Tyxxx

I can confirm it is a BOL combined chaff/launch rail which we began fitting to the inboard shoulder stations form the mid to late 90's. They replaced the LAU-7A's which were normally fitted to the shoulder stations as they increased the chaff load we could carry without loosing the ability to fit a missile, as was the case with fitting a PHIMAT chaff pod instead of a LAU-7A. The BOL was only fitted to the inboard Stub pylons as with the wings fully forward if fitted to the outboard stubs they inter feared with the flaps when dropped. The bulbous front to the BOL is actually a Nitrogen bottle used to cool the head of the Sidewinder/ASRAAM missile. The rear of the Launcher contains packets of CHAFF where in a LAU-7A would be a long Nitrogen bottle. Where possible, certainly on 11 Sqn where I served, we avoided fitting external stores to the BOL LAU's as the nose bottle did not provide the number of sorties before requiring re charging that the larger N2 Receiver in the rear of the LAU-7A provided. I also seem to remember that electronically the outboard stations were either wired to accept RAIDs/ACMI PODS or the Missile Management System (MMS) only recognised them on particular outboard stations, the latter I think and again if memory serves, the outboard stations provided less interference from the airframe/Pylons/Tanks in regards to data transmission than using the inboard launch rails. I hope this info helps

See what you mean in the photo. I would think either undersized seat or mounted too low, or both. Just a bit more info that might help. The ejection gun (The telescopic tubes you see sticking up following ejection), are bolted to brackets on or near the cockpit bulkhead in two places. the bottom bolt is fixed on the ejection gun and we get the bolt into that one first. The upper attachment bracket on the ejection gun, if its the first time the set of seats has been fitted to that airframe, is left loose. This allows for minor differences in the distance between the two brackets in the cockpit. The bolt would be fitted then the bracket on the gun would be tightened up. If the seat and guns had been out for access and were been returned to the same cockpit they should fit first time. We only take the gun out if its in the way, removal of the seat assembly is usually enough for access. Once the gun is in, the rest of the seat, comprising the main beam, seat pan, parachute assembly (head box) and Personnel Survival Pack that forms the seat in the seat pan are fitted as one, from above, with the six slippers on the inside of the main beam assembly sliding down the rail on either side of the ejection gun until the top of the ejection gun meets the inside of the main beam assembly. We used to fit seats in Tornado in five pieces, Ejection gun, Main Beam Assy, Seat pan, Head Box and PSP. It saved removing the canopy. Health and safety in the early 90's stopped that practice and we had to remove the canopy and remove the seat up the ejection gun as one piece. How the F-14 community did it I cant comment but been Martin Baker seats I cant imagine much difference. In summary, the seat should always, if fitted correctly be in the same position, the headbox will always be in the same position in relation to the underside of the canopy/cockpit sills, give or take a few millimetres depending on the lower bracket in the cockpit. the only part of the seat that should vary is the Seat Pan. I don't know the length of Main Beam on an F-14's seat but if you can find that out you can see if the seat length is to scale. Hope that waffle helps a bit more Tony and isn't to baffling!

Welcome home Tony. Interesting to read how your enforced sabatical from the site has thrown up extra information on the kites you have already built as accurately as you believed possible. Personally, if the errors are minor I wouldn't mess around with them, unless you get somebody who knows the particular subject better than you any errors would not be picked up. I often wonder how accurate decal sheets are as you rarely see the research or photos a manufacturer has used. Sometimes I think one side photo is used for both sides and if you look at painting guides, camo patterns are often the same on whichever subject. In reality, looking at photos of the same subject shows slight variations in where the pattern crosses panel lines, leading to shallow or tighter curves in the pattern. As for your comment on the seats, the seat pan is adjustable to allow for different crews body lengths. Fully down the pan is very close to the cockpit floor. Fully up the gap between the top of the seat pan and the bottom of the head box can be quiet small. Having them at different heights is probably the most accurate, from my near 20 years working with seats the crews rarely raise them before they get out, they are left where they have been adjusted to! Once again welcome home bud, looking forward to your thread continuing.

Thanks for the reply Tony. They are the small dumpy ones, a set for the Su-27 I started a millennium ago! I have never heard of UMP universal thinners, I will have to look it up. I am back in Darlington now so it would be good to see you in September. Any thoughts on the book idea? I picked up the Haynes Manual on the F-14 at The Works. I was pleasantly surprised, a good read with lots of new photos, 6 quid it was a bargain as well.

Still following this thread with great interest Tony, and the other Tomcat thread I found last night. Also interested in the items you are looking at producing. I was looking through the previous posts as I remember you using the Akan paints, to see what you used as a thinner. I couldn't find what you used so any help is greatfully received. Looking through got me thinking, have you thought about turning the threads into a book, 'Modelling the Grumman F-14 Tomcat'. Everything you have done so far would make a superb guide to the Tomcat, its weapons, paint schemes etc and would be a welcome addition to any modellers bookshelf. It would also make finding info easier. I am a bit old school, I do like a book at hand when I am modelling, just a thought, I would buy one!

The item is indeed a BOL launcher. The launcher has a chaff dispenser built into the rear 3/4's of the launcher, replacing the Nitrogen bottle that occupies the area in a LAU-7. The bulbous front end is a nitrogen bottle that replaces the nitrogen bottle in the rear of the launcher. Nitrogen is used to cool the head of Sidewinder and ASRAAM Missiles. BOL Launchers are only ever fitted to the inboard pylons on Tornado F.3's. The increased width at the rear of the launcher would be struck by the flaps when they were lowered. Ex F.3 Armourer by the way.

We also lost the Squadron codes and started using fleet codes.

During my time on fast jets in the RAF, 1991 to 2006, Tornado F.3 and Typhoon, we always referred to the markings around the roundel as fighter bars. I was on XI for 13 years and as we became more involved in the No Fly Zone over Southern Iraq the markings on the F.3 force took a marked turn for the worst. We started to use decals instead of the full markings so they could be removed easily when the airframe went on ops. Elevens became a yellow disc with the double eagles inside. The fighter bars were moved to the dielectric panel on top of the fin so, as I remember, a quick panel change removed the bars. Never liked them myself. We always referred to Six Squadron as shitty six. The reason I remember is due to the aircrew leaving the groundcrew in France prior to Dunkirk. I do not know if this was true but it was well known.

Looking forward to this one Roger. Are you at the club Friday?

LAU-7A fitted to an F.3

Still looking good Tony. Having loaded countless live and training winders as well as ACMI and RAIDS pods to LAU-7A's, I have to say the detail on yours are the best I have seen.

Just looked at that site. Looks quiet good. I added the shoulder straps to mine, as I said, making life difficult

Whats at Ripon? A stand was selling them for 2 quid each at the Tyneside show. Although they didn't have a full selection I picked up five which should cover the Flankers back end. Are you adding a pilot or leaving the seat empty?

I have been on hold for a couple of months while I moved back to Darlington. Modelling room is nearly set up so I will hopefully be back on it this week. I have a couple of bits to do in the cockpit and I can get the canopy on. Intakes need painting inside and fitting then ready to start painting. I was spraying the metal areas around the engines before work stopped but I may strip it and start again as I acquired some Alclads at the Tyneside show a couple of weeks ago. Struggling to get the right and accurate Alamos for it. I have never sprayed an aircraft nor finished one for around 25 years so on a steep learning curve. I joined the club when I came out of the Air Force as I was returning to the hobby and needed advice on figure painting. I have returned to my first love though in the last three years, just need to finish something. I am making life difficult for myself though as I am building 1/72 kits as fliers to add extra interest, rather than rows of statics and I hated painted white undercarriage, although I was using brushes then. I am trying to build famous aircraft from history, hence this Flanker, or aircraft I photographed whilst in the mob. Complicates things as I have to fit pilots and sometimes move control surfaces. 1/48 kits I am planning as doing statics on their undercarriage. I have Flanker references as well if you need them.

No problem Bud. The info in the book stops at 2007 so any later mods aren't included. I am in most evenings if you need to check any details.

I have some good Hog references which I am more than happy for you to view if you want to call round. The modern Hog guide has two pages of text detailing the differences, up until 2007 when it was published. Here is a quick summary A-10A Stick and rudder version with limited avionics O/A-10A Semi official designation. aircraft received no modifications and could change between an A-10A and O/A-10A from one day to another. Following Desert Storm the Air Force reluctantly decided it had a place for the Hog and instigated the LASTE (Low Altitude Safety and Targeting Enhancement) programme. New weapons computers,Ground Collision Warning System, Low Altitude Auto pilot and attitude stabilising system used during gun firing. Changes were made in the cockpit. Externally identified by radar altimeters fitted to the underside of each horizontal stabilizers and the bottom edge of both vertical stabilizers. Formation strips fitted at the same time but not as part of the LASTE mods. Beginning of 94 A models were modified to use NVG's. Externally covert lighting was added to the wingtips, top of the fuselage and extreme aft end of the fuselage. 1999-2003 GPS/INS installed. Fitted to cockpit and upper rear fuselage behind the cockpit. 2002 Life Extension programme instigated known as Hog Up. Re furbished wings and new fuel bladders fitted and extensive inspections extended the life from 8000 to 16000 hours. The last upgrade detailed in the book is the Precision Engagement programme and results in a designation change to A-10C. Extensive modifications to the cockpit, new stick top from the F-16 and new throttle enabling HOTAS operations. New smart weapons including JDAM, WCMD and the ability to carry the Sniper pod. Data Link enabled positional information to be shared between the Hog and ground forces and Link 16 compatability between airborne elements. ANG and AFRES units funded the A-10A+ upgrades that added 75% of the C's capabilities at a fraction of the cost. They cannot use GPS weapons but utilise the Lightning pod. Only difference between an A and A+ is a radio aerial added to the fuselage under the engines. Cockpit mods were limited to a new MFCD and F-16 stick top but no new throttle. Phew, I hope that helps!

love a Hawg! Will we see this at the next Darlington club meet? Just a couple of points you may need to look at. I haven't seen in the box but I would say by the box art it is an A-10A or O/A-10A as these versions wore the European 1 colour scheme. The sheet looks like they may be later marks culminating in the C. Their cockpits are different and they have different aerials, have a look on line if you haven't any books. A-10A's and O/A-10's did wear the grey scheme but I don't believe later versions wore European 1. Looking forward to seeing this in the flesh, Andy

I was a Tornado F.3 Armourer for 13 years so I am Just confirming they are BOL Launchers. The LAU-7A incorporated a Nitrogen receiver to provide coolant to the head of the 'winder and latterly ASRAAM. The bottle was inserted through the rear clamshell doors and occupied around 3/4 of the length of the LAU. The BOL LAU incorporated the Nitrogen bottle in the nose, which explains the bulbous look. Unfortunately it didn't contain as much Nitrogen so needed replacing with a full bottle more frequently. The rear of the BOL launcher contains chaff packets. You only ever see BOL Launchers on the inboard stub pylons as due to their length and wider rear profile they interfere with the flaps when they are down.

It has been a while since my last update to Red 36. I was re diagnosed with bone marrow cancer last March, 5 month of chemo followed by stem cell treatment in hospital put a stop my modelling. Thankfully my mo jo returned before Christmas when I was declared in remission again. I contemplated starting a new project but have restarted Red 36. I am hoping to have the model done for Sword and Lance in Darlington in April, we will see. So, here is my first update, comments as always are welcome. I am depicting the Flanker as shown in one of the photos taken during the interception. The Su-27 will be nose up, airbrake out with a slight bank to port, showing his missiles to the Orions crew. This has complicated the build as I have had to cut away the control surfaces. Rudders are shown. I have also hollowed out the air intakes at the base of the fins as well as making the port intake larger. Having thought I had finished the rudders I noted that the vertical part at the base is cut away with a fill in piece on the port side. As the detail was noticeable I altered the rudders and fins. pity I hadn't noticed it earlier. There was a step between the upper and lower fuselage which was evident on the engine cowlings. I cured it by adding plastic strip and filing to shape. Flaperons and leading edge flaps are shown below. They took a bit of shaping and may need further tweaking when the final primer coat is applied. Control surface details covered with primer. The hole in the engine cowling is for the acrylic rod that will support the model. On its base. Same photo again and cant delete it. Tailerons are taped on for effect.

Looking good as usual Tony. Looking forward to seeing this one in the flesh.

Decals stripped from the too light VF-111 kite. Looks like you have salvaged the kit. I have found a photo that maybe of use following the club meet chat we had on Friday night. I don't know if you have the book but it is in the colours & markings vol 8, Pacific Coast Squadrons 1974-1987. Unfortunately I cant make next months meet as I think my F-14 references might be of interest to you.

Cheers for the replies gents. I was given the kit so no financial hit with this one. I was looking at a quick from the box build but been 1/48th and my OCD kicking in the cockpit started to annoy me! I may suck it up and go with the box offerings although I have replaced the seat so that may have to do. I have never built a 1/48 scale kit and needed the practice before getting stuck into Tamiya's F-14! Go with it I think.

I have started the Trumpeter Fishbed, hopefully a quick out of the box build apart from a new seat. However, having started the cockpit it has become obvious it doesn't resemble early or late examples. A quick search for a replacement hasn't thrown up any for the Trumpeter release, I assume because the kit is reasonably new. Has any of my fellow members tried to fit an Academy or Eduard example and if so how did you get on. It may be a case of leaving it until specific releases arrive on the market. Thank you for your assistance guys and gals! Andy

Beautifull! I do love a Vark!

Note the HARM and Maverick combo in the bottom right picture, more interest!