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. :)

Dermo245

Need help identifying a bomb....

Recommended Posts

HI all,

So am currently building a 1/72 Revell Jaguar GR1A (Desert Pink scheme) and want to replace the awful kit bombs that come with it.

 

I found these in the stash and am wondering (a) what are they and (b) which of them if any are suitable as replacements?

 

IMG_1356_zps0wshhha9.jpg

 

Any and all advice appreciated!

 

Thanks in advance,

Dermot

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones on the right are BL755 Cluster munitions, the ones on the left are 1000lb RAF GP bombs, looks like maybe the high drag version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BL755 is appropriate to early Desert Storm missions, then they ran out and used a Canadian cluster munition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, scotthldr said:

The ones on the right are BL755 Cluster munitions, the ones on the left are 1000lb RAF GP bombs, looks like maybe the high drag version.

 

29 minutes ago, bentwaters81tfw said:

BL755 is appropriate to early Desert Storm missions, then they ran out and used a Canadian cluster munition.

 

Many thanks lads and much appreciated! :clap2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones on the left look as though they're out of the Revell Tornado kit; @Selwyn will be able to offer a bit more information; something about the fusing and the way this appears on certain bombs from certain kits dimly echoes in my mind, or they're molded with retard tails - whatever it is, I have a fuzzy memory that they're not appropriate for carriage by a 1991 era Jag operating at medium level.

 

The BL755s (Hasegawa ones?) can be used, but you need to check references, since some of the nose art may not have been on the aircraft at the time that of use. As noted the Jags did use  a few - 8 - at the start of the war. These were unsuited for medium level ops, and were replaced by CRV7 rockets (the Canadian ordnance). The replacement CBUs, employed as a result of a need to rewrite the CRV7 related software, were US CBU-87. If you don't mind the risk of being inaccurate in the markings/ordnance matching department, then the BL755 should be fine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The one's on the left are 1,000lb bombs with 117 retarded tail units. They also have the 960 fuze airburst sensors on the nose (making them more pointy).

The Jags didn't use airbust fuzing, only the 960 fuze in the tail. I don't know if any bombs were dropped with 117 tails as this would be released at low level, so early sorties before moving to medium level?

 

XV107 is correct on BL755 CBU use.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I concur with phone fixer, British 1000lb with 117 tails and proximity sensor noses, and BL 755.

 

Selwyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ones on the left represent a 1000lb AUR   (All Up Round).

 

This was supposed to be all things to all people.  It had a 117 retard tail and a PSU (Proximity Sensor Unit) on the nose.  The 960 Fuze was intended to be programmable and would dictate the mode of the weapon.

 

If it was used in airburst mode, the tail would not operate allowing the weapon to fall ballistically.  the PSU would initiate the fuze at 50 feet above ground level.

 

It it was used in ballistic mode, again the tail would not operate.  The weapon would strike the ground and detonate, either on impact or with a post impact delay.

 

If it was used in retard mode, the tail would operate allowing the weapon to be delivered at low level.  The weapon would detonate on impact or with a PID.

 

However...    the PSU was found to have serious defects and could allow the weapon to detonate immediately on release from the aircraft.  Because of this, the AUR was never used operationally.  

 

In order to make an operational weapon from those parts, you must assemble the body halves and then sand down the nose to a more ogival shape.  

It's difficult to tell from the photo whether the lines on the tail are raised or engraved.  If engraved, they will represent the joint lines along the retarder arms.  In this case they are over pronounced and should be filled in a bit.  If they are raised, then they should be sanded off entirely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bentwaters81tfw said:

BL755 is appropriate to early Desert Storm missions, then they ran out and used a Canadian cluster munition.

 

It wasn't a Canadian munition.  It was a standard US CBU-24 dispenser.

 

The Canadian link refers to the CRV-7 rocket.  This was a replacement for the SNEB 68mm rocket that was introduced into RAF service during the mid 1990s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Slater said:

Are you sure it was CBU-24?

 

Not certain...  it was whichever CBU dispenser was common at the time.  The number seemed right... :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries. CBU-24 was long gone by the time Desert Storm rolled around. CBU-52 and CBU-58 did see some use, though. The entire SUU-30 family was replaced by CBU-87 CEM which was a more effective munition. 

Edited by Slater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, XV107 said:

The ones on the left look as though they're out of the Revell Tornado kit;

 

yep, I can confirm. Part numbers fit.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Phone Phixer said:

The Jags used CBU-87 on Op Granby.

 

That's the one! :wall:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14/12/2016 at 9:29 PM, Enzo Matrix said:

The ones on the left represent a 1000lb AUR   (All Up Round).

 

This was supposed to be all things to all people.  It had a 117 retard tail and a PSU (Proximity Sensor Unit) on the nose.  The 960 Fuze was intended to be programmable and would dictate the mode of the weapon.

 

If it was used in airburst mode, the tail would not operate allowing the weapon to fall ballistically.  the PSU would initiate the fuze at 50 feet above ground level.

 

It it was used in ballistic mode, again the tail would not operate.  The weapon would strike the ground and detonate, either on impact or with a post impact delay.

 

If it was used in retard mode, the tail would operate allowing the weapon to be delivered at low level.  The weapon would detonate on impact or with a PID.

 

However...    the PSU was found to have serious defects and could allow the weapon to detonate immediately on release from the aircraft.  Because of this, the AUR was never used operationally.  

 

In order to make an operational weapon from those parts, you must assemble the body halves and then sand down the nose to a more ogival shape.  

It's difficult to tell from the photo whether the lines on the tail are raised or engraved.  If engraved, they will represent the joint lines along the retarder arms.  In this case they are over pronounced and should be filled in a bit.  If they are raised, then they should be sanded off entirely.  

Enzo,

 

The AUR complete with prox sensor as seen with 117 tail was,and still officially can be used operationally, its just that the retarder system is wire locked to make it inoperative, converting it to a low drag tail.  It is however normal nowadays to use the 114 tail instead as the focus of ops has moved away from low level to medium level releases and of course the 114 is much cheaper to buy than a 117!. 

 

Selwyn

Love the idea of the British 1000lb being in  "Modern."  Design dates from 1947. the newest made ones are IIRC at least 25 years old..........................!

Edited by Selwyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Slater said:

Makes me wonder why the RAF would demil/scrap some expensive 117's and retain the 114's.

1. 117 not really needed anymore.

2. After Gulf wars, Bosnia, Afganistan, Libya, etc, probably not that many 1000lb's left in stock! Probably more than enough 114's for what's left. 

3. RAF policy seems to be  to go to smaller type PGB's  like PW IV. and phase out unguided stuff.

 

Selwyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/12/2016 at 22:54, Selwyn said:

3. RAF policy seems to be  to go to smaller type PGB's  like PW IV. and phase out unguided stuff.

 

Yep...   smaller bombs mean less collateral damage.  Always a good thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...