.

nuclear missiles are too destructive

and anyway, well placed conventional warheads can fell most societies you don’t need to use anything so destructive to get a more practical result

for example

instead of bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki you send a letter to the Japanese

we control the sky and land

surrender unconditionally in the next 48 hours or expect all of your most precious artifacts namely buildings and locations to be levelled – this would of course include the royal residences

bombing cities is a waste of time it sucks in an awful lot of bombs for little result

I would bet the Japanese would have rolled over immediately

the way to defeat an adversary is to take away what he loves most

wookiemeister said:

nuclear missiles are too destructive

and anyway, well placed conventional warheads can fell most societies you don’t need to use anything so destructive to get a more practical result

for example

instead of bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki you send a letter to the Japanese

we control the sky and land

surrender unconditionally in the next 48 hours or expect all of your most precious artifacts namely buildings and locations to be levelled – this would of course include the royal residences

bombing cities is a waste of time it sucks in an awful lot of bombs for little result

I would bet the Japanese would have rolled over immediately

the way to defeat an adversary is to take away what he loves most

I don’t think the above scenario would have worked.

Any weapon you actually have to use has failed.

Nukes are the ultimate (so far) deterrent.

Although I suppose you could load the missiles with a deadly virus and kill people but leave infrastructure alone.

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

nuclear missiles are too destructive

and anyway, well placed conventional warheads can fell most societies you don’t need to use anything so destructive to get a more practical result

for example

instead of bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki you send a letter to the Japanese

we control the sky and land

surrender unconditionally in the next 48 hours or expect all of your most precious artifacts namely buildings and locations to be levelled – this would of course include the royal residences

bombing cities is a waste of time it sucks in an awful lot of bombs for little result

I would bet the Japanese would have rolled over immediately

the way to defeat an adversary is to take away what he loves most

I don’t think the above scenario would have worked.

within the Japanese psyche I think it would have been a very powerful motivator. think of all those nice places, the temples, the cherry blossoms, the scared stones etc etc.

instead of blowing lots of people to pieces you step back , use your brains and then deliver the ultimatum – if you really wanted to deliver it you load thousands of bombers with leaflets telling the populace about the ultimatum and you have told their leadership.

the bombers are then amassed into a giant armada that flies over continuously day and night dropping the leaflets – there is no hope.

you can talk about using nuclear weapons but they are very destructive leaving a poisonous legacy.

I ascribe to sun Tzu

think carefully about waging war – most wars always go badly – the art of war is indeed mostly about the disasters , victory is rarely spoken about.

if you go to war understand what you are trying to achieve and how you intend to go about it

bribe the leaders if the enemy – the yanks had practically stopped all heroin production from Afghanistan by paying the Taliban some chicken feed money for example.

wookiemeister said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

nuclear missiles are too destructive

and anyway, well placed conventional warheads can fell most societies you don’t need to use anything so destructive to get a more practical result

for example

instead of bombing Hiroshima or Nagasaki you send a letter to the Japanese

we control the sky and land

surrender unconditionally in the next 48 hours or expect all of your most precious artifacts namely buildings and locations to be levelled – this would of course include the royal residences

bombing cities is a waste of time it sucks in an awful lot of bombs for little result

I would bet the Japanese would have rolled over immediately

the way to defeat an adversary is to take away what he loves most

I don’t think the above scenario would have worked.

within the Japanese psyche I think it would have been a very powerful motivator. think of all those nice places, the temples, the cherry blossoms, the scared stones etc etc.

instead of blowing lots of people to pieces you step back , use your brains and then deliver the ultimatum – if you really wanted to deliver it you load thousands of bombers with leaflets telling the populace about the ultimatum and you have told their leadership.

the bombers are then amassed into a giant armada that flies over continuously day and night dropping the leaflets – there is no hope.

you can talk about using nuclear weapons but they are very destructive leaving a poisonous legacy.

You mean….like the firebombing raids on Tokyo that destroyed lots of the city but didn’t result in their surrender?

Or the London Blitz or the Dresden bombing raids? None of which caused the bombee to surrender?

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

I don’t think the above scenario would have worked.

within the Japanese psyche I think it would have been a very powerful motivator. think of all those nice places, the temples, the cherry blossoms, the scared stones etc etc.

instead of blowing lots of people to pieces you step back , use your brains and then deliver the ultimatum – if you really wanted to deliver it you load thousands of bombers with leaflets telling the populace about the ultimatum and you have told their leadership.

the bombers are then amassed into a giant armada that flies over continuously day and night dropping the leaflets – there is no hope.

you can talk about using nuclear weapons but they are very destructive leaving a poisonous legacy.

You mean….like the firebombing raids on Tokyo that destroyed lots of the city but didn’t result in their surrender?

Or the London Blitz or the Dresden bombing raids? None of which caused the bombee to surrender?

bombing residential areas is pointless, the elite running the show don’t care about them.

bomb what is valuable to the elite and then suddenly the situation is different

if they had flattened all of saddams palaces for example and left civilian infrastructure INTACT Iraq might not have turned into the basket case it is now. the RAF was bombing shepherds on the hills in the end rather than knocking down saddams monuments.

if the yanks had arrived in force and given the Japanese elite an ultimatum the war would have been over sooner

in Europe the Nazis loved their railways, now some people tell me that bombing and killing an untold number of people in the cities was do-able yet shooting up and bombing railways would have done nothing.

bombing the railways would have immediately knocked out all logistics to the eastern front, bombing the autobahn made a mess of hitlers beloved road network. the Nazis built in places like munich , they should have levelled those places that hitler built instead of places like “the residence”. knocking out the railways night after night would have also knocked out the supply to the death camps. instead of bombing the cities they could have had a major attack on the SS barracks and infrastructure in the camps. you could have bombed heavily, then parachuted troops in to give what troops were left the shock of their life – trained, armed people with the ability to shoot back. commando missions would have been useful, setting time bombs on SS infrastructure delivers a knockout blow to the ideology.

attacking german airbases would have been far more effective instead of bombing cities

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

I don’t think the above scenario would have worked.

within the Japanese psyche I think it would have been a very powerful motivator. think of all those nice places, the temples, the cherry blossoms, the scared stones etc etc.

instead of blowing lots of people to pieces you step back , use your brains and then deliver the ultimatum – if you really wanted to deliver it you load thousands of bombers with leaflets telling the populace about the ultimatum and you have told their leadership.

the bombers are then amassed into a giant armada that flies over continuously day and night dropping the leaflets – there is no hope.

you can talk about using nuclear weapons but they are very destructive leaving a poisonous legacy.

You mean….like the firebombing raids on Tokyo that destroyed lots of the city but didn’t result in their surrender?

Or the London Blitz or the Dresden bombing raids? None of which caused the bombee to surrender?

At the time, such a thing as a nuclear bomb was known only to a few. Dropping pamphlets would be no greater disturbance than dropping toilet paper.

roughbarked said:

Angus Prune said:

wookiemeister said:

within the Japanese psyche I think it would have been a very powerful motivator. think of all those nice places, the temples, the cherry blossoms, the scared stones etc etc.

instead of blowing lots of people to pieces you step back , use your brains and then deliver the ultimatum – if you really wanted to deliver it you load thousands of bombers with leaflets telling the populace about the ultimatum and you have told their leadership.

the bombers are then amassed into a giant armada that flies over continuously day and night dropping the leaflets – there is no hope.

you can talk about using nuclear weapons but they are very destructive leaving a poisonous legacy.

You mean….like the firebombing raids on Tokyo that destroyed lots of the city but didn’t result in their surrender?

Or the London Blitz or the Dresden bombing raids? None of which caused the bombee to surrender?

At the time, such a thing as a nuclear bomb was known only to a few. Dropping pamphlets would be no greater disturbance than dropping toilet paper.

the yanks had capacity to keep firebombing cities , the had the nuclear bomb

as I said you deliver an ultimatum to the people who started the war – not to some peasants and city folk who were no more than slaves

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

Angus Prune said:

You mean….like the firebombing raids on Tokyo that destroyed lots of the city but didn’t result in their surrender?

Or the London Blitz or the Dresden bombing raids? None of which caused the bombee to surrender?

At the time, such a thing as a nuclear bomb was known only to a few. Dropping pamphlets would be no greater disturbance than dropping toilet paper.

the yanks had capacity to keep firebombing cities , the had the nuclear bomb

as I said you deliver an ultimatum to the people who started the war – not to some peasants and city folk who were no more than slaves

The cult of Bushido would have made surrender impossible without convincing the Emperor that defeat was inevitable. Almost the entire Japanese population was far more fanatical than the German people.

If only the world was either black or white.

PermeateFree said:

If only the world was either black or white.

Let’s compromise. Brown.

Tamb said:

wookiemeister said:

roughbarked said:

At the time, such a thing as a nuclear bomb was known only to a few. Dropping pamphlets would be no greater disturbance than dropping toilet paper.

the yanks had capacity to keep firebombing cities , the had the nuclear bomb

as I said you deliver an ultimatum to the people who started the war – not to some peasants and city folk who were no more than slaves

The cult of Bushido would have made surrender impossible without convincing the Emperor that defeat was inevitable. Almost the entire Japanese population was far more fanatical than the German people.

What better reason to burn civilians.

poikilotherm said:

Tamb said:

wookiemeister said:

the yanks had capacity to keep firebombing cities , the had the nuclear bomb

as I said you deliver an ultimatum to the people who started the war – not to some peasants and city folk who were no more than slaves

The cult of Bushido would have made surrender impossible without convincing the Emperor that defeat was inevitable. Almost the entire Japanese population was far more fanatical than the German people.

What better reason to burn civilians.

The leaders understood conventional weapons & believed that they could continue to fight & even win. The two A-bombs convinced the Emperor & the military that they could not possibly win.

Wookie, you know all about this stuff; why did the Americans drop the bomb on Nagasaki? The Japanese had indicated after Hiroshima that they wanted to surrender, so the second bomb couldn’t be justified the same way as the first.

Wocky said:

Wookie, you know all about this stuff; why did the Americans drop the bomb on Nagasaki? The Japanese had indicated after Hiroshima that they wanted to surrender, so the second bomb couldn’t be justified the same way as the first.

I think that is post-war revisionism.

Amazingly, the Japanese had not in fact surrendered.

dv said:

Amazingly, the Japanese had not in fact surrendered.

What he said.

The 2nd bomb let the Japanese (and the rest of the world) know that America had more than one A-bomb.

Note that America didn’t actually have any more A-bombs at that stage. According to Wikipedia

Groves expected to have another atomic bomb ready for use on 19 August, with three more in September and a further three in October.

So… Tsr2 vs f111, are they even apples and apples? Can’t say I have heard of the tsr2 before and a popular search engine says they are reconnaissance whereas the f111 is tactical strike..

PM 2Ring said:

dv said:

Amazingly, the Japanese had not in fact surrendered.

What he said.

The 2nd bomb let the Japanese (and the rest of the world) know that America had more than one A-bomb.

Note that America didn’t actually have any more A-bombs at that stage. According to Wikipedia

Groves expected to have another atomic bomb ready for use on 19 August, with three more in September and a further three in October.

Thanks, Wookie.

BTW, Wookie, Wikipedia says:

On the night of 25 May 1945, most structures of the Imperial Palace were destroyed in the Allied firebombing raid on Tokyo.

furious said:

So… Tsr2 vs f111, are they even apples and apples? Can’t say I have heard of the tsr2 before and a popular search engine says they are reconnaissance whereas the f111 is tactical strike..

TSR stands for Tactical Strike & Reconnisance.

Wocky said:

Thanks, Wookie.

:p

• TSR stands for Tactical Strike & Reconnisance.

Well, I’ll be…

Makes sense, carry on…

furious said:

• TSR stands for Tactical Strike & Reconnisance.

Well, I’ll be…

Makes sense, carry on…

This site seems pretty factual: http://www.unrealaircraft.com/classics/tsr2.php

PM 2Ring said:

BTW, Wookie, Wikipedia says:

On the night of 25 May 1945, most structures of the Imperial Palace were destroyed in the Allied firebombing raid on Tokyo.

that should have been the ultimatum BEFORE anything was bombed in japan

once you’ve delivered the ultimatum, informed the populace that the ultimatum, then everyone is on the same page

The British Aircraft Corporation TSR-2 was a cancelled Cold War strike and reconnaissance aircraft developed by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) for the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The TSR-2 was designed to penetrate a well-defended forward battle area at low altitudes and very high speeds, and then attack high-value targets in the rear with nuclear or conventional weapons.

Anti-flash white is a brilliant white color commonly seen on United States, British and Soviet nuclear bombers. The purpose of the color was to reflect some of the thermal radiation from a nuclear explosion, protecting the aircraft and its occupants

The only TSR-2 to fly, XR219 in anti-flash white finish, at BAC’s Warton factory in 1966

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

Weapons bay

The F-111 featured an internal weapons bay that could carry bombs, a removable 20 mm M61 cannon, or auxiliary fuel tanks. For bombs, the bay could hold two 750 lb (340 kg) M117 conventional bombs, one nuclear bomb or practice bombs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Dynamics_F-111_Aardvark

the reason I moved straight to nuclear weapons is that both aircraft were designed to take them

Australia at one point wanted nuclear capability – it wouldn’t surprise me if the F111 was chosen for that very reason.

http://www.airvectors.net/avtsr2.html

tsr2

http://www.airvectors.net/avf111.html

f111

The Panavia Tornado is a multirole, twin-engined aircraft designed to excel at low-level penetration of enemy defences. The mission envisaged during the Cold War was the delivery of conventional and nuclear ordnance on the invading forces of the Warsaw Pact countries of Eastern Europe;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panavia_Tornado

this aircraft is what came much later after TSR2 and does the same thing as both

the idea of the aircraft is to deliver a knock out blow with principally nuclear weapons

British Defense Minister Duncan Sandys

was obviously a spy/ agent of some kind to be used to cancel the project.

the typical acts of a spy in those positions is to create confusion, collect info and sabotage

when confusion reigns in a defence project the sure cause is a spy/agent

wookiemeister said:

British Defense Minister Duncan Sandys

was obviously a spy/ agent of some kind to be used to cancel the project.

the typical acts of a spy in those positions is to create confusion, collect info and sabotage

No, just that the British were bankrupt and had lost their empire, but were still trying to carry on like they were a major power. They just weren’t any more.

Never carefully articulate your point in an argument when chanting a slogan will do.

wookiemeister said:

Australia at one point wanted nuclear capability – it wouldn’t surprise me if the F111 was chosen for that very reason.

They weren’t necessary, if that was the case.

Not only could the Mrage III-Os have been wired to do that, as were the Swiss III-Ss (yes, the Swiss), but the RAN’s A-4G Skyhawks came with the capability already installed, as did almost all A-4s

Well, DA is on her way to New Caledonia

Cruie ship ‘Pacific Dawn’ is in Moreton Bay, heading out.

http://www.cleancruising.com.au/ship_location.asp?ship=PACDAW

and

http://www.sailwx.info/shiptrack/shipposition.phtml?call=2AGH7

Sorry, thread of the wrongness.

wookiemeister said:

The British Aircraft Corporation TSR-2 was a cancelled Cold War strike and reconnaissance aircraft developed by the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) for the Royal Air Force (RAF) in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The TSR-2 was designed to penetrate a well-defended forward battle area at low altitudes and very high speeds, and then attack high-value targets in the rear with nuclear or conventional weapons.

IIRC not only was the project cancelled by the labour government, they ensured that al plans, drawings, and tooling was destroyed too. It does seem a bit suspect to me, I’m leaning toward the wookie report.

My school was given a computer by Marconi that was rumoured to have been used for the project. No one knew how to use it.

bob(from black rock) said:

Back in the late 60’s, early 70’s, debate raged in Australia which one should we choose, so with the advantage of hind sight, did we make the best choice? I must admit that at that time I thought that the TSR2 was the better choice, but now I’m not so sure.

Strategically, yes, we made the right choice. An export customer on the back of a huge order from a superpower. When Australia were shopping around there was already doubt the TSR2 would not proceed into full production for the British. This would have left us in the awkward position of being the only user of that aircraft. Easier to piggy-back off the Americans in terms of support, maintenace, development etc if they are already using them in large numbers.

party_pants said:

No, just that the British were bankrupt and had lost their empire, but were still trying to carry on like they were a major power. They just weren’t any more.

But still had responsibilities in cold was Europe. The defence of Berlin and West Germany for EG.

wookiemeister said:

the reason I moved straight to nuclear weapons is that both aircraft were designed to take them

Australia at one point wanted nuclear capability – it wouldn’t surprise me if the F111 was chosen for that very reason.

Meh, Australia signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty about the same time as the F111s were entering service.

The real reason was that the Canberra bombers were obsolete but the government of the day kept delaying the replacement. When they finally did decide to replace them they decided they needed something that could make a bombing run from Australia to Jakarta and back on a single tank of fuel (without needing aerial refuelling) and something that was capable of supersonic speeds.

If anyone’s in Caloundra, they can run down to the shore and wave to DA.

‘Pacific Dawn’ is just offshore, having cleared the tortuous route through Moreton Bay. Will be altering to the open sea, soon.

Damn. did it again.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BAC-TSR2-RAF-Aircraft-Olympus-320-Jet-Engine-TSR-2-/130574234473?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item1e66d4b369&vxp=mtr

wookiemeister said:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/BAC-TSR2-RAF-Aircraft-Olympus-320-Jet-Engine-TSR-2-/130574234473?pt=Motors_Aviation_Parts_Gear&hash=item1e66d4b369&vxp=mtr

Thankyou wookie, will have a shuftie now, cheers bob