STOVL Canberra

[Sauragnmon]

I have to admit, I was kind of confused when I read the bias was aft - all that's around that area on a harrier is the empennage, the engine, the nose, the pit, the weapons, everything else is around the nose area, it didn't make sense to have the lift biased aft, you'd nose down hard.  That and with primarily unheated thrust in the forward jets, that thrust is forming a high-pressure area between the hot tail thrust and the intakes, which averts the chances of a pop stall.

[kitnut617]

I hadn't quite got my head around it either but now it's sorted out I can get on with the project.

I've decided that I'll keep the guy 'in the hole' up front too, considering the Prowler had three operators keeping an eye on things, I think two will do the job here.  I'll have the guy up front doing the detecting and the guy in the right seat as the WO.

Incidently, does anyone know what the RAF call their 'Wild Weasels' and what the correct service designation is ?  Also can the Pave Spike Targeting Pod be used with TV guided weapons ?

[Weaver]

The RAF don't believe in dedicated Wild Weasels: a few years back some Tornado squadrons had the wiring and training for ALARM whilst others had Paveway or JP.233, but there was no special designation for the aircraft. Now I think with the GR.4, every Tornado can use all the weapons.

[Mossie]

XI Sqn had a few of their Tornado F.3's fitted to perform DEAD duties, these became known as EF.3's, but I don't think it was an official designation.  Never went further than a handful of aircraft IIRC.

[kitnut617]

Thanks for that, so if I call this a GR.9 DEAD I've got it covered, or should that be a GR.23.  Now all I need to do is work out what DEAD stands for, apart from pushing up the daisies

[Mossie]

Would it be an EGR.23?  DEAD stands for 'Destruction of Enemy Air Defences'.

[kitnut617]

Would it be an EGR.23?  DEAD stands for 'Destruction of Enemy Air Defences'.

Well this is definitely a DEAD aircraft, it's sole purpose to hunt out SAM sites.  I think I like EGR to, but the number is bugging me, there was a SC.9 which was a converted PR.9 so this could be a EGR.9.  Thanks for the help Simon.

[kitnut617]

Well I've had to change my plans a bit after following the Harrier and Sea Harrier thread on here.  I was going to use the GAU-12 gun pods (Plan 'A') but then changed my mind to go with the GR.5/7/9 gun pods instead (Plan 'B', keeping it compatible with the Harriers).  It turns out the GR.5/7/9 doesn't have a gun     So it's on to Plan 'C' or Plan 'D'

Plan 'C' is to go with the Harrier 30mm gun pods (we know they had guns --right !!) or Plan 'D' is to go with the Canberra gun pack in the bomb bay, move it forward (was it Kit that did that on one of his projects ?) and then add big strakes to it.  Decisions, Decisions ---------

[Weaver]

GR.5/7/9 gunpods wouldn't have been that different to GR.1/3 ones, and there's no reason the latter couldn't have carried a different cannon, so I'd go for it. Alternatively, GR.9s DO carry "gunpods"; they just don't have any guns in them  (ECM, I think) That could always be rectified, if a GR.9 kit actually includes them, of course.

[Mossie]

Robert, like Weaver mentions, there isn't much external difference between the 25mm & 30mm ADEN's, at least not much that you'll see in 1/72.  The GR.5/7 did use the 25mm, for a short time at least until it was decided it was more hassle than it was worth, a lot of development work & money went into realising that!

Just to add an extra letter to your alphabet, Harriers have in recent times carried TIALD designators in place of the left gun pod.  Have a look here:
http://amraamline.50megs.com/photos.htm

[kitnut617]

Robert, like Weaver mentions, there isn't much external difference between the 25mm & 30mm ADEN's, at least not much that you'll see in 1/72.  Just to add an extra letter to your alphabet, Harriers have in recent times carried TIALD designators in place of the left gun pod.  Have a look here:

Looks like it's Plan C  Simon, Weaver   ------ only because I've just realized the Canberra PR.9 kit doesn't come with the gun pack  

I've got a number of targeting pods but I've forgotten which one came from which. I think the top photo is from the Revell Tornado GR.4 but the ones in the bottom photo are definitely from the Italeri F-15E.  I was thinking of using the F-15E pods under each of the new nacelles on the center line pylon, but then I could always switch the target designator to the Tornado one.  I think you told me once before what the two pods are from the F-15E but I can't find where you did.

Another question for anyone who might know, the Buccaneer when it carried TV guided Martels had a guidance pod on one of the pylons right ?  Was the regular nose radar used to guide the radar guided Martels or was the extra pod used for that too.?

[Weaver]

The top pic is definately a TIALD. The bottom pics are probably LANTIRN pods, one for navigation, one for targeting, but don't hold me to that.

The AS.37 Radar-MARTELs were passive anti-radar homers, so they didn't need any help from either a pod or the Bucc's radar. A Bucc could carry four of them if it didn't carry anything else.

The AJ.168 TV-MARTELs needed the datalink pod to receive their TV signals, so only three could be carried. The pod's aerial was in the blunt end of it's teardrop-shaped body, and it (and it's pylon) could be carried facing either way. Having it face backwards allowed the Bucc to fire the missile and then turn away rather than continuing to fly towards the target, but distances/altitudes had to be carefully calculated so that it didn't lose contact with the missile.

[kitnut617]

Thanks Weaver, when an anti-radar missile is fired, what does it go after, the dish or the control vehicle, or can is distinguish between the two and go for the one that would be the best target.  I know some radar dishes are carried on the vehicles but others are set to one side on a trailer or something.

[Weaver]

Thanks Weaver, when an anti-radar missile is fired, what does it go after, the dish or the control vehicle, or can is distinguish between the two and go for the one that would be the best target.  I know some radar dishes are carried on the vehicles but others are set to one side on a trailer or something.

ARMs of that generation just went for the radar signal, so they'd hit the dish. If the dish is mounted on the vehicle, then I suppose you could programme the missile to hit a few feet lower, but if it's separate, then I don't see how you'd do it. Later ARMs memorise the location of the signal and have autopilots, so they hit even if the radar operator switches off, but it's still the source of the signal that they hit. There's been talk of ARMs with slaved thermal imagers that can make an "intelligent" target choice, but I don't know of any being deployed so far. It sounds a bit of a stretch to me, and probably suceptable to counter-measures.

In any case, SEAD was never just about ARMs: F-105Gs would send F-105Ds in to dive-bomb the launchers and control vans once the radar aerial was destroyed, and F-4Gs carried Mavericks for the same purpose. Cluster bombs are also favoured since, with a high proportion of booby-trap sub-munitions in them, they disuade the SAM crew from trying to fix the aerial or replace the launchers for an extended period.

[kitnut617]

I had a couple of spare hours today so did a bit more to this project.  I've got the nacelle to fit onto the wing, I cut the top of the new nacelle off the same way as I did the fuselage using my profile gauge, it was a bit tricky as each side had to match a different chord profile but also line up correctly.  I've saved the parts I cut out so they can be used later to fill the hole in the top.

Now I can start the other nacelle as all the major problem sorting out is over.