RMP2 Posted September 4, 2016 Share Posted September 4, 2016 Theyre not the same tanks just with different fins are they? And the French ones - theyre the same tank whether fitted to the wing or centreline? Ive been Googling and frankly Ive done my own head in looking at the things from different angles, perspectives etc - sometimes both the French and British tanks look the same (aside from the fins), sometimes theyre miles different depending on the photo, lens, colours, obstructions etc etc. As ever, any help is much appreciated in overcoming my lack of genius. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exdraken Posted September 5, 2016 Share Posted September 5, 2016 somethings that puzzles me for some time as well.... why on earth are they different anyways? I'd guess french and british air behaves similar after all. so identical tanks should alsbe behave identical when jettisoned... so why the need for different fin arrangements? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 5, 2016 Author Share Posted September 5, 2016 Maybe a more "Mirage" appearance was preferred..? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary West Posted September 5, 2016 Share Posted September 5, 2016 Theyre not the same tanks just with different fins are they?/quote] I believe they are the same Rob and Im also told that Jag & Mirsge F1 tanks are one of the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 5, 2016 Author Share Posted September 5, 2016 Theyre not the same tanks just with different fins are they?/quote] I believe they are the same Rob and Im also told that Jag & Mirsge F1 tanks are one of the same Really? Thats quite surprising to me. I was thinking earlier how given that the French Jags had different pylons that was maybe related to compatibility with existing ranges of stores, rails etc in their inventory, likewise fuel tanks whereas all the RAF stuff seems bespoke - tandem bomb racks, tanks, and eventually the ALQ pods etc that the French dont use. Only common thing between them being the... the.... that pointy chaff thing... whats it called? Its been a long day. Basically - Id convinced myself that the tanks were different. Right. I feel a deep search coming on, starting with the capacity of the things and more staring at photos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 5, 2016 Author Share Posted September 5, 2016 That didnt take long. Yep, Im happy that the french and RAF tanks are the same aside from the fins. Found this too, which is interesting, if perhaps requiring some salt - The RAF's Jaguar 97s were intended to be wired for the carriage of ASRAAMs on the overwing launchers, but clearance of this weapon was never completed because of funding cuts - From Wiki... but an interesting thought along with ALARM missiles perhaps for a WhatIf. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phone Phixer Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 Don't know if the tanks were the same between nations. As far as the RAF is concerned, they were the same tanks on both inboard or centerline pylons. Capacity was 1200 litres. ASRAAM, yup, that was the rumoured plan. Linked with the helmet mounted sight to give off boresight launch capability. ie, Instead of the target having to be directly in front of the Jag, to get missile lock. Anywhere the pilot looked, the missile could be launched. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagRigger Posted September 6, 2016 Share Posted September 6, 2016 We had off bore capability with the AIM9L. Even we had different tanks - fixed fin ( early ) or removable ( later ) If you used finned on the centreline the spent cases would hit them 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 7, 2016 Author Share Posted September 7, 2016 Did the french guns not eject the cases out of the aircraft? I've not seen any CL tanks of theirs without fins. Cheers guys, all good stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squezzer Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 The external fuel tanks were RP-36. They fitted underwing and centerline as well. The Mirage F-1 used RP-35. Both tanks were 1200 liters. I think that, from a modeller's perspective, you can swap them. The fins were always installed (I think the cases were not jeetissonned in the DEFA cannon but I don't remember) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 7, 2016 Author Share Posted September 7, 2016 The external fuel tanks were RP-36. They fitted underwing and centerline as well. The Mirage F-1 used RP-35. Both tanks were 1200 liters. I think that, from a modeller's perspective, you can swap them. The fins were always installed (I think the cases were not jeetissonned in the DEFA cannon but I don't remember) Brilliant, thanks for that. Out of curiosity, do you know what the differences were/are between the RP-35 and RP-36? And the RP-36 with different fins was also what was used on the RAF Jaguars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard E Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 (edited) This is probably completely wrong but I'll add another theory to the debate. From memory, RAF Jaguars frequently flew with underwing tanks and stores mounted on the underfuselage station whereas the French aircraft typically flew with one tank carried under the fuselage and underwing stores. I think I've seen a reference to the fins being removed from the RAF tanks if they were carried under the fuselage for aerodynamic reasons: could the French fin design be intended to resolve this problem, particularly if it was a more common fit? Edited September 7, 2016 by Richard E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 7, 2016 Author Share Posted September 7, 2016 Possibly, Richard.My thinking being that if the empty cases hitting the fins of RAF Jags was a concern enough to remove the fins when under the CL - what of the ventral fins too? Surely they would get walloped as well...? Could perhaps have been a ground clearance issue...? Maybe...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Finn Posted September 7, 2016 Share Posted September 7, 2016 Here is a pic showing the pivot point on a French Jaguar for the external tank to allow for cleaner separation when jettisoned: the c/l pylon had the same extension at he back. Jari 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phone Phixer Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 The fins were removed from the tanks when fitted to the centerline only when the guns were planned to be fired. It was nothing to do with aerodynamics, purely the damage caused by the empty cases smacking into them. The only time this was not the rule was in the Gulf War. You will see fins fitted to the tanks for the missions then. It was war time and tanks were expendable!! Rob. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
squezzer Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 Brilliant, thanks for that. Out of curiosity, do you know what the differences were/are between the RP-35 and RP-36? And the RP-36 with different fins was also what was used on the RAF Jaguars? RP-36 and RP-35 were both produced by SECAN, in the same frame time, they shared the same external dimension, so I guess they were externally identical. I think that the differences are a matter of internal plumbing/wiring according to aircraft type specificity. It seems to me that the RAF tanks are different. Their central body section seems more conical but I have no clue on that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagRigger Posted September 8, 2016 Share Posted September 8, 2016 That French tank looks welded - the RAF ones were moulded asbestos / phenolic with no visible seams 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 8, 2016 Author Share Posted September 8, 2016 Hmmm. The mystery deepens! Cheers for the input so far guys. Looks like as far as 1/48 tanks go its just a fin issue, but its nice to hear and see stuff in general. I do like "stuff". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted September 30, 2016 Author Share Posted September 30, 2016 One more question - theres no "filler cap" moulded on the Aifix tanks, did they simply get filled via the aircrafts plumbing rather than independently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phone Phixer Posted October 2, 2016 Share Posted October 2, 2016 The tanks were filled and defueled using the internal pressurised aircraft system. The back up method used the caps that were in each section of the tank. Ascoteers photo's in your other thread show these, the caps with the over center latch. Usually this was for a defuel if the valves had malfunctioned and the tank needed removing. Trying to remove a tank with lots of fuel in would lead to a broken weapons loader and up to 1200 litres of fuel flooding around the aircraft!! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted October 2, 2016 Author Share Posted October 2, 2016 Smashing, cheers for that Rob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JagRigger Posted October 3, 2016 Share Posted October 3, 2016 On 02/10/2016 at 2:28 AM, Phone Phixer said: The tanks were filled and defueled using the internal pressurised aircraft system. The back up method used the caps that were in each section of the tank. Ascoteers photo's in your other thread show these, the caps with the over center latch. Usually this was for a defuel if the valves had malfunctioned and the tank needed removing. Trying to remove a tank with lots of fuel in would lead to a broken weapons loader and up to 1200 litres of fuel flooding around the aircraft!! Empty ones were sometimes removed by hand - don't try it with a full one like we did on detachment one year. With 4 of us we did slow it enough to stop it smashing, but we certainly couldn't have held it.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMP2 Posted October 14, 2016 Author Share Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) Thanks for the info guys. Work on Jaguar fuel tanks has started, mainly as a correction set for the 1/48 Kitty Hawk Jaguar A and GR1/GR3. Pylons etc will follow for the RAF version. Look here for updates and info and feel free to add or ask anything that may be of help. Edited October 14, 2016 by RMP2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now