guillaume320 Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 Hi, I would like to know from the experts if there is any difference between a 'standard' Tornado GR.1 and a GR.1B. Is the B just wired to carry the Sea Eagle missile? And who used the B? Only 12 and 617SQN? I guess those units used a 'mix fleet', no? Thanks in advance! Guillaume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 Not an expert Guillaume, but yes externally no difference between the Gr1 and the Gr1B, just the wiring for the Sea Eagle and the adaptor pylon to go with it. Think the rear cockpit had additional control panel and screen for the weapon. Spike or others with experience will be able to confirm. 617 and 12 were the only official operators taking over from the Buccaneers on 12 and 208 squadrons. When the Sea Eagle was withdrawn from service the B designation disappeared and no doubt the airframes would gradually disperse. I should be able to get a list of serials of the converted airframes if you require them. Muzz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guillaume320 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 Thanks for the reply Muzz... Yes a list of serials would be greatly appreciated! G Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jabba Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 According to the Tornado book by Jon Lake and Michael Crutch, the following aircraft were converted to GR1B standard. the first proof installation aircraft was ZA407 at Warton, and then a further 25 aircraft ZA374, 375, 399. 409, 411, 446, 447, 450, 452, 453, 455, 456, 457, 459, 460, 461, 465, 469, 471, 473, 474, 475, 490, 491 and 492 which were converted at St Athan. Hope that this is correct and of some help. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guillaume320 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 Thanks for the list Jabba...!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 No problem Guillaume. The airframes were as follows (all ZA).... Shown with tail code and Squadron where known ZA407 (the first proof installation) AJ-G 617Sqn ZA374 AJ-L 617 Sqn ZA375, AJ-W 617 Sqn ZA399, AJ-C 617 Sqn ZA409, FQ 12Sqn ZA411, AJ-S 617Sqn ZA446, SAOEU ZA447, FA 12Sqn ZA450, FB 12Sqn ZA452, FC 12Sqn and 617 Sqn ZA453, AJ-M 617Sqn ZA455, FE 12Sqn ZA456, AJ-Q 617Sqn ZA457, AJ-J 617Sqn ZA459, AJ-B 617Sqn ZA460, AJ-A 617Sqn ZA461, FD 12 Sqn ZA465, FF 12 Sqn ZA469, AJ-O 617Sqn ZA471, AJ-K 617 Sqn ZA473, FG 12Sqn ZA474, AJ-F 12Sqn ZA475, FH 12 Sqn ZA490, FJ 12Sqn ZA491, FK 12Sqn ZA492, FL 12Sqn 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plumber Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 I went from 208 to 617 when the Tonka's arrived from Marham April/May '94. Externally the GR1B was exactly the same as any other GR1. Internally too. The Tonka didn't have a Sea Eagle Role Panel in the back like a Bucc did, so the jet couldn't 'talk' to the missile like a Bucc could. On a Tonka the missile could only be launched in 'Boresight', ie, straight ahead and hope for the best!!. On a Bucc the role panel had 6 buttons named NEAR, FAR, BIG, SMALL, LEFT, RIGHT. If you found a nasty convoy on radar and wanted to take out the biggest boat furthest away to the right, select a missile, push BIG FAR RIGHT on the control panel and at the right range loose off the Sea Eagle and it would do it's thing. The beauty of a Sea Eagle was if it missed it's target for whatever reason, and it had enough fuel left, it would turn round for another go and keep going till it hit the target or ran out of fuel. Love it. The other thing was a Bucc could carry 4 Sea Eagles a lot further (and faster/lower) than a Tonka could carry 2!!! Progress eh? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotthldr Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Was it something like 4 Tornado's to do the job of 1 Bucc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardiff guy Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Slightly off topic but what was wrong with sea Eagle wasn't in service that long . Nimrod had harpoon why not sea eagle . Regards Glenn . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Selwyn Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 Slightly off topic but what was wrong with sea Eagle wasn't in service that long . Nimrod had harpoon why not sea eagle . Regards Glenn . 20+ Years, not long then? It was probably taken out of service as its operating system was so old (Same era as the commodore 64!) that it would not interface well with modern systems in the Gr4 Tornado, and it was not updated as was the harpoon. It was not really suitable for external carriage on Nimrod, a bit draggy, and I believe it was policy that all cold war NATO MR aircraft used common weaponry as possible so they could get a reload at any NATO MR base around the N Atlantic in case of war. That's why the Nimrod would carry american type nuclear depth charges rather than British ones in wartime. Selwyn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muzz Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 I know what you mean Glenn, doesn't seem like it was in service for long but as Selwyn has stated 20 odd years, probably wasn't that well know in its early days as Martel was still about and only really noticed in the broader spectrum when the Tornado took on the role and then it's time was up! I thought the same about ALARM when it was withdrawn (although again in service for approx 20 years), another weapons system that seemed to have unique capabilities but then disappears. HARM was in service before ALARM and is still in service now (although I'm sure an updated variant). Seems strange to me that these systems couldn't be upgraded and prolonged given the development and costs that went into them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardiff guy Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 see what you mean guys I guess I refuse to get old lol they just looked like good systems deleted before their time , Glenn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spike7451 Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 Slightly off topic but what was wrong with sea Eagle wasn't in service that long . Nimrod had harpoon why not sea eagle . Regards Glenn . 20+ Years, not long then? It was probably taken out of service as its operating system was so old (Same era as the commodore 64!) that it would not interface well with modern systems in the Gr4 Tornado, and it was not updated as was the harpoon. It was not really suitable for external carriage on Nimrod, a bit draggy, and I believe it was policy that all cold war NATO MR aircraft used common weaponry as possible so they could get a reload at any NATO MR base around the N Atlantic in case of war. That's why the Nimrod would carry american type nuclear depth charges rather than British ones in wartime. Selwyn Politics had a lot to do with it...Most of the weapons we used on Nimrod were also used by the US Navy,Australians,Canada & N.Zealand.For example,Selwyn touched on the BDU we used on the Nimrod,whilst the WE-177 we used was looked after & maintained by us (the RAF) the BDU was looked after by the US Navy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now