Trumpy 1/32nd Buccaneer!

[TonyT]

Edgar more

PS. Just a query as to the title of the thread? Why 'Buccaneer Pilots'? I will ask 2 of my fellow Navs on the Bucc Aircrew Association Committee for the definitive answer as they will have much more reliable info than the pilots; the 2 in mind have published 2 excellent books on the Bucc and one is our historian with a vast library of info.

PPS. Just for your info - the Bucc was very much a 2-man aircraft with absolute equality in the cockpit. Notwithstanding that navs were never allowed to be captain they often authorised student pilots when they were in the back seat on his FAM 2 on the OCU!

[TonyT]

Edgar, more

The Bucc featured in these pictures is an S2B not an S2A. And because of that there should not be a choice of Wing Tip fairings unless other details are changed.

The question is... Do crews know the difference? - clearly shown in these pics.

Not a driver or a shouty map reader - just an old Cpl Rigga.

[buccymad]

hi all

jumping on the bandwagon,as with anything "banana shaped"it really depends of individual airframes/time period with which to model said aircraft.

from a modellers point of view i would go with the wide chord tips (as per the pictures) as it would be an easy fix if you needed to modify yours,although i suspect trumpeter will provided both in the kit as airfix did.

also just to chuck a spanner in the dishwasher,those two little bumps at the top of the wingtip,above the aileron are the automated fire extinguishers (activated if the wing scraped the deck).

that is the first time Ive noticed them in that position ,they are usually positioned slap bang in the middle of the wingtip,also the first time Ive seen them painted over.

they are usually natural metal with a black centre section(rubber i presume)you can just about make them out ,above the roundel.

just to give an idea of the variation on the fleet ,and thats before you take into consideration all the different mods done to some/all airframes

[Greg B]

That would explain the obnoxious PMs I got from "Coolcat" after my Sanger Shackleton AEW2 post last year.

Darius

Should have given us a shout then matey, what a thoroughly odious little creature he is. Banned 4 times now, slags off this and other sites online, snotty, obnoxious, arrogant personality and sending condescending pm's to other members being a trademark of his and yet, he still comes back to BM! According to him users of this site have no brain cells. Which is why I have refused to buy any of his books as I will not put money into his slimy little pockets.

Hey ho, another few months peace until he joins yet again!

[The wooksta V2.0]

Weren't the tips on the S2s changed in the early 80s? I read somewhere that this after they were discovered that the ones delivered caused fatigue that led to cracks in the spars, leading to several crashes?

This will be a monster of a kit. Pity it isn't my scale but I guess they'd soon scale it down. Perhaps Airfix could ask them to do it?

[Plastic Bonsai]

I think the area rule reduced drag below the transonic region as well. The low speed profile drag of this airframe is very low and it doesn't rise that much in the transonic region as well. The limit on the Buccaneers top speed was a handling problem, not thrust vs drag. I noted a thread on Prune where aircrew were comparing the Bucc and it's successor - it looked like they really appreciated the Buccs performance and handling and would have liked just an avionics update. Why it never had one is beyond me though I suspected that the Bucc's performance capabilites was just too embarassing for some.

The flared wing tips were an afterthought at the end of the S2 development when someone noticed that the raked back wing tips when the wings were folded left a triangular gap between the forward tip and the carrier hangar roof and it was proposed to extend the wing tips to fill the gap. There was a brief flight trial and there was no discernable difference between the two wing tips on the aircraft handling and performance but they were retained as they must have been doing something.

When the structural flight testing was performed after the Red Flag crash it was realised that the extended tips were increasing the loading at the failure point which was one of the factors in the crash. The existing fatigue rig aircraft did not show any damage despite its flight hours being well ahead of the fleet. An ammended wing loading was produced and a low lifed Bucc was put through the revised loading in the fatigue rig.The wing broke at the failure point at the right number of flight hours - one of the best QEDs ever!

One of the outcomes of the accident investigation was the re-introduction of the S1 wing tips to the fleet to reduce fatigue damage. The S2 tips may have been re-introduced after the strengthening measures were made and then possibly only on the airframes that did not have any fatigue damage.

Meanwhile as newbie I think I get the Song/Chox bit but there is the photo in Edgars post which corroborates things for me. All I can figure is that someone somewhere has a pretty detailed CAD model of the Bucc and now knows there's a lot of interest in it.

Edited January 6, 2010 by Plastic Bonsai

[song]

Wingtip shape...thank you to you comment so more. MARK!

[Wez]

Another thing to watch for when making a Bucc' is the wingfold, according to my ex-Bucc' Splitter mate, a lot of them had their wingfold inhibited - a problem with the hinge pins apparently. This was obviously registered as a Limitation in the F700 but a further hint was the painting of (as my mate described it), red X's on the wing fold hinge. Now I've seen Bucc' stencils that show a red rectangular box around the hinge point with a red X in each corner - don't know enough about the Bucc' to know whether these were the ones he was talking about.

Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen pictures of Bucc's flying around without a cover over the hinge point - can anybody else verify this?

Wez

[DamienB]

The flared wing tips were an afterthought at the end of the S2 development when someone noticed that the raked back wing tips when the wings were folded left a triangular gap between the forward tip and the carrier hangar roof and it was proposed to extend the wing tips to fill the gap. There was a brief flight trial and there was no discernable difference between the two wing tips on the aircraft handling and performance but they were retained as they must have been doing something.

Roy Boot's book says they improved high altitude cruising performance and admits they had an unforeseen effect on fatigue.

I see Chox has been banned from LSP now too. Racking those bans up isn't he.

Edited January 7, 2010 by DamienB

[Edgar]

Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen pictures of Bucc's flying around without a cover over the hinge point - can anybody else verify this?

It gets a mention in Crowood's book; apparently, when it was found that the lack had no detrimental effect on performance, it became quite common.

Edgar

[Edgar]

Should have given us a shout then matey, what a thoroughly odious little creature he is. Banned 4 times now, slags off this and other sites online, snotty, obnoxious, arrogant personality and sending condescending pm's to other members being a trademark of his and yet, he still comes back to BM! According to him users of this site have no brain cells. Which is why I have refused to buy any of his books as I will not put money into his slimy little pockets.

Hey ho, another few months peace until he joins yet again!

You know, Greg, you must learn that you won't go far, in this world, if you keep pulling your punches; start saying it as it really is, for pity's sake (can't think how I'd change a single word, though, to be honest.)

Amazingly, there's a "Tim McLelland" peddling the same sort of poison, about Mr.Song, using almost identical rhetoric, on PPRuNe, on a thread started by our own TonyT, I suspect.

Edgar

[Greg B]

Well, my last annual appraisal did say I was now starting to show signs of diplomacy . Must be mellowing in my dotage like yourself Edgar

You know, Greg, you must learn that you won't go far, in this world, if you keep pulling your punches; start saying it as it really is, for pity's sake (can't think how I'd change a single word, though, to be honest.)

Amazingly, there's a "Tim McLelland" peddling the same sort of poison, about Mr.Song, using almost identical rhetoric, on PPRuNe, on a thread started by our own TonyT, I suspect.

Edgar

[Plastic Bonsai]

The wing hinge covers were left off from at least the late '70's onwards. There was a memorable Flight Test Report filed by the Brough Test Pilot who evaluated the effects of leaving the covers off. After he had sent up all literary flight genres he simply reported no noticeable change.

I think the versions bought for the RAF did not have the wing fold drive mecahnisms in. They could still be folded by hand for storage though. The Red X may collorate with them.

[TonyT]

Yep me Edgar on pprune, will add some more this evening

someone really should summarise all the points here to make it easier for Mr Song and his collegues.

[Notdoneyet]

You know, Greg, you must learn that you won't go far, in this world, if you keep pulling your punches; start saying it as it really is, for pity's sake (can't think how I'd change a single word, though, to be honest.)

Amazingly, there's a "Tim McLelland" peddling the same sort of poison, about Mr.Song, using almost identical rhetoric, on PPRuNe, on a thread started by our own TonyT, I suspect.

Edgar

Edgar,

Chox = CoolCat = Tim Laming = Tim McLelland - a man of many disguises ........ I wonder why?

HTH,

Ian

[Mike]

Chox = CoolCat = Tim Laming = Tim McLelland - a man of many disguises ........ I wonder why?

Good riddance to bad rubbish, says I. To skew a well known truism - A turd by any other name smells just as bad.

[wadeocu]

The wing hinge covers were left off from at least the late '70's onwards. .... I think the versions bought for the RAF did not have the wing fold drive mecahnisms in. They could still be folded by hand for storage though.

Incorrect on the one point; RAF wing folds were fully functional, mechanically operated and used often. Yes indeed the hinge covers were removed for easier inspection and flown as such - not always the case but very often:

[AnonymousAA72]

I think the versions bought for the RAF did not have the wing fold drive mecahnisms in. They could still be folded by hand for storage though. The Red X may collorate with them.

I don't think I ever saw an RAF Bucc taxi-ing WITHOUT the wings folding up -and rarely parked without .I'd say this was very standard for the RAF as well as the FAA....

[Iain Ogilvie]

I soooooo want to do an Ark Royal Bucc in 1:32 - please let it be so Mr Song!

Iain

Edited January 7, 2010 by 32SIG

[Plastic Bonsai]

someone really should summarise all the points here to make it easier for Mr Song and his collegues.

I fully agree - we could start threads on different bits and then distil them down. It's a bit difficult to know what he needs to know, at the minute at least we can pore/drool over the expanding collection of pictures of the models and highlight and areas of concern. Hopefully when production gets closer, markings and weapon fits could be clarified. The more shake and bake this model is the more I can build!

I stand corrected on the wing fold - do Tornados use wing sweep when taxiing? I didn't get out much but I did see the Bucc that landed at Brough fold his wings up twice whilst taxiing up the runway - which was just swank.

Also found this...http://www.amazon.co.uk/Buccaneer-Songbook-Anthology-Drinking-Songs/dp/B0016988E4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1254154297&sr=8-1 .... but remember that Buccaneers should be enjoyed responsibly.

And there's some video clips here

- Bucc 3 has some good in cockpit video towards the end. I wish that Red Flag film would show up somewhere - if you've seen it you'll know which one I mean. There's also rumoured to be a photo of the two Buccaneers hiding underneath a Vulcan at low level to sneak past the defences.

[TonyT]

Hi Edgar, Mr Song,

Some more feed back for both Aircraft

Buccaneer

Assuming that the S1 wing hinges are the same/similar the front hinge and lock pins looks a little "lightweight". The picture below of an S1 shows the wing break clearly and the various attachments.

P Mills

Gatwick Aviation Museum - Charlwood

http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&amp...museum.co.uk%2F

Jaguar and I think some is GR3 specific as the GR1 did not have GPS, (have altered some words for Mr Song to be plain English)

For the RAF Jag, how about the RWR (fin) and the GPS aerial on the top of the nose. And the HMS sensor in the top of the canopy.....

Its a bit hard to show an HMS tracker (sensor) when there is no perspex window to put it on...

Another cockpit error is the lack of the Sky G / RWR display on the RH glareshield as well as the INDU on the left.

And please make Trumpeter aware that of the GR1 G Meter supporting structure + the meter itself was binned post GR 1B/GR 3 upgrades, if they are doing a GR 1 or T 2

As regards the Jag.... I don't think the end of the cannon barrel comes past the opening of the faring in front of it (not on the ones fitted with the Aden it doesn't). The port side of the cockpit combing on the GR3 doesn't look right either. Picky point's I know, but if you're forking out £100 plus on a model, it would be nice not to have to fork out for replacement resin parts because something is totally the wrong shape (Like the bottom end of the Lightning kits they did), please pass it on. Well done to Trumpter for doing these two types though 1/32 Scale Phantom FG1/FGR2 and Hawk T1A next please (Oh and seeing they have done a large scale SAM kit (i.e. SA-2), could we have a Bloodhound 2 kit in 1/32 Scale as well (and don't use the missiles at Cosford or Hendon as the source of reference either, as they are not standard production missiles).

Not mentioned before I think

I would also mention the mass of holes seen in the rear heat shields at the rear of the fuselage. These panels were held on on their extremities by mush head screws. The rest of their internal structure was rivetted on with tiny (3/32") countersunks. The fwd heat shield panels had cut outs for mounting the tailplane range measuring protractors. Again, small details but seeing they have gone to town on it.

Yeph, the GR1 /GR3 ADEN barrels do not protude out of the blast fairing. There are two gas deflector plates in that area of the Brit kites. Also the Brit nose is missing the standby pitots, the TAT sensor and AOA sensor. The AJAX / Dash pot panel on the starboard side was never hinged either. It was release the QRFs and take it off.

Edited January 7, 2010 by TonyT

[Edgar]

Tony, your thread's dead; Laming's got it killed.

Edgar

[AnonymousAA72]

Wingtip shape...thank you to you comment so more. MARK!

Just a note om the wingtips......taken from the Buccaneer Website

"Mod.1736 Modified - Smaller Wingtips - Fitted to extend airframe flying hours by reduxing wing-loading. Result of fatigue testing on XN982 at HS Brough, to determine cause of the crash of XV345 while participating in "Red Flag 80" on 07/02/1980. (fatigue testing commenced Jun.1982 - solution implimented to specific airframes from Aug 1989 onwards. This was on the majority of airframes that had ASR1012 (Avionics Upgrade Programme)"

Additional notes state that the modification of the specific airframes was completed by Oct 1992. So, it will be important to identify the time slot of your own Buccaneer. I seem to recall that most Gulf War Bucc's WERE fitted with the modification - but not all of them. It would also follow that ALL Navy S2's would have had the larger wing-tips, and S2's based in RAFG!! Additionally the wing tip modification appeared on the S2B only and reduced the wingspan from 44' to 42'4" a difference of 1'8" (Sorry don't know what that is in "metric!").

The website is a mine of valuable Buccaneer info....Highly recommended!!!

[TonyT]

Tony, your thread's dead; Laming's got it killed.

Edgar

I know, I was in the process of replying to a couple of questions when it closed, chatted to the mod about it letting him know I considered pulling the plug on it myself when he started up................. At least we got some help and it seems kindled some interest in modelling, so it is not all bad news

Seems he (Laming) edited several magazines himself.............. had visions of him sitting on the throne with a stack of modelling mags and a marker pen crossing out adverts whilst muttering to himself.. "thats' a lie, they will newer produce that".... sad to say I used to read some of the Magazines he worked on, how the "mighty" have fallen, he just comes across now as a sad old man who's credibility and believabilty has long since gone

[Shaun]

I stand corrected on the wing fold - do Tornados use wing sweep when taxiing?

The F-3 can and does quite regularly but the Strike Tornados don't because of centre of gravity limits,the RAF GR1 also had an extra fuel tank fitted in the tail fin.

Anyway lets get back to the Buccanner- wing folding was well used by RAF pilots, and was allways a sort of party piece when displaying at airshows.

Shaun.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Shaun