bigVern1966

This kit is a Mark 1, it should be all white with a orange/tan radome. The wings had a black cross on them top and bottom from wing root to tip and the leading to trailing edge which aligned to the supports on the loader. The Ramjets were all over white with a bare metal intake cone. The boost motors were all white with a thin red band around them about 5mm behind the nose cone and Brown/red rocket motor nozzles. The Yellow boost motor tubes were dummy's used on prototypes and missiles fired at Woomera. Drill (dummy) boost motors on the operational units were black with white nose cones and fins. The RAF's stock of Bloodhound Mk 1 missiles was 575, with 440 issued to the 11 missile squadrons with 32 on launchers and 8 spares. The other 135 were reserves for service firing trials and replacements for squadron missiles fired on missile practice firings at Aberporth. The RAF originally ordered 800 missiles in 1955, this was cut to 700 in 1958 and the 125 missiles not issued were most likely broken up for spare parts. The missiles displayed to the public and on the newsreels were pre-production missiles with the yellow dummy boost motors. This is what an operational missile looked like. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205214261 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205378769 Launcher and Trailer should be Deep Bronze Green and the Landrover RAF Blue. The green missiles are Mark 2's which were originally white when they were built in 1963-66. They were painted green in the early 1970's. The Ramjet's on the Mk 2 were very different from those in the Mark 1 and the engine could be spilt at the mid point to allow parts in the engine to be replaced. Those engines had the bare metal rear section. The Mark 2 system had a completely different launcher, loader, radar and fire control system. The missile had a longer radome, front fuselage, bigger engines (both ramjets and boost motors), bigger tailplane and smaller boost fins. plus a fin on the top ramjet and strake on the lower one. RAF ordered 377 missiles (but only 375 sets of boost motors). Bloodhound Mk 1 was in service with the RAF from 1958 to 1964 Bloodhound Mk 2 was in service with the RAF from 1964 to 1991

And all of them are wrong!!! I've sent Ben a fraction of what I have and I have access to both Neatishead;s Mk 2 and Bentwaters Mk 1 missiles and launchers to give him anything I haven't got.

Most Museums don't stock that type of stuff. If they have the tech publications, they are next to useless as a lot of drawings are from prototypes which were modified in later years and have major changes. Also Most missiles in Museums are Drill / Training or Display missiles that are missing bits or are made out of prototype and pre production parts. The Rb-68 missile at the Swedish Air Force Museum is one example, it has Drill Rb-365 boost motors on it!!!

I'm working some for both the Mk 1 and the Mk 2. Around 90% complete for both. Got to get the measurements of the Mk 2 Boost Fins as they were not the same as a Mk 1 (angles were the same but the Mk 2 fin was longer in span and shorter in cord). There are only two 2 Mk 2 missiles in the UK that are almost accurate and on display, the one at RAFADRM Neatishead and the one at Aerospace Bristol. The three at Cosford, The Helicopter Museum and Muckleburgh Collection are Service Evaluation Missiles (Pre Production) built for trials at North Coates between 1962 and 1966 which had major differences with what was put into production (mainly in the shape of the ramjet stub wings and rear ramjet mounts),.

Absolutely true that story, Bristol's and RAE's aerodynamicists were pulling their hair out trying to work out why the data from Bloodhound Mk 2 models in wind tunnel tests and the data coming off the firings of full sized test vehicles were so much off (25% was the figure it memory serves). I do have photos of the actual report that states what the error in the model was.

I knew there was a 1-48 Scale kit of a Mk 2 kicking about, but have never seen it before. Mountford was the maker if memory serves. Quite a few errors on the Launcher and the Missile, mainly being a mish-mash of Mk 1 and Mk 2 parts. The Missiles lived on the Launchers 24/365. The RAF Mk 1 Squadrons had 32 launchers and a total of 40 missiles on the Squadron. The 8 spare missiles allowed missiles to be swapped out for servicing. They were suppose to have 8 Launchers at 10 minutes readiness to fire (one half of a Fire Unit), another 8 at 30 minutes (the other half of the duty fire unit) and the remainder (the other fire unit) at 2 hours from the sounding of an alert. There is some evidence that the missiles couldn't be fully prepared for firing in peacetime due to design flaws in the firing circuits that lit the boost rocket motors which meant that the cable that connected the missile's explosive igniters (Ramjets and Rocket Motors) could only be fitted in time of war (the Firing circuits could not be checked for induced electrical currents (from RF signals from the sites Radars and alike) with the missile connected to the firing chain. The Firing Chain problem was fixed on the Bloodhound Mk 2 and they could be fired as soon as the missile section was run up. The Missiles were quite badly weathered and after a couple of years tended to be a mish-mash of various shades of Olive Drab around the panels where they had been removed and refitted and had new paint brush painted over the panel joints. The Radome was gloss black when new, but weathered to a dull dark grey over time as the gloss coating eroded and was replaced with a wax coating brush painted over the fiberglass of the structure.

A quick internet Search shows you correct. It does show the modification of a Mk 1 into a Mk 2, What the author has failed to note is the following: Bloodhound Mk 2 Radome is longer and has a very different shape to the Mk 1. Bloodhound Mk 2 Ramjets are totally different shape, have a bigger intake and an enlarged rear end section. Bloodhound Mk 2 has bigger tailplanes. Bloodhound Mk 2 has different ramjet mounts and stub wing design (The Mounts for the Mk 1 kit are incorrect for a real Mk 1 as well). Bloodhound Mk 2 has different Boost Motors, rear boost motor mounts and Boost Motor Fins. The Boost motors are in line with the tappered body section on both versions of the missile, not the front constant diameter front end. Bloodhound Mk 2 has external Proximity fuze aerial and fairings, plus large vortex generators on the main body in front of the Ramjets (The Mk 1 has a couple of Vortex generators on the missile mainbody as well)

The Trailer in the Airfix kit is a Prototype model. It was only used at Woomera and North Coates, The production trailer only had four wheels on it, not 6 like the prototype. There is at least 2 Bloodhound Mk 1 trailers still extant. One at the RAAF museum and one that will be going on display at a UK Museum, most likely next year.

The one with the Land Rover and Trailer were gone in 1964. Mk 2 missile was loaded on to a Launcher with a Sideloader.

Big Bloodhound Mk 2 on the Market https://www.kitformservices.com/standard.html

I Doubt you bought a 1/24 Scale Bloodhound as they haven't made a kit of it. Their missile kit is a Thunderbird Mk 2 which was a completely different missile built by a completely different compony.

Bunch of Swedish guys are trying to restore this into a complete missile (it was on a firing range as a target). The missile is a former RB-365 (Bloodhound Mk 1) and was one of 13 missiles bought by Sweden to get them into the Surface to Air Missile game. It was a Trials weapon (Hence the 3 Prefix) and the missile system was evaluated by both the Swedish Army and Air Force. The Army then bought the MIM-23 Hawk, while the Air Force bought the Bloodhound Mk 2 as the Rb-68. 10 of the RB-365's were modified with fore extensions to take them up to the length of a Bloodhound Mk 2 so that they could be used as Loading trainer drill missile.

The Stalk Aerial is used to tune the Missile's rear radar receiver to its section's radar via Launcher Illumination aerials on the radar that point towards the launchers at all times and tap off part of the transmitted signal going out the main radar dish. While in flight, the missile picks the same signal transmitted via a wide field transmitter aerial from the radar via an aerial in the missile's tail (which was connected to the stalk aerial on the launcher via co-ax cables and waveguides). The main radar transmitter dish sends out a narrow field powerful continuous signal that hits the target and is reflected back and if the target is moving the frequency of the signal changes (doppler shift). A receiver aerial on the radar picks up the signal and allows to radar to track the target. it also is used to give Doppler shift information to the missile before launch. On launch the missile's front receiver system has had its dish pointed in the right direction, the receiver set to see the correct frequencies of its radar and told what doppler frequency to look for. One major problem however, is the missile is also moving and that changes the frequency of the signals it picks up, from the target it is speeding towards and the radar its speeding away from. However take the two signal from the back and the front and mix them (as is done in an radio receiver more advanced than a simple crystal set) and the doppler shifts caused by the movement of the missile are cancelled out and the signal left is the doppler shift that missile is looking for and it will lock on and follow. The reason the stalk aerial was used was to give the launcher 360 coverage and still allow the missile to pick up a signal. A Bloodhound Missile Section in Germany had 8 missiles / launchers per section and the only way that you could tune a missile from one section to an other was to move the missile to a launcher on that section. The models are of course Bloodhound 1's which were never based in Germany (and modifying a BH 1 into a BH 2 is a lot of work and is easier done by starting from scratch as the only usable bits are the mainbody (which needs extending and a new radome) the wings and the boost motors (which again need a lot of work). Only the Clutch airfields had Bloodhound and as far as i'm aware only Bruggen had them really close to the runway and the aircraft based there were tac strike Phantoms followed by Jaguars,

The kit is clearly based on BAC drawings as I have seen drawings from that period. It is indeed 1-24 scale and the launcher is pretty close to the real thing, only missing the bit that connected the missile to the launcher electrically, which wasn't on the drawings. The missile boost fins and tail planes are also spot on, though the wings are not in profile and the missile suffers the same problem as all other Mk 1 models in that the stub wing that supports the ramjets is a constant cord along the whole ramjet, which wasn't the case on the real missile, where it tapped in to a vent about a third of the way down the length of the ramjet and a thin metal plate then ran down the centreline of the missile to the point at which the ramjet is supported at the rear by a couple of struts. The shape of the radome and forebody guidance bay is spot on and the panel lines are roughly in the right places, but various ports and vents are duplicated on both sides of the missile (which was not the case on the real thing). On both versions of Bloodhound all of the vents, ports and gauges in the missile skin were on the port side where the skin was riveted on, while the starboard side panels were held on by screws and were removable. The warhead bay lacks proximity fuze aerials (in line with wings and ramjets) and a pair of vortex generators on the top and bottom. The small ram air intake between the ramjet and the body are moulded with a blank cover on them and the ramjets are based on development engines and not the final production one (which makes sense as the intake design of the engine was classified at the time as careful measurement of it will allow you to work out how fast the missile can actually fly). The Boost motor mounts, motor nozzles and thrust yoke that attach the motors to the missile and the attach the missile to the launcher are also almost spot on as are the bits of the launcher that support the missile. The markings are based on a demo missile belonging to Bristol and do not reflect the paint scheme on a real missile.

Nice model, though from an alterative universe. Belfast entered RAF service in 1966. Bloodhound Mk 1 was phased out of RAF service in 1964. Belfast's did shift a lot of Bloodhound Mk 2's but not on a trailer towed by a Landrover. Of course the same problem existed with the RAF Hercules, the aircraft wasn't even ordered until after Bloodhound Mk 1 was gone, though the RAAF did move their Mark 1 missiles in C-130's as they did have both in service at the same time. However in real life the upper boost motor fins had to be removed to get the missile and trailer into the aircraft.

The missile being towed by the Landrover was the last 264 Squadron Bloodhound Mk 1 to be removed from a launcher at North Coates before the Squadron was disbanded in 1962 to allow the clearing of the site so that Bloodhound Mk 2 service evaluation trails could commence. In the background you can see a development model of the Type 87 radar for those trials being erected. The Squadron's roll for the vast majority of its existence was service trials and it only had a full operational capability for around 8 months (Oct 61 to May 62). After that they had a training role to introduce a completely new mode of operation of the Bloodhound Mk 1 system for all of the other squadrons on the force for another couple of months and once those courses where finished, the squadron was declared fully non-operational and disbanded 3 months later after all Bloodhound 1 kit had been removed from the missile site. A nice build of the Airfix kit and not a bad attempt at an LPA Mk 1A (which was the version used on all the Bloodhound Mk 1 sites bar North Coates and Dunholme Lodge). good reference information on that bit of kit is like rocking horse poo. Good effort on making the launcher look like the real thing as well. However the missile colour scheme is wrong. All of the 575 production RAF Bloodhound missiles looked like this. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205214261 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205378769

A little bit of references for anybody making a Mk 1. https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205378769 https://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/205214261 The live boost motors on the 575 production RAF Missiles were never yellow. Those missiles with yellow boost motors seen in the late 1950's were Prototype Red Duster 2 missiles built at training rounds for the service acceptance trials at North Coates and the boost motors were empty dummies (North Coates did get live missiles in 1961). Real training (weighted with concrete) drill Bloodhound boost motor's were painted black. I've just managed to find the operational requirements for the Bloodhound Mark 1 launcher written in 1955. According to the finishing requirements the prototype launchers were to be painted in "Bristol Green BS 277". The only BS 277 paint colour that I can find is known as Cypress green. The paint colour for the operational launchers were listed as "to be issued later".

The search radar does rotate, it also folds down for transit as well, The whole turret rotates 360, but only around 225 degrees from the from the center line. The Target Tracking Radar on the front of the turret should move up and down in elevation, while the two Missile Sighting Radars (to the side of the TTR) can be steered in both elevation and Azimuth. I've worked on the two the RAF have and have the Tank Maina one.

Very off topic as it isn't a Bloodhound!!! The missile is a BAC Thunderbird mark 2 of the British Army. A different missile build by the English Electric side of BAC. Calling the Thunderbird a Bloodhound is the same as saying a Hurricane was a Spitfire or a Swift was a Hunter or a Vulcan was a Victor. They were built for the same role but were totally different machines built by different companies.

The Airfix kit is a Mark 1 and if you are intending to build it with the Hercules the only markings that can go on both are RAAF, as the Bloodhound Mark 1 was phased out of service long before the RAF got the C-130. (The RAAF did move their Bloodhound Mk 1's between Williamtown and Darwin on their C-130s). The Mark 1 was almost completely white all over with the majority of the RAF missiles having an orange radome (as did majority of the 13 Swedish missiles) Some of the later missiles on the production run (RAF and RAAF) had black radomes. The Yellow boost motors were inert dummys and were later painted black, while the real live ones were all over white with a thin red band just behind the forward mount. The ramjets were also all over white with a silver nose cone. The majority of the stencil data was black and RAF roundels were not painted on to the majority of the missiles (a few did have roundels and squadron markings on the upper ramjets for public display). The Airfix Mk1 missile can not be converted to a Mk 2 without some major scratch building as the only things the two missiles had in common were body diameter, rear main body taper and the wing shape / cord / span. The radome, engines, ramjet stub wings, tailplane and boost motors were very different in shape and size. As for the Launcher, they were very different and the trailer in the kit was only used on the Mark 1.

I think David does a Rapier FSB in the Firingline range and that somebody has plans for a 1/35 scale injection plastic Rapier FSA/FSB. The problem with Bloodhound is there are two very different missiles, with two very different launchers and two very different methods of loading. The Mk 1 did use a trolley and an Landrover, while the Mk 2 used a Sideloading Fork Lift Truck fitted with a beam to carry the missile with a ready use stand to support the missile (and the RAF used two different sideloaders during the missile's service life. The Mk 1 launcher actually came in two pieces with the Launcher itself and a large box like Launcher Plant Assembly mounted just of the launcher pad. The Mk 1 only has one paint scheme which is all over white with white boost motors (the photos of missiles with yellow or black boost motors on RAF / Swedish Army & AF / RAAF missiles are drill motors with no explosive content). The odd RAF missile had squadron markings on the top ramjet, while the Swedish Army and RAAF missiles did have roundels on the missile mainbody. The Mk 2 had the white scheme which with the exception of the Missile Serial Number layout were identical across the 4 users (RAF/Swedish AF/Swiss Army and Singapore after 1970). The Serial was behind the wing and in the case of the RAF missiles was a W above the serial number and an AA below that. The Swedish missiles had a SW instead of a W, while the Swiss missiles had a CH instead of the W and BL 64 instead of the AA. All of the nations repainted the missiles green in the early 1970s and the Swiss missiles stencil details stayed the same, while a great amount of the stenciling on the RAF missiles was removed. (I've no idea what happened marking wise on the Mk 2 of Singapore or the Swedish missiles, though in the former they were most likely the same as the RAF missiles. I did a set of full scale markings for a Mk 2 missile restoration (original white scheme) and working on markings for a green RAF Mk 2. See attached picture.

Right, having got my hands on the Missile Air Publication from the Swiss Bloodhound Museum, the correct colour for a green RAF missile is Olive Drab BS 381C 298, though I do believe that Nato Green was used on some of them and on the launcher towards the end of the missile's service life. Missiles based in Cyprus from 1972-75 were Light Stone BS381C 361. The bands on the boost motors were Mid brown BS381C 411.

Only on short courses (Ex RAF TG 3 so most of the training at Locking and Cosford), 1995, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011.

I did the first instructors course at Halton after the school moved from Newton. Though a quite hard course, the fact that the RAF Hospital there was still going, plus the medical School was still there made the social life in the evenings top notch (Best Male to Female ratio on any RAF camp I've ever been on by a wide margin). Saying that, Newton wasn't that bad either, plus Nottingham city centre was only 75p return on the local bus service. A side view of the compound below, taken in Sept 1986 (yes that is the tail of a BBMF Spitfire Mk II on the left hand side).

The NAFFI, with the Airmans Mess in front of the main car park / parade square, with a number of H Blocks either side of the square. Nearest H block to the NAFFI entrance was HQ P&SS Northern Region, with HQ ATC and part of the Dog School on that side, with Barrack Blocks on the other. Except for the Room inspections every week for Permeate Staff (it was a training camp) and a Airman's mess that thought that as the place was the RAF Poilce Training School, everybody there should be fed like pigs, the best 6 months I ever had on a RAF Training course. It was my post on Key Forum showing the Google Maps screen shot of the location of the compound anyway. Hopefully in a few weeks will be getting to play in a major restoration project on a real missile and launcher.