The ex-Ukraine Thread Bucc' Love-in...

Posted before about the Germans wanting to buy them...

bucc-jpg.308407
The Aussies apparently were interested in TSR2, until Mountbatton came along and pushed the Bucc. Pity, we might have got TSR2 into production with an export customer, as it was the Aussies went with the F-111 instead and did a reasonable job with it.
 
At 50:32 there seems to be a rocket assist on, never knew about that
RATO was one options that was sold to the South Africans I think, they needed the additional thrust for takeoffs in hot places.
 
RATO was one options that was sold to the South Africans I think, they needed the additional thrust for takeoffs in hot places.
Yep. Hot and high altitude.
IIRC the SAAF wanted extensive work done to denavalise the Bucc.
from wiki
These were S.2 aircraft with the addition of Bristol Siddeley BS.605 rocket engines to provide additional thrust for the "hot and high" African airfields. The S.50 was also equipped with strengthened undercarriage, and higher capacity wheel brakes, and had manually folded wings. Due to the need to patrol the vast coastline, they also specified aerial refueling, and larger 430-US-gallon (1,600 l; 360 imp gal) underwing tanks.[18] Once in service, the extra thrust of the BS.605 rocket engines proved to be unnecessary, and they were eventually removed from all aircraft
Don't know what happened to Beachy Head's Thunder City jobs.
His fleet was grounded after ZU-BEX prang, but I know (at least) one was flying circa 2017.
And no, it wasn't used to hunt drug runners, as per Freddy Forsyth!
 

Bloater is

Old-Salt
Pulling the gear up was the next most important factor, especially with an engine out. Indeed, several aircraft cannot be climbed with engine(s) out and gear down, and this was the death knell of the Air France Concorde.
(thread drift but Aircraft related) were there not other issues re AF Concorde - iirc The FE shut down a damaged donk that was still producing some thrust, also taking off several tons over MTOW ? (Aircraft geek drift off)
 

Yokel

LE
I believe it did. The whole thing about lift from a wing is that the amount of lift you get relies on the amount of air flowing over the wing. Fly fast and the air flow over the wing gives more lift that flying slow, to compensate at low speed the angle of attack (the angle at which the wing meets the airflow) has to be increased to try and get more lift.

If you can augment the natural flow of air over the wing with blown air it will increase the lift. Its basically the same reason that an aircraft carrier turns into the wind when launching or retrieving aircraft, the naturaly flow of wind over the deck gives a little bit more lift.

Blown air increased the stability at low speeds which when you are trying to land on a small deck is a good thing. Trouble is the blown air system needs to be designed in, takes up space and can be complex. Leading edge slats do something similar and are easier to manufacture.

I think that that the leading edge slat was also developed for carrier aircraft such as the F/A-18 Hornet.

How much similarity was there between the Buccaneer and the American A-6 Intruder? Both were intended to hit the Soviet Navy.

At the risk of a massive thread diversion, I wonder how things would have panned out if the Falklands War had happened in 1978, just four years earlier? The RN would have had three carriers, ARK ROYAL, HERMES and BULWARK. ARK ROYAL would have had Buccaneers, Phantoms and Gannets. The other two were reduced to ASW-roled helicopter carriers at that time. SHAR was not quite in service, and INVINCIBLE still under construction.

I suppose the Buccaneers would have dispatched the ARG navy, had they come out to play, and the Gannets’ AEW would have been useful. But the ship itself would have been on its last legs. Not sure about Phantom vs SHAR in the roles required.

I expect a similar thing would have happened to what actually did in 1982, and they’d have been checking out EAGLE for spares or even refit (only scrapped in ‘82) and pressing for INVINCIBLE to be completed early, along with as many SHARs as could be produced. I would imagine Harrier GR3 would have been on board too.

I suppose one advantage would be that the Buccaneer could tank, so perhaps that might have changed the range of operations in scope on the ARG mainland. Phantom attacks on their airfields perhaps?

ETA: Thinking about it, no matter the naval situation, the political leadership wasn’t there. I don’t think Callaghan would have committed to the war regardless.

By then Bulwark and Hermes had both been converted to Commando/ASW carriers and were incapable of operating anything other than helicopters or V/STOL aircraft. They had both been too small for Phantom, so would they have been trying operate Sea Vixen in the South Atlantic? Could it have achieved the same sortie rates?

I think there's little doubt the Argies wouldn't have tried it against proper carriers.
Phantom was all weather, radar missiles, eight missiles total, supersonic, longer endurance, twice the radar range, two crew, yada, yada. It would have killed a lot more Argies than the SHAR did.
I've worked on exercise with the SHARs running one CAP and us (land-based) running another. We were at least 10 times more effective. We'd normally shot down the opposition before the SHAR had even detected them. Not because we were better aircrew, but because the weapon system was just so much more effective.
It's a bit difficult to be sure whether it was the withdrawal of proper carriers, or just the withdrawal generally, indicating unwillingness to defend the Falklands, that had the most influence on the Argie decision.

Phantom would have needed large carriers to operate it.
 
How much similarity was there between the Buccaneer and the American A-6 Intruder? Both were intended to hit the Soviet Navy.
Different design philosophys lead to different designs, the Buccaneer had to fit into smaller RN carriers, hence the wing fold, nose fold and the butterfly-like air brake.

The Intruder had a wing fold, but bigger carriers (and associated aircraft elevators) meant the nose fold and tail shortening was not required, also the side by side cockpit give a wider but shorter fuselage.

Both may have the same tasking, but the internal Bucc bomb bay gave a slicker aerodynamic performance.
 

Yokel

LE
Different design philosophys lead to different designs, the Buccaneer had to fit into smaller RN carriers, hence the wing fold, nose fold and the butterfly-like air brake.

The Intruder had a wing fold, but bigger carriers (and associated aircraft elevators) meant the nose fold and tail shortening was not required, also the side by side cockpit give a wider but shorter fuselage.

Both may have the same tasking, but the internal Bucc bomb bay gave a slicker aerodynamic performance.

I was no referring the the design so much as what they were designed for. The Buccaneer was designed to attack Soviet cruisers, and the Intruder also had an anti shipping role which influenced the design. Both were subsonic bomb trucks, with two crew members and a powerful air to ground radar to find the enemy ships. I imagine that both benefitted from lessons learnt the hard way in 1950s carrier operations.

As I mentioned in my post on page one, this anti ship role is frequently overlooked, but it was a big headache for the Soviets and a massive plus for NATO.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
I was no referring the the design so much as what they were designed for. The Buccaneer was designed to attack Soviet cruisers, and the Intruder also had an anti shipping role which influenced the design. Both were subsonic bomb trucks, with two crew members and a powerful air to ground radar to find the enemy ships. I imagine that both benefitted from lessons learnt the hard way in 1950s carrier operations.

As I mentioned in my post on page one, this anti ship role is frequently overlooked, but it was a big headache for the Soviets and a massive plus for NATO.
...one arguably that's needed now but, again, one which has been allowed to wither and die. Both Tornado and Sea Harrier could carry the Sea Eagle. Neither was by the end of their respective service lives.

Meanwhile, a 'second-line' military such as Ukraine has a rather natty solution such as Neptune. We, as a maritime nation (as we keep reminding people), have... um... er...
 
24 Squadron SAAF





Two SAAF legends, Lt-Gen Bob Rogers and Lt-Col Cecil Margo ( in his role as Honorary Colonel of 24 Squadron ), featured briefly in this last video , it’s in die taal but I’m sure you guys can get the gist of it lol . Or not .




 
Last edited:

Yokel

LE
Did the Buccaneer carry Sidewinders in RN/RAF service? I did suggest that in RN service it could be used to augment the Phantoms for fleet air defence, but @Archimedes suggested that it was not a good idea.

For detecting Soviet warships it had Blue Parrot radar, which was derived from the AIRPASS radar fitted to the English Electric Lightning. How come it had no air to air mode? Also in the 1980s the Buccaneer had the same radar when it was equipped with the Sea Eagke anti ship missile, so how did it compare with the anti surface modes of the Sea Harrier FRS1's Blue Fox or the F/A-18 Hornet's APG-65 (interfaced to Harpoon), or to the Agave radar of the Super Eterndard?
 

Londo

LE
Did the Buccaneer carry Sidewinders in RN/RAF service? I did suggest that in RN service it could be used to augment the Phantoms for fleet air defence, but @Archimedes suggested that it was not a good idea.

For detecting Soviet warships it had Blue Parrot radar, which was derived from the AIRPASS radar fitted to the English Electric Lightning. How come it had no air to air mode? Also in the 1980s the Buccaneer had the same radar when it was equipped with the Sea Eagke anti ship missile, so how did it compare with the anti surface modes of the Sea Harrier FRS1's Blue Fox or the F/A-18 Hornet's APG-65 (interfaced to Harpoon), or to the Agave radar of the Super Eterndard?
I don't know about the radars but the Buccaneers did on occasions carry Sidewinders .
From what I remember reading , if it was a four ship bombing mission the second pair carried a winder each just to surprise any enemy that tried to bump the first pair .
Can't remember where exactly I read this but I'm sure some ex RAF type will be along soon with more info.
 
RN Buccs carried AIM-9B and the RAF aircraft had -9G and then -9L. The -9L was a standard fit on the Granby Buccs when they first arrived, but the total lack of an air-to-air threat meant they were left behind and a Paveway II fitted instead.

I don't think it was me who suggested that the Bucc wasn't a good idea for a fighter - it was looked at as a possibility by Blackburn (or HSA) and as more of an interceptor than a pure fighter; would've had four Red Top or similar, although Roy Boot complained that there was no suitable UK-built radar for the design had it come to fruition. The problem was that it was a fighter derived from an attack aircraft at a time when the Phantom had appeared - the end result was that the fighter Buccaneer didn't have much going for it in terms of export purposes and the RN wasn't that interested.
 
RN Buccs carried AIM-9B and the RAF aircraft had -9G and then -9L. The -9L was a standard fit on the Granby Buccs when they first arrived, but the total lack of an air-to-air threat meant they were left behind and a Paveway II fitted instead.

I don't think it was me who suggested that the Bucc wasn't a good idea for a fighter - it was looked at as a possibility by Blackburn (or HSA) and as more of an interceptor than a pure fighter; would've had four Red Top or similar, although Roy Boot complained that there was no suitable UK-built radar for the design had it come to fruition. The problem was that it was a fighter derived from an attack aircraft at a time when the Phantom had appeared - the end result was that the fighter Buccaneer didn't have much going for it in terms of export purposes and the RN wasn't that interested.
I recall some discussions around putting afterburner on the Bucc, a longer fueslage was required and some strengthening (pah!) and that might have led to a proposed varient.
 
Did the Buccaneer carry Sidewinders in RN/RAF service? I did suggest that in RN service it could be used to augment the Phantoms for fleet air defence, but @Archimedes suggested that it was not a good idea.

For detecting Soviet warships it had Blue Parrot radar, which was derived from the AIRPASS radar fitted to the English Electric Lightning. How come it had no air to air mode? Also in the 1980s the Buccaneer had the same radar when it was equipped with the Sea Eagke anti ship missile, so how did it compare with the anti surface modes of the Sea Harrier FRS1's Blue Fox or the F/A-18 Hornet's APG-65 (interfaced to Harpoon), or to the Agave radar of the Super Eterndard?
As other have said, the Bucc did carry Sidewinders for a period, but then so did Nimrod so exactly what use they would have been is anyones guess...

Blue Parrot used the AIRPASS magnetron technology, using the same technology as an airborne intercept radar did not mean it could do the same things. Thats like asking why your car can't do Formula 1....

As for performance against other radars, I don't believe it would have been easy to compare, it;s a bit apples and oranges as Sea harrier and Hornet were designed for different tasks. As part of the package, the radar was there to detect a target and provide range and bearing data to the missile. The effectiveness of the radar would determine how far away you could detect the target and how accurate the data was, by the time Sea Eagle came in Blue parrot had been updated to something that didn't need valves everywhere...

With a big enough target you could get the same information throwing ping pong balls and using a stop watch.....
 

5645andym

Old-Salt
At the risk of a massive thread diversion, I wonder how things would have panned out if the Falklands War had happened in 1978, just four years earlier? The RN would have had three carriers, ARK ROYAL, HERMES and BULWARK. ARK ROYAL would have had Buccaneers, Phantoms and Gannets. The other two were reduced to ASW-roled helicopter carriers at that time. SHAR was not quite in service, and INVINCIBLE still under construction.

I suppose the Buccaneers would have dispatched the ARG navy, had they come out to play, and the Gannets’ AEW would have been useful. But the ship itself would have been on its last legs. Not sure about Phantom vs SHAR in the roles required.

I expect a similar thing would have happened to what actually did in 1982, and they’d have been checking out EAGLE for spares or even refit (only scrapped in ‘82) and pressing for INVINCIBLE to be completed early, along with as many SHARs as could be produced. I would imagine Harrier GR3 would have been on board too.

I suppose one advantage would be that the Buccaneer could tank, so perhaps that might have changed the range of operations in scope on the ARG mainland. Phantom attacks on their airfields perhaps?

ETA: Thinking about it, no matter the naval situation, the political leadership wasn’t there. I don’t think Callaghan would have committed to the war regardless.
I believe that Callaghan DID send a small task force down south in 1977 to deter the Argentines when they started playing ganes - a nuclear sub plus two frigates went?

Unlike the modern party Callaghan and many of his generation had served in uniform during the war.
 
I believe that Callaghan DID send a small task force down south in 1977 to deter the Argentines when they started playing ganes - a nuclear sub plus two frigates went?

Unlike the modern party Callaghan and many of his generation had served in uniform during the war.
Operation Journeyman, after the Dagoes had set up base at Thule.

However, the fact that Jim didn't kick Argie arse was taken by the Argies as a sign that Britain wouldn't interfere too much... hence we saw the 1982 fun and games.

Britain sent a naval taskforce ... in order to deter any threat to the Falklands, but ruled out using direct force to end the occupation of Southern Thule.

Arrangements to legitimise the station were discussed in 1978 but failed. More than a year went by before word of the occupation of Southern Thule leaked out to the public.
 
Last edited:
Mentioned here before but during Pulsator they were given carte blanche around Akrotiri and they made full use of it. Approaching at very, very low level and scaring the bejesus out of unsuspecting line swine in the early hours and they eventually did the Beirut run. There was a cracking vid going about at the time.

The Ekeranoplan effect?
 
The Ekeranoplan effect?
Nah, the not stopping at red traffic lights whilst flying through, not over, Beirut effect. Obvs it's one of those stories which grows in the telling.
 
Nah, the not stopping at red traffic lights whilst flying through, not over, Beirut effect. Obvs it's one of those stories which grows in the telling.
The t-shirts said "through not over" and while they may not have been low enough to stop at the lights, they definately went between high rised buildings. This is the photo from the British Embassy

1653375767122.png


Op PULSATOR - 06
 

Latest Threads

Top