RAF Jags, CBU-87 and the tandem beam

[RMP2]

I have read a few times that the CBU-87 was used in GW1 in singles on the inboard wing pylon as it was too long to work with the Jags tandem beam which works fine with BL755s and British 1000lb'ers.

Thing is, the CBU-87 is around 2.26-2.34m in length, the BL755 is longer at 2.44m and the 1000lb'ers are 2.3m long.

 

I'm getting consistant lengths from tinternet sources and in the case of the 755 they pretty much match up with a Hunting "sales brochure" that I have, so they seem pretty accurate.

 

So... why do the CBU-87s not fit the Jags tandem rail?

It bugs me!

[Selwyn]

45 minutes ago, RMP2 said:

I have read a few times that the CBU-87 was used in GW1 in singles on the inboard wing pylon as it was too long to work with the Jags tandem beam which works fine with BL755s and British 1000lb'ers.

Thing is, the CBU-87 is around 2.26-2.34m in length, the BL755 is longer at 2.44m and the 1000lb'ers are 2.3m long.

 

I'm getting consistant lengths from tinternet sources and in the case of the 755 they pretty much match up with a Hunting "sales brochure" that I have, so they seem pretty accurate.

 

So... why do the CBU-87s not fit the Jags tandem rail?

It bugs me!

Quite possibly related to the position of the bomb Fusing units and arming wire strong points on the rail, British Fuzing requirements are quite different position wise  to US Fuzing units.

[RMP2]

1 minute ago, Selwyn said:

Quite possibly related to the position of the bomb Fusing units and arming wire strong points on the rail, British Fuzing requirements are quite different position wise  to US Fuzing units.

 

I like your thinking, Selwyn.

 

But... a lot of US munitions work fine with other pylons which also work with BL755s... would the Jags tandem beam be any different?

 

[Selwyn]

10 minutes ago, RMP2 said:

 

I like your thinking, Selwyn.

 

But... a lot of US munitions work fine with other pylons which also work with BL755s... would the Jags tandem beam be any different?

 

Having spent the last 20 years before my retirement  struggling to engineer methods of fitting US stuff to Typhoons It sounds easy...............but!

[RMP2]

29 minutes ago, Selwyn said:

Having spent the last 20 years before my retirement  struggling to engineer methods of fitting US stuff to Typhoons It sounds easy...............but!

 

That sounds as if you are suggesting that some things in the military are far more complicated and unreasonably difficult than they should be...

[Finn]

On pg 23 of this file: 

 

https://www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/our-history/air-historical-branch/post-coldwar-studies/jaguar-operations/

 

gives an explanation of why only two per aircraft, further details of the CBU-87 and Jaguar in the following pages.

 

Jari

[RMP2]

25 minutes ago, Finn said:

On pg 23 of this file: 

 

https://www.raf.mod.uk/what-we-do/our-history/air-historical-branch/post-coldwar-studies/jaguar-operations/

 

gives an explanation of why only two per aircraft, further details of the CBU-87 and Jaguar in the following pages.

 

Jari

 

Perfect, thank you very much for that!

[Selwyn]

1 hour ago, RMP2 said:

 

That sounds as if you are suggesting that some things in the military are far more complicated and unreasonably difficult than they should be...

Heaven forbid!🤣

[CharlieGolf2009]

Only saw pictures of Jags carrying a single CBU-87 beneath each wing.

 

 

Edited November 4 by CharlieGolf2009

[exdraken]

On 11/3/2025 at 9:52 PM, Finn said:

gives an explanation of why only two per aircraft, further details of the CBU-87 and Jaguar in the following pages.

So not a space issue, but a time, priority and clearance issue...flight safety was first at least.

But targeting anyways was also an issue in the beginning of CBU-87 use..

[Slater]

On the flip side, BL755 was authorized for use on some US aircraft, but only on an emergency wartime basis. Possibly something to do with the fuzing?

[RMP2]

4 hours ago, Slater said:

On the flip side, BL755 was authorized for use on some US aircraft, but only on an emergency wartime basis. Possibly something to do with the fuzing?

 

True. The later, radar fused version sorted that (RBL755?) but things got signed that put an end to them here in the UK at least

[Slater]

I've heard very little about the RAF's use of CBU-87 during Desert Storm. Presumably it worked up to expectations?

[Finn]

On 11/8/2025 at 5:42 AM, Slater said:

On the flip side, BL755 was authorized for use on some US aircraft, but only on an emergency wartime basis. Possibly something to do with the fuzing?

 

As per the Warning:

 

 

Jari

[Jabba]

Although not Jaguar, when the CBU-87s were fitted to the Tornado it one bomb to the underfuselage pylon mounts rather than 2 to the twin stores carrier.

[Slater]

Normally, stores have to be cleared/certified on a particular aircraft before they can be used operationally. Did the RAF do this previous to the war?

1 hour ago, Finn said:

 

As per the Warning:

 

 

Jari

Good information, thanks.

[Pappy]

1 minute ago, Slater said:

Normally, stores have to be cleared/certified on a particular aircraft before they can be used operationally. Did the RAF do this previous to the war?

 

This is generally true but wartime is a situation when the 'normal' process can be expedited or even circumvented due to 'operational need'.

The F-111s use of the GBU-28 during DS is a good example, design to operation within 3 weeks. The EO fill was still curing when the bombs were being transported to the theatre

 

Pappy

 

[Slater]

True about the GBU-28. In fact, my claim to fame in 20 years of USAF Ammo service was being on the Nellis AFB crew that received and assembled the first inert GBU-28 for testing. This would have been January of 1991 (IIRC). The warhead arrived on a C-141 and was packed in a large wooden crate. We hauled it to the bomb dump, removed the warhead and placed it on an MHU-110 trailer. Then attached the wing assembly and forward adapter. Some of the crew expressed a certain amount of letdown over the whole experience. They were expecting some sort of space-age wonder weapon instead of what looked like a stretched BLU-109. 

[Pappy]

Don't worry, I am sure that when Hollyweird makes the movie it will be suitably 'whizz-bang'

 

Pappy