Buccaneers & BL755s?

[Phone Phixer]

18 hours ago, Scimitar said:

'used to drop live BL755's on exercise in Oman. '

Were bombs similar to missiles with a shelf life so were fired off before expiry?

 

I can't remember if there was a shelf life for BL755's.

Squadrons were given a small allocation of live weapons to use each year. The relevant sqn that was due to go out on exercise "magic carpet" that year usually saved their allocation to have a bomb fest in one go.

 

I went along one year in the dump doing weapon prep. Live 1,000lb HE bombs, Paveway II, Paveway III, BL755, CRV-7 and 30mm HE were all used.

We went to the firepower demo, the targets were 1km away from us. Close enough to feel the shock wave from the 1,000lb ers, pretty impressive. BL755's are bloody noisy when they go off!

 

Rob. 

[Finn]

On 6/29/2017 at 11:44 AM, Slater said:

Didn't know that Canada was a user of the Mk 20. Presumably those are all gone by now?

Yes we got the Mk-20 Rockeye in 1984 for the CF-104, i was on the first load crew to be trained to load them, a max of 4 could be carried on the wing pylons with Twin Stores Carriers. You couldn't load one on the c/l due to clearance with the main gear doors. We also had them for the CF-18 as well and when treaties were signed later on they were quickly gone from inventory. 

 

Another reason why you don't see many photos of live BL755s being flown around is cost, CBUs are much more expensive than GP bombs, rockets and gun ammo. Some countries could afford to drop a few now and then but most like to be economical. 

 

Jari

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

My post on World Naval Ships Forum (which has an aviation section) has been viewed many times but no replies so perhaps the Navy didn't have it in the Buccaneer days.

[Finn]

On 6/28/2017 at 3:50 PM, Slater said:

BL755 was actually authorized for use by the USAF, but only as a wartime emergency expedient.

 

I saw a photo of a F-111 being loaded with a BL755, the Load Standards crew were teaching USAFE Munitions techs how to load them who in turn were teaching the Load Standards guys how to load the F-111 so they could train us to load them as F-111s would come to Baden for fresh bombs in case of war. A bit different putting 20 Mk-82 Snakeyes on one just a/c when you are used to a max of 5 on a CF-104.  Also the A-7K manual, no doubt applicable to the A-7D as well, here:

 

http://aviationarchives.blogspot.ca/2017/04/ltv-7k-weapon-delivery-manualnonnuclear.html

 

pg 1-176 has all sorts of details on the BL755. As it says there, the BL755 is only certified for contingency rearming of USAF aircraft.

 

Jari

[Selwyn]

15 hours ago, Phone Phixer said:

 

I can't remember if there was a shelf life for BL755's.

Squadrons were given a small allocation of live weapons to use each year. The relevant sqn that was due to go out on exercise "magic carpet" that year usually saved their allocation to have a bomb fest in one go.

 

I went along one year in the dump doing weapon prep. Live 1,000lb HE bombs, Paveway II, Paveway III, BL755, CRV-7 and 30mm HE were all used.

We went to the firepower demo, the targets were 1km away from us. Close enough to feel the shock wave from the 1,000lb ers, pretty impressive. BL755's are bloody noisy when they go off!

 

Rob. 

All weapons have a service life and the BL755 definitely did.  Its life IIRC was actually determined by the internal cartridges (these ejected the bomblets) in  the weapon and I remember that there was a team that routinely went round to the storage sites in the RAF changing these life ex cartridges thus re lifing the weapon.

Most British weapons go through a surveillance programme over their lifetimes.  They give a weapon type  a nominal life on entry into service, say for the purposes of argument 10 years. They place surveillance weapons  in store that are never issued and left untouched from day one, and at  around the 9 year point they take one of these weapons and  along with the in service weapon that has flown the most hours and dismantle them, examine them, and determine the condition of the explosive fill. Based on the results of this they  might either decide to extend the life, or if found in a poor condition reduce the remaining life, or at worst take them out of service. If life extended  they repeat this process when the new  lifex date comes up again, and so on et al  until all the stores are either expended in service, or they become unfit for use.

 

Selwyn

 

[Slater]

In USAF usage (depending on the munition), some weapons which have expired shelf/service lives are reclassified as "Training Use Only" so at least some use can be made of them. 

[Slater]

I will say that, from a purely aesthetic viewpoint, the BL755 is a winner over all other CBU's. You just can't beat Deep Bronze Green and that rather businesslike appearance

Edited July 1, 2017 by Slater

[RMP2]

On 22/06/2017 at 4:08 AM, Phone Phixer said:

The tandem beams shown in Finns picture were only used for 8 inch Lepus recce flare carriage, no bombs were ever fitted to them.

 

Would these tandem beams be the same or similar to the Jaguar beams? looks pretty close in the photo.

Also - would they have been loaded up with a single Lepus fore and aft and as a symmetrical or asymmetrical load with maybe a slipper tank on the other side?

 

Cheers for any further help with this, finding almost as little photo infor on Lepuses (Lepii?) as BL755s and would like a different and interesting load to the norm without forcing a Whifi ideally.

[Finn]

It kind of looks like the one on the Jaguar, maybe slight differences:

 

 

I also posted a drawing of the Lepus on another thread. HTH.

 

Jari

[RMP2]

1 hour ago, Finn said:

It kind of looks like the one on the Jaguar, maybe slight differences:

 

 

I also posted a drawing of the Lepus on another thread. HTH.

 

Jari

 

 

It would be logical for it to be the Jaguar fit beam/rail. But logic and MoD.....

Thanks. I spotted and printed the Lepus image and converted dimensions to a 48th version. Much appreciated indeed.

Edited July 16, 2017 by RMP2

[Phone Phixer]

On 7/16/2017 at 8:00 AM, RMP2 said:

Would these tandem beams be the same or similar to the Jaguar beams? looks pretty close in the photo.

I think they were just a little bit shorter than the Jag one's. The Jag T-beams could have 2 1,000lb bombs loaded (or BL755's), the Bucc one's couldn't.

 

Have a look at this website for loads of info.

http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/

 

Have a look at the load outs for the Bucc S2D, as that is what you will be building with the kit you have and FAA markings. All the role fits are in the External Payload & Airframe Configurations section.

 

In the RAF's hands, like I said no bombs were fitted to the T-beams. But in the load outs on the site, the Navy chucked on 500lb bombs, as they were smaller.

http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/Pages1_files/Payload_Stores_Index.html?

 

 

As to how many Lepus flares, the Bucc could handle asymmetric loads so would be what was required. 1 flare could illuminate approx 1km. There are stories on the net of Phantoms releasing 3 flares at different times while pulling up to illuminate a long strip of ground.

1 T-beam or 2, I don't think either would be wrong.

 

Of course, looking through the loads, you could do a buddy-buddy tanker fit! Now that would be different.

[RMP2]

Thanks very much. Will have a look n rummage.

Buddy tanker did cross my mind too but fancy a go at loading up the bay.

[huvut76g7gbbui7]

3 hours ago, RMP2 said:

at loading up the bay

Ready for Torrey Canyon ?

http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/1060020567  for film.

 

Note the three S1s from 736 at end of row in this pic. (Perdu to note folded wings!)

 

[RMP2]

18 hours ago, Phone Phixer said:

the Bucc S2D

 

Ah, I have a non-fat bomb bay door on its way and have been generously gifted the early (EDSG over white) S2 scheme decals, so I think that means I can call mine an S2..? I think....
Also thinking that scheme was phased out in 69-70?

 

Just found the Gloworm rockets.... got a Hunter here with rockets that look similar and wont be used.... those on the outer wing pylons and an asymmetrical inner wing load of a slipper and slant 1000lb bombs appeals.

 

Ive managed to cross thread stuff now, sorry for the confusion!

Edited July 18, 2017 by RMP2
A momentary lapse of reason...