pigsty Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 Help! A little while ago a very nice chap here on BM let me have the Fleet Air Arm bits for my Airfix 1/48 Buccaneer and, I think, I let him have my RAF bits for his. I have a horrible feeling I may have made a Horlicks of the underwing tanks. In my box are the parts for the tanks in the RAF version's instructions: three parts each, numbered 15 17 19 (right) and 16 18 20 (left). In the instructions for the naval version the tanks are in four parts each, numbered 19 115 117 119 (right) and 20 116 118 119 (left). So far as I can tell from the illustrations, the pylons/fairings are the same (although for some reason one version includes part of the tank while the other doesn't), but the front end of the naval tanks extends a little bit further than on the RAF ones. This doesn't appear to be the difference between standard and streamlined tanks, nor is it the much bigger South African ones. It seems to be two tanks with fairings, much the same in design, but with one a little longer than the other. So, my question is: what is the difference between these types of tank? Could I use the three-part ones for a Fleet Air Arm aircraft, or does it absolutely have to be the four-part jobs? Or could I just ignore the difference and rely on no-one noticing it? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumber Posted November 19, 2016 Share Posted November 19, 2016 There is no difference mate. Most RAF Buccs were en-Navy so the u/w tanks were the same. Happy days Scoots Ex 208 Buccs Armourer 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted November 20, 2016 Author Share Posted November 20, 2016 Ta v much. I realised the same myself as I woke up this morning. Parts 19 and 20 are common to both, so obviously the tanks are the same length and the instructions are misleading . I can only surmise that the four-part construction in the naval boxing was to allow the longer SAAF tanks to be fitted to the same pylons. Which only leaves you wondering why Airfix tooled them differently for the RAF boxing ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grizzly Posted November 20, 2016 Share Posted November 20, 2016 The Navy used two style of tank the plain one was early fit, one with raised fairing on upper front was the revised one used on C/D aircraft . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 Another question, still about those infernal tanks. Lord but they're dreadful. Each has a fuel vent underneath (as does the rear fuselage). They're odd little things: a deeply faired pipe with a plate across the end. I assume there has to be a hole in that plate, or possibly just above it, where the fuel would come out. But I've not had any luck with interweb references, not even the walk-rounds here. Can anyone tell me where I should drill the hole? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 On the rear fuselage dump there's two holes (central one larger than fwd one) in the mast and they exit at the end of it, ie below the plate affair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 (edited) Picture here on Thunder & Lightnings site, 5th picture on the right under 'Fuselage' http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/buccaneer/walkaround.php Edited January 15, 2017 by 71chally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted January 15, 2017 Author Share Posted January 15, 2017 Ah, forgot about them; handy for cockpit colours too. Ta v much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted February 3, 2017 Author Share Posted February 3, 2017 Another one. The kit has very prominent detonating cord in the canopy, but I don't think it was original fit. As I'm doing a Fleet Air Arm Buccaneer in dark grey and white, would I be right in thinking I should try to remove it? (From inside!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 On 19/11/2016 at 8:26 PM, pigsty said: Help! A little while ago a very nice chap here on BM let me have the Fleet Air Arm bits for my Airfix 1/48 Buccaneer and, I think, I let him have my RAF bits for his. I have a horrible feeling I may have made a Horlicks of the underwing tanks. Hi Sean Was reading this post and thought, mmmmm that rings a bell! Pretty certain it was myself that exchanged the parts with you many moons ago. I've still got all the bits so if do find yourself needing the parts it won't be a problem! Murray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Oh and I'm pretty sure the canopy detonating cord was certainly original fit for the S2 as I'm sure the crew were supposed to be able to eject through the canopy even if they were submerged under water. Murray Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted February 4, 2017 Author Share Posted February 4, 2017 11 hours ago, Muzz said: Oh and I'm pretty sure the canopy detonating cord was certainly original fit for the S2 as I'm sure the crew were supposed to be able to eject through the canopy even if they were submerged under water. Murray That would make so much sense, yet it hardly shows in early photos of the S.Mk.2. Still, easier to explain the cord than to try to remove the infernal thing. Hope I'm doing your parts justice (come back in six months to find out)! I've been persuaded that the tanks are fine, at least in their dimensions, if not in any other respect whatsoever. Why am I doing this? I could have sold this lumpit old nail for fifty quid ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kiwitrogg Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 There's a section in the buccaneer website about seats and canopies. Here's what it says under the heading of Royal Navy Service Quote A system was finally perfected in which a small explosive charge (in the form of a thin zig-zag strip) was placed above each of the crews' heads on the underside of the canopy transparency. This was the MDC (Miniature Detonating Cord). The thickness of the transparency was reduced to aide with the successful egress through the canopy. This system finally entered service as a retro-fit to existing Fleet Air Arm Buccaneers as well as RAF Buccaneers from 1971-onwards. The existence of MDC being fitted to a Buccaneer can be ascertained if the small warning triangle on the right has been applied to either side of the lower canopy frame in line with the Terylene arch fitted to the centre of the canopy transparency. http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/Pages2_files/0_Ejection.html HTH Cheers Gaz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 6 hours ago, pigsty said: Hope I'm doing your parts justice (come back in six months to find out)! I've been persuaded that the tanks are fine, at least in their dimensions, if not in any other respect whatsoever. Why am I doing this? I could have sold this lumpit old nail for fifty quid ... I'm sure you will do them justice, you're lucky, at least you've started your one. I haven't and the Tan Models one is looming large on the horizon! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted February 5, 2017 Author Share Posted February 5, 2017 The existence of MDC being fitted to a Buccaneer can be ascertained if the small warning triangle on the right has been applied to either side of the lower canopy frame in line with the Terylene arch fitted to the centre of the canopy transparency That's handy, thanks for that. It does give me a quandary, though. I'll be using the kit's decals, which include the small triangle but date the scheme to 1966. Oh well, there's always "what should have been" ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
71chally Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 (edited) If you see pictures of earlier FAA Buccaneers during ejection you see the canopy being jettisoned first. Sometimes you see an extra triangle on the earlier Buccs, even the later service S.1s, so guessing that was for the canopy jettison? Second shot dated 1966. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=buccaneer+S.2+royal+navy&client=firefox-b-ab&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiLncrs2_nRAhXpDMAKHUBeAuMQ_AUICCgB&biw=1525&bih=734#imgrc=Y__3mtdU3PKewM: https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=buccaneer+S.2+royal+navy&client=firefox-b-ab&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiLncrs2_nRAhXpDMAKHUBeAuMQ_AUICCgB&biw=1525&bih=734#imgrc=Y__3mtdU3PKewM: http://aflyinghistory.com/photos/blackburn/buccaneer/xn-973/3929-lossiemouth-1969.jpg Edited February 5, 2017 by 71chally Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Bryon Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 I think I have the RAF tanks if you need them. Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Bryon Posted February 5, 2017 Share Posted February 5, 2017 And check out this: http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/ And this ;-) https://jonbryon.com/buccaneerS2.html/ See you Saturday you masochist! Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pigsty Posted February 5, 2017 Author Share Posted February 5, 2017 There seem to be three sizes of triangle. The big ones are one under each crew position, for the ejector seats. There's a smaller one between them that the Airfix decals hint might be something to do with the canopy. And there's the very small one, level with the inner windscreen, that sits among the yellow dashes along the canopy bottom frame. And there's the question of whether I can be bothered to remove the cord - it will take a lot of work to recover the canopy's finish. As I say, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprtt Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 Hello all I'm building the Airfix kit but in the post Gulf all grey scheme (XX889 circa 1992/3 with Gulf markings still on). I have a question wrt roundels. All the reference material so far indicates that the the wing roundels were upper right and lower left, which is opposite to convention on most other aircraft. Can anyone tell me why this is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Des Posted March 21, 2017 Share Posted March 21, 2017 2 hours ago, Sprtt said: Hello all I'm building the Airfix kit but in the post Gulf all grey scheme (XX889 circa 1992/3 with Gulf markings still on). I have a question wrt roundels. All the reference material so far indicates that the the wing roundels were upper right and lower left, which is opposite to convention on most other aircraft. Can anyone tell me why this is? According to various print sources the Buccaneers which were painted ARTF Desert Sand and deployed to Muharraq in January 1991 had their wing roundels applied as you describe (unlike the Tornado GR.1 and Jaguar in-theatre) so possibly it was thereafter accepted by the paint-shop as standard when it came to applying the Greys colour scheme , or maybe it was just a bit of Buccaneer oneupmanship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sprtt Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Interesting. Well I guess it makes for a little difference sitting on the shelf next to the other Brit models. 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