Blackburn (BAE) Buccaneer

[Archibald]

Most interesting competitor was clearly the Armstrong Withworth (AW-168 if I remember well). Not only lovely, but also very promising. It was barely the winner of the competition, but the Buc had clearly more growth potential...

[MAD]

What would a modified Blackburn Buccaneer have been like in the role of a carrier-based Anti Submarine Warfare / Maritime Strike.
With say its weapon bay modified to carry say 2 x Mk-46 dual-purpose torpedoes, while the rear portion of the weapon bay held sonar bouys.
The rear fuselage / airbrake arrangement modified to incorporate a MAD sting.
The wing hardpoints will be used for Sea Eagle ASM's, depth charges, rockets or drop tanks

What do you think?

M.A.D  

[GeorgeC]

I remember some discussion in 80s about using fast jets as asw platforms, based on passive towed arrays being able to detect (noisy) subs in the sonar convergence zones that exist about 30 and 60 miles away.  The theory was that a fast mover could get out to a fleeting contact before it was lost.  However, there is a big difference between detection - there's a submarine over there - and localisation - knowing the position accuarately enough to get a fire solution on the sub.  Fast jets lack the persistance and sonarbouy payload to stooge about over the oceans for hours getting a firm fix, and the space to fit the processors to churn the raw data from the bouys.   A nice slow helicopter, able to prosecute a contact for hours, or a nice big matitime patrol aircraft were a better solution.  

[Geoff_B]

I remember some discussion in 80s about using fast jets as asw platforms, based on passive towed arrays being able to detect (noisy) subs in the sonar convergence zones that exist about 30 and 60 miles away.  The theory was that a fast mover could get out to a fleeting contact before it was lost.  However, there is a big difference between detection - there's a submarine over there - and localisation - knowing the position accuarately enough to get a fire solution on the sub.  Fast jets lack the persistance and sonarbouy payload to stooge about over the oceans for hours getting a firm fix, and the space to fit the processors to churn the raw data from the bouys.   A nice slow helicopter, able to prosecute a contact for hours, or a nice big matitime patrol aircraft were a better solution.

The Sea Harrier and Two Seat Harrier were considered for this role as they could do the quick sprint to the drop zone, stop and hover and release the appropraite ASW weapon then scoot back to the carrier to refuel and re-arm. One of the Harrier SIG newsletters had images of the SHAR with either a depth charge or lightwieght torpedo on its centreline.

Then of course weren't SHAR's equiped to carry and drop the Naval WE177(C ?) nuclear bomb which i think was intended for drastic ASW.

G

[Mossie]

Ooohh, haven't seen that USMC Bucc before, gorgeous!

Simon.

[Archibald]

Two Seat Harrier

The hunt for Red October  ^_^ (just love this book).  

[anthonyp]

Thanks to Leigh, we know the USMC used them.

USN also used them, as tankers  B)

[lancer]

The Luftwaffe also took them as well, they used them for SEAD missions.  I think I'm gonna have to build a Marinefliger example as well...I like the idea of an Indian version as well.

[nev]

*waiting impatiently for a new-tool Bucc from Revell or Trumpeter*

[elmayerle]

I'm not as well read on engines as airframes, but AFAIK, the Spey is/was a scaled down Medway.  The Tay had nowt to do with either and predated them by about ten years, being as it was an outgrowth of the centrifugal Nene but with reheat.  

As for P.1108, Hawkers were never particularly interested in NA39 - actually, despite the success of the Sea Fury and the Sea Hawk they were never particularly interested in designing naval aircraft -  and the P.1108 was really just for appearances.

The "Medway" I'm talking about here is a whiffy dry, incread by-pass ratio, derivative of the RB.199.  The Tay I'm referring was a refanned, with higher by-pass ratio, version of the Spey that was installed on some of the late-production Romanian BAC 111's.

[elmayerle]

What would have a modified Blackburn Buccaneer have been like in the role of a carrier-based Anti Submarine Warfare / Maritime Strike.
With say its weapon bay modified to carry say 2 x Mk-46 dual-purpose torpedoes, while the rear portion of the weapon bay held sonar bouys.
The rear fuselage / airbrake arrangement modified to incorporate a MAD sting.
The wing hardpoints will be used for Sea Eagle ASM's, depth charges, rockets or drop tanks

What do you think?

M.A.D

Hmm, weapons bay configured as described but with a towed MAD sensor winch at the back end, slipper tanks or drop tanks on the inboard hardpoints, towed MAD sensor pods on the outboard harpoints.  Three sensors lets you triangulate a lot faster; though you may need a datalink to a larger aircraft or a ship for processing power.

[Lawman]

How about a joint US/UK agreement, buying a heavily modified Buccaneer instead of the A-7, but with more powerful engines and a better wing. As part of the agreement, the US buys the British Buccaneer design, and the UK gets two or three smaller Forrestal class CVAs? Big bilateral agreement, with the US getting the Buccaneers, and selling the UK some carriers (hulls built in the US, then finished in the UK), RN and RAF get Super Buccaneers and Phantoms!

[Zen]

Ah my kind of topic!
Gods flying brick.

elmayerle you seem on the right track, a FBW machine might have flown under these circumstances rather than the ACT Jaguar, though weather it would go any further is hard to say. Potentialy such technology would increase speed, agility, ride at low level and reduce take off runs.

An alternative change would be engines able to push it beyond mach1 in level at 45,000ft like the 'fighter' version offered along with the N/A.39 machine.

Removal of the wingfold would increase fuel capacity somewhat, while lowering structural weight and simplifying it.

[AeroplaneDriver]

I'm not as well read on engines as airframes, but AFAIK, the Spey is/was a scaled down Medway.  The Tay had nowt to do with either and predated them by about ten years, being as it was an outgrowth of the centrifugal Nene but with reheat. 

As for P.1108, Hawkers were never particularly interested in NA39 - actually, despite the success of the Sea Fury and the Sea Hawk they were never particularly interested in designing naval aircraft -  and the P.1108 was really just for appearances.

The "Medway" I'm talking about here is a whiffy dry, incread by-pass ratio, derivative of the RB.199.  The Tay I'm referring was a refanned, with higher by-pass ratio, version of the Spey that was installed on some of the late-production Romanian BAC 111's.

The newer Tay is also used in the Fokker F70/F100 and Gulfstream GIV.  Though it was developed from the Spey the LP compressor was adapted from the RB211 IIRC.  I think the bypass ratio is around triple the Spey's.

[GeorgeC]

The Sea Harrier and Two Seat Harrier were considered for this role as they could do the quick sprint to the drop zone, stop and hover and release the appropraite ASW weapon then scoot back to the carrier to refuel and re-arm.  

Then of course weren't SHAR's equiped to carry and drop the Naval WE177(C ?) nuclear bomb which i think was intended for drastic ASW.

G

Yep it was the SHAR I was particulalry thinking of.    The wikipedia article on WE.177

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WE_177

suggests that it was the A variant that was employed by the RN, but a lot of this is still a bit unclear.  Purely speculating, I would guess an hydrostaticly-operated nuclear depth bomb could be in a high-speed ballistic airframe and, with a time/velocity arming system, be lobbed at a surface traget from a strike (or FRS...) aircraft. That way, you only had to load your CV/CVS with one type of 'nasty' and the different fusing systems.

Regards

GeorgeC