Buccaneer S.1 and S.2 Jet pipes

[71chally]

I've just purchased the lovely set of Buccaneer S.1 intakes from Aerocraft Models so that I can convert the new Airfix kit, and it got me thinking that the jet pipes /exhausts would also be different?

I've got it in my mind that the S.1 pipes were of smaller diameter and that the aft part of the of nacelles was narrower and swept upwards from the underside more to compensate, compared to the S.2. 

The Haynes book on the Buccaneer does casually mention that the jet pipe size changed, but nothing more definite.

I have compared pictures and this still looks to be the case to me, all be it a very subtle difference (and certainly not one that prevents me from doing a conversion), but then I've started doubting myself.

 

Can anyone here definitely state, preferably with information to back it up, whether they were actually different from each other or not?

Beyond measuring the S.1/S.2 orifices at FAAM, it might be hard to confirm.

 

[Edge]

I spotted this set last night. Thought it odd that the intakes & exhausts are separate sets.

 

https://aerocraftmodels.bigcartel.com/product/blackburn-buccaneer-s-1-exhaust-and-air-brake-set

 

Edge

 

[David Womby]

Can't help you on the exhausts.  I hadn't spotted that when I did my S1 conversion a few weeks back to the old Airfix S2B with ModelArt intakes.   Good luck with your conversion.  the S1 looks so different!

 

David

[Giorgio N]

The shape of the exhaust fairing is sure different between the S.1 and S.2, this is shown well in the Aeroguide new series book on the type where pictures of both are shown side by side.

From the picture it's however hard to tell if the exhaust pipe is larger on one of the two.

I have the old Heritage Aviation conversion and this correctly includes a new set of exhausts

[71chally]

The nib fairings behind the exhausts are definitely different, and smaller, and Aerocraft provide a set for these (aswel as the airbrakes without the thicker skins).

 

But it's the possible exhausts and rear nacelles size differences that I'm trying to pin down for sure.

 

 

Edited June 15, 2020 by 71chally

[perdu]

I am not helping pin anything down I know but this is the S1 in the RNAS Museum at Yeovilton

 

Trawling through a milliard of photos I have taken over the years I came across this one which I had forgotten, a very clear shot of the rear of the pipe and the shape of the nacelle rear

 

I wish I had done a comparison shot of the S2, sorry

[John B (Sc)]

Maurice Allward in Modern Combat Aircraft 7 said that the main airframe design changes required for the Mk2 was enlargement of the air intakes to cope with the greater mass flow. All the drawings I can find show similar sizes, so I think you are correct that exhaust size remained the same.  

 

I can check this weekend and may be able to take a photograph of a Mk2 from the same aspect as 'perdu' s shot.

[Graham Boak]

Greater mass flow in = greater mass flow out.  Any other large holes on a Mk.2 that weren't there on a Mk.!?

[John B (Sc)]

On 6/19/2020 at 2:19 PM, Graham Boak said:

Greater mass flow in = greater mass flow out.  Any other large holes on a Mk.2 that weren't there on a Mk.!?

Very true.  By the time the air had been in, compressed, heated etc., its volume and velocity would have changed a lot - which was the point wasn't it? 

 

Then only additional 'exhaust' points I can think of was the additional boundary layer blowing on the inner wing. I believe the boundary layer slits were modified generally, so flow rates may well have increased.

[71chally]

Thank you for all the extra answers and info on this.

 

Personally after looking at lots of photos I think the jet pipes are slightly larger on the S.2 and this affects the rear of the nacelle a touch, with that underside upsweep not being as much as on the S.1 resulting in less of a gap between the nacelle rear bottom line in relation to the bomb bay upper edge line. 

I have taken loads of S.1 and S.2 pictures, and some from similarish angles but need to overlay them on a programme like paint.net which I don't currently have.

Also looking on line, the old Heritage S.1 conversion set features replacement intakes and rear nacelles.

Next stage is to actually measure some real exhausts, so I'm hoping the FAAM might reopen at some stage this year.

 

Graham makes a good point, the fact that the Spey produces a third more power than the Gyron Junior, you would think would make the jet pipes larger in diameter.

I'm not sure if the S.2 Speys delivered more BLC pressure, however it certainly was able to deliver  more thrust when the BLC was running, allowing for a safer margin of power for operation from carriers or hot conditions.

 

 

Having said all that, any differences in the nacelle and pipe are so hard to actually quantify that I don't suppose it will matter on a 72nd kit!

[neilfergylee]

Oh lummie!  I'm about to start a 1/48 S.1 conversion!