BAE Nimrod

[Hobbes]

According to the VC-10 book, the Nimrod already wasn't big enough for all the equipment and operators. Stuffing them all in a Vulcan would depend much on the timeframe; no way you'd get a decently capable system in there in the 1960s; 20 years later you'd have a much better bet.

[Weaver]

According to the VC-10 book, the Nimrod already wasn't big enough for all the equipment and operators. Stuffing them all in a Vulcan would depend much on the timeframe; no way you'd get a decently capable system in there in the 1960s; 20 years later you'd have a much better bet.

Well 1970s possibly, after all the S3 Viking managed with 4 crew and everything remotely operated, although it was no Nimrod.

[Weaver]

I still like the idea of a Nimrod with Vulcan wings. The Nimrod fuselage has 9 x "N" section frames over the wing box. I don't have a Vulcan structural picture to hand, but I'd imagine that re-distributing those 8 frames along a greater length of fuselage with "O" frames in between them would do the job. The Vulcan must have a large gap in it's full-section fuselage frames due to the bomb bay, but that needn't be preserved in a Nimcan/Vulrod because the bomb bay would be the long shallow ASW-oriented one in the Nimrod's pannier.


Now the question them is, what would you do with the spare Nimrod wings and Vucan fuselage.................?

[TsrJoe]

i like the idea of an AEW Vulcan, def be different, theres a passing mention on the Secret Projects site of a Vulcan used as an orbiting (not orbital, lol!) data link in a similar vein to one of the AWACS. roles, certainly be different for a model, esp in a hight altitude/nuclear flash scheme?

cheers, Joe

[GTX]

On a slightly different tangent, what if de Havilland developed a pure bomber version of the Comet (pre-Nimrod development)  - maybe as something in between the EE Canberra and the forthcoming V-bombers?  Either internal or pannier based bomb-bay.

Regards,

Greg

[Weaver]

Here's a thought: get a Comet, move the rear pressure bulkhead forwards and put some big astronomical telescopes behind it, with dorsal fairings to cover them, and then, because it's obviously for research flights by the Royal Astronomical Society, name it after that great astronomer, Sir Edmond Halley, thus making it.........


<oh go on, fill in the dots for yourselves.......>

[retro_seventies]

[Weaver]

Ayethankyew! 

[anthonyp]

(GROAN!!!!)

*throws rotten vegetables*

[GTX]

Something different - Grumman's proposal for an AEW Nimrod from 1986:



Regards,

Greg

[Mossie]

Ooooh, now that is nice, heck of a conversion though!  A stretch, a comet front end (Welsh Models vacform might help both those points), the rear radome egg (from the Cammet AEW conversion) & of course a Hawkeye radome.  Pricey, but would look good.

[kitnut617]

I'm confused   

If you have a dish, what's the rear bit for ?

[dy031101]

If you have a dish, what's the rear bit for ?

Maybe a more comprehensive ECM/ESM suite than that seen on the Hawkeye.

[rickshaw]

I'm confused   

If you have a dish, what's the rear bit for ?

Cover the rear quarter?  The dish would find the tail interfered with signals in that direction.  Either you lower the tail (Hawkeye) or raise the dish (E-3) to avoid the tail interference.

[kitnut617]

Cover the rear quarter?  The dish would find the tail interfered with signals in that direction.  Either you lower the tail (Hawkeye) or raise the dish (E-3) to avoid the tail interference.

Umm! still confused ---
having built an E-3 I can say that the dish/tail relationship is almost the same as shown in the Nimrod/Hawkeye drawing.