Blue Water Nuclear Missile

[PR19_Kit]

Lifting the rear of the truck? Wouldn't such a launch be essentially recoil-less?

It's the back to front angle that I can't figure out, the Honest John launch ranp just elevates a bit and they fire over the cab, the Blue Water solution seems to be needlessly complex to me.

[kitnut617]

Lifting the rear of the truck? Wouldn't such a launch be essentially recoil-less?

It's the back to front angle that I can't figure out, the Honest John launch ranp just elevates a bit and they fire over the cab, the Blue Water solution seems to be needlessly complex to me.

I was thinking the same Kit, plus what effect does the rocket blast have on the truck itself, there doesn't appear to be any blast deflector down under the truck bed -- 

[Rheged]

Lifting the rear of the truck? Wouldn't such a launch be essentially recoil-less?

It's the back to front angle that I can't figure out, the Honest John launch ranp just elevates a bit and they fire over the cab, the Blue Water solution seems to be needlessly complex to me.

I was thinking the same Kit, plus what effect does the rocket blast have on the truck itself, there doesn't appear to be any blast deflector down under the truck bed -- 

That rather worried me too! What state would the truck tyres be in after a launch?

[Mossie]

I've found a snippet on a Flight article that mentions the reason for it (quite a good article to read):
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961%20-%200647.html

Blast damage to the launcher is negligible (it is the latter factor which dictates that the launcher should point away from the target).

Looking at some other systems such as Sergeant & Lance, they have blast deflectors on the launch structure.  I would imagine this is way of eliminating the blast deflector & saving weight for air transport?  The air transport was seen as an important capability.

[PR19_Kit]

I've found a snippet on a Flight article that mentions the reason for it (quite a good article to read):
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961%20-%200647.html

I read the article, and agree it's very informative, but I still can't see any reason for the launcher to be 'over the shoulder'. It mentions the truck driving to the marker posts but surely it would work just as well with them laid out 180 deg from their position mentioned?

I note even then the Artillary guys were using offset targeting, just like they did with 25 pdrs in WWII.

[Weaver]

It depends on the missile, but a lot of launchers with over-the-cab firing have to have the cab armoured and the windscreens covered to protect them from the rocket exhaust as the missile leaves the rail. The comment about blast damage to the launcher in the article might relate to this.

[Mossie]

That's how I saw it.  The 3 tonner doesn't have any kind of thermal protection & the crew leave the cab to launch it.  This arrangement means the blast only affects the very rear of the vehicle & you don't need to add weight which would impact on air transport.

[rickshaw]

Does anybody know if there were different versions of Blue Water?  Was the ground based version shorter than the proposed air launched one?

[Mossie]

Yes, it was, considerably.  I'm in the process of building a ground based Blue Water & I used the Freightdog missile.  When I first compared it to the model, I was surprised at how long the air launched version was.  A quick check to my references showed there was indeed a large difference in length (every source I've got on the air launched version quotes a different figure though).  I took some piccys comparing a chopped version to the stock missile, I'll try & post them when I get a chance.

[rickshaw]

Yes, it was, considerably.  I'm in the process of building a ground based Blue Water & I used the Freightdog missile.  When I first compared it to the model, I was surprised at how long the air launched version was.  A quick check to my references showed there was indeed a large difference in length (every source I've got on the air launched version quotes a different figure though).  I took some piccys comparing a chopped version to the stock missile, I'll try & post them when I get a chance.

I'd appreciate that.  Great minds think alike.  I too have the Freightdogs Blue Water set and a Bedford RL lorry to mount it on.   

[Mossie]

Great minds really do think alike!  BW Models by any chance???  I've also got something else which I'm pretty far down the road with & I'll be posting soon.

[Mossie]

These might help you, here are all the pics I've found on the net that I haven't already posted.  You've probably found most, although I downloaded some of the photoarchives pics a while ago & can't find them again. 

Sources:
http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/showphoto.php/photo/9459
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,1113.0.html
http://www.photoarchives.co.uk/acatalog/copy_of_Military.html

[rickshaw]

There are a few there I haven't seen before.  The ones with it down over the cab give me an idea of how long it actually should be.

Now, does anybody know any 1/72 or 1/76 figures which have the British 1943 Pattern Helmet and carrying 1950s equipment?  All the ones I know of have 1918 Pattern Helmet and 1938 webbing and WWII weapons. 

[NARSES2]

There are a few sets of late war British infantry but I don't think they have that helmet (I think of that as the "Canadian pattern") and of course have 44/45 equipment

[Weaver]

If you do find any "old modern" British troops then please post it up, 'cos I'd like some for my own projects.