Comments by "Orbital_Inclination" (@Orbital_Inclination) on "The TSR-2 could do almost anything. Why wasn't it made?" video.

  1. And common sense. In todays money, it is estimated each aircraft would have cost £240m
    2
  2. The F-35B is more capable than the Harrier in nearly every single measurable way. How exactly is it inferior?
    2
  3. It would have been a disaster. It was estimated that the 50 the RAF were planning on ordering would have cost around £240 million in todays money. What international customer would ever have spent that much on a single airframe?
    2
  4. And financial reality. It was becoming an absolute drain on the MOD budget, and would have cost an estimated £240m per unit in todays money
    2
  5. Both main parties have done damage. Let's not forget that the Tories were responsible for the massive cuts to the armed forces, and SDSR 2010, in recent years
    2
  6. And in this case, rightly so. It was a financial nightmare of a programme, sucking money from other defence capabilites with no promise of delivering on the obscenely long list of tasks it was being asked to carry out
    1
  7. You mean not blowing a ridiculous amount of money on an overhyped aircraft? £240 mil per airframe in todays money (twice as much as a Typhoon, for example)
    1
  8. £240 million per aircraft (in todays money) made this project completely unfeasible. To put that into context, that's 2x Typhoons or 3x F-35A for the same cost as 1x TSR2
    1
  9. The Russians haven't lost any aircraft carriers to a drone attack, and none of the ships they've lost in the Black Sea have been using the kinds of layered defence a carrier group employs, and were far closer to the enemy than a carrier group would ever sit.
    1
  10. There are TSR.2s on museum display
    1
  11. Tbf that's just basic budget balancing. The TSR2 programme was hemorrhaging money we didn't have as a nation.
    1