Jump to content
This site uses cookies! Learn More

This site uses cookies!

You can find a list of those cookies here: mysite.com/cookies

By continuing to use this site, you agree to allow us to store cookies on your computer. :)


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5,457 Excellent


About 71chally

  • Rank
    Very Obsessed Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Thanks for those John. Really it's the warning triangles pre MDC that would be most handy. Also, I think @colin ritchieis after details of the large single dispenser at the rear underside, but it does seem quite hard to find drawings of that. There are some images on the net, but can't link right now. The two you show are the ones where the mounting plates are molded into the surface of the new kit.
  2. I know Duncan, I meant that the Firestreak was the only missile operational with the Javelin.
  3. There's always the SAAF Shack MR.3s, retired in 1984. Don't seem to be that popular as completed models but they did look good.
  4. The more traditional Shackleton MR.2 was chosen for AEW.2 conversion as basically it hadn't suffered from the all up weight stresses that the MR.3 had, there were plenty of redundant airframes around, and as Gmat mentions, the layout was far more suitable for bolting on the radar and radome. You have to remember it really was planned to be a short notice stop-gap Airborne Early Warning measure at the time, so existing retired MR.2s from the Ballykelly Wing and 205 Squadron were drawn from storage at Kemble and taken to Bitteswell for the conversion programme using the existing AN/APS-20 radar sets and associated equipment that had been removed from the dwindling Gannet AEW.3 fleet. The 'stop-gap AEW' saw as many years RAF service as the entire MR.1, 2 & 3 run. MR.3s retired in the UK with 42 Squadron in September 1971, and in Malta with 203 Squadron in January 1972. I'm away from sources but I believe that the Duxford Shack was the last in operational service when it was delivered. The MR.2 actually lingered on a little bit longer due to better stress life, some seeing work as T.2 trainers with MOTU, and to support detachments to the Far East, believe the last was retired at RAF Honnington, Spring 1972. AEW.2s were retired with 8 Squadron 1 July 1991. PS, the best Shackleton book for good solid information is without a doubt Chris Ashworths', his involvement, knowledge and research of the type was second to none.
  5. and they can't be mixed as the Javelin was only ever Firetsteak equipped and the Sea Vixen FAW.2 only Red Top equipped.
  6. There is nothing that states that anywhere really. Getting to NorthBayKids point, all the V bomber designs were technology of the 1940s, but the Vulcan, and particularly the Victor, did have novel construction techniques which put them over the Valiant, and flight systems were far more advanced. The Valiant was a traditional and safe 'belt and braces' design which is why it was ordered in the first place (over the even more traditional Sperrin), before the other two designs were known quantities. The Valiant B.2 is only known to be stronger than the Valiant B.1, the only reason being is that the spars were uninterrupted by the landing gear cutout, I have never seen evidence that it was stronger than the other two bombers. There wasn't any reduction in span to reduce gust and turbulence loading on the wing, and it was constructed from the same alloy that eventually brought down the Valiant fleet. Of course these issues could have been remedied, but would have taken years to achieve on an already known to be outdated design, Canberra developments, the Buccaneer and other cancelled types were already being specified for the role. Conversely, I haven't heard of the issues that @Giorgio N raises, I have only seen it with the same bomb bay dimensions, which was adaptable to Blue Steel on test Valiant. The Conway engines were vastly superior and powerful than the Avon, and I wouldn't have thought that lifting the established Nukes would have been an issue. All aircraft suffer to some extent on sustained low-level ops, even more so when designed for one role and then switched to that role, but the Vulcan dealt with it more admirably than most. The B.2 was a sexy looking aircraft for sure and one of my favourite types of that 'Wellsian' era, but that was it. Imagine the discussion being the other way around, why did the RAF have the Valiant B.2 instead of ordering that 'Dan Dare futuristic' HP80 design?!
  7. Beautiful rendered Bill, even down to the subtle seat colouring. Great info on the Ski kit @keefr22, I hadn't realised that it was that good.
  8. Will you be doing a build or review at all? Would love to see how these kits come and how they build. Srongly interested in the Andover C.1 when that comes along.
  9. No post-war bomber including MEAF/FEAF Canberras wore the sand/stone finish, only really applied to transport & liaison aircraft that were expected to operate in rough strips.
  10. Contrary to many other beliefs on various forums I personally don't think the Valiant B.2 would have been around for too long. Compared with the Vulcan and Victor the Valiant was far more traditional in both flight systems and construction than those two. The B.2 with Conway's would really have only had the edge over the B.1, and possibly to a lesser extent, the Victor (not enough evidence on that) in the low-level and redundant target market roles. In reality the low-level role was far more suited to smaller types such as the interdiction Canberras, Buccaneer, and robust Vulcan. In an alternative world the TSR.2 would have made it redundant, but even then the Canberra and Vulcan would have filled the gap. However I know how popular 'what-ifs' are and there seems to be alsorts of versions of reality! Colour scheme wise it would have been in the same scheme as the Canberras with the black undersides. The B.2 was exciting looking thing at the time, but too late to have been truly effective, and probably the right decision was made that it didn't progress.
  11. Yeah, l think a bit of what you say. If you look at side view schematics the TFR seems to be sufficiently higher up and further forward as to not interfere with the main H2S scanner path. However I won't pretend to fully understand radar principles!
  12. It doesn't come better than that!
  13. the square bit isn't part of the radome, but an extension to the fuselage structure. My take on this is that the company that made and delivered the radome finished them in the medium sea grey colour all over (apart from the fwd part which was sometimes black). It appears a slightly different hue to the airframe grey due to the neoprene coating of the radome and thinner coating to allow radar waves to travel through it (this came up in the Victor thread recently). This results in a colour mismatch on the port side of the nose where the grey radome meets the dark green camo of the airframe. The stb'd side looks alot neater as it is grey meeting grey.
  14. I don't think that's correct Jonners. The third triangle is also seen on early RAF Buccaneers which weren't fitted with underwater ejection (and of course RN jets retained that system but lost the third triangle), it referred to the canopy jettison system pre MDC. My understanding is that the underwater escape system didn't merit its own warning marking as it was part of the seat system. I wonder if @canberra kid AP shows the markings text?
  15. Correct on all counts, the kit has alternative wing tip sections to cater for B.2 and K.2 wing spans. Edit, I think 3 foot was the total removed in span, 18" off each wing tip.
  • Create New...