Canberra B(I).8 vs. B-57B Canberra

Good point about gauges and rivets which never even crossed my mind. I’m peeved I didn’t think of it too, having spent nearly 20 years in aluminium sales. SWG would be strange to Americans – it’s bad enough for us. 🙂

The difference appears to be of the order of 1.5 thousandths of a millimetre over a yard. Probably near enough for building aeroplanes. 🙂

Still nothing intelligent to add about Canberras…

Hey DHF
I did say it was a ‘slight’ difference 😀
I am sure you or I would say ‘close enough’ but I have never met anybody from a drawing office with that sort of attitude 😀
To quote Robert C Mikesh (2000 + B57 hours )

The first canberra drawings arrived on 1 june 1951 and work began immediately on the conversion from british measurement standards to those of american standards and related equipment.This entailed a tremendous redrawing job,for the americans used different gauge sheet metal standards,rivets ,bolts and screws,and the best compromise had to be determined in each case.

cheers baz

As far as i am aware the present systems vis a vis US/UK were agreed upon in 1958…prior to that there was a slight difference,but engineering drawings are very precise by nature so ‘close enough for government work’ is not necessarily good enough for building an aircraft,as S63 said …there also was a big change to american fasteners which (hopefully) got rid of the plethora of ancient brit threads etc…personally I love working with A/F or metric sizes and happily swap between either,but also have not forgotten Whit,BS,BSF,BSP or BA sizes 😀

regards baz

I was certainly partly right, we use 1st angle projection and 3rd angle is standard in America. Fasteners obviously makes sense. I’ve still got Whit/BSF spanners around but it would take a while to get used to them again.

I can’t find anything that states for certain what the difference was before 1958 but the best I’ve found says the Imperial Standard Yard was made slightly larger to match the International Yard. The difference appears to be of the order of 1.5 thousandths of a millimetre over a yard. Probably near enough for building aeroplanes. 🙂

Still nothing intelligent to add about Canberras…

Anyone have any solid photos of the B(I).8 gun pack when fitted?

I’m also curious as to what types of bombs were fitted and how many could be carried in the two types of weapons bays (i.e. the full Brit bay without the gunpack and the B-57 bay).

I think a search on airliners.net for B(I).8s or a trip to Les B’s site will get you what you need for the gun pack. Bomb load wise, the full Brit bomb bay was 6x 1,000lb, or 10x 500lb. I believe the total armament weight on the Mark 8 was 10,000lb, that said, 6,000 internal stores, and 2,000lb underwings leaves you short of 2,000lb elsewhere. These are just the main bomb types though, as I think it could accomodate a range of target markers and larger amounts of practice bombs. B-57…hmm, I’m sure someone can do some digging on that.

**UPDATE, here’s a natty little view of the gunpack as fitted on a B(I).8 model kit which might help you:

http://www.ipmsusa2.org/reviews2/aircraft/details/qb_48/qb_48_canberra-gunpack.htm

No, can’t see it being that. Unlike pints an inch is the same everywhere, officially now and I’m pretty sure in practice then.

From dim and distant memories, I’ve an idea we use 3rd angle projection and the Yanks 1st angle, or the other way around – it’s nearly 40 years since I did technical drawing and well over 30 since I worked from one so I can’t even remember which is which now. That might explain it as IMHO the units must have been the same but the drawings wouldn’t make sense to a workforce used to the other system.

As far as i am aware the present systems vis a vis US/UK were agreed upon in 1958…prior to that there was a slight difference,but engineering drawings are very precise by nature so ‘close enough for government work’ is not necessarily good enough for building an aircraft,as S63 said …there also was a big change to american fasteners which (hopefully) got rid of the plethora of ancient brit threads etc…personally I love working with A/F or metric sizes and happily swap between either,but also have not forgotten Whit,BS,BSF,BSP or BA sizes 😀

regards baz

Anyone have any solid photos of the B(I).8 gun pack when fitted?

I’m also curious as to what types of bombs were fitted and how many could be carried in the two types of weapons bays (i.e. the full Brit bay without the gunpack and the B-57 bay).

The problem was not dimensions but American thread sizes and fasteners which are very different to UK. The tools needed would also be different and standardisation across the US military was the requirement hence the conversion to US standard fasteners. Material standards also varied between the US and UK, it wasn’t a problem for Indian or Australian production as both countries used British standards.

No, can’t see it being that. Unlike pints an inch is the same everywhere, officially now and I’m pretty sure in practice then.

From dim and distant memories, I’ve an idea we use 3rd angle projection and the Yanks 1st angle, or the other way around – it’s nearly 40 years since I did technical drawing and well over 30 since I worked from one so I can’t even remember which is which now. That might explain it as IMHO the units must have been the same but the drawings wouldn’t make sense to a workforce used to the other system.

I know virtually nothing in depth about Canberras so the link posted by Bager1968 was useful and very detailed.

http://www.vectorsite.net/avcanbra.html

One very minor point mentioned jumped out at me: “plans flown from the UK to be converted from Imperial to metric measurements”.

Seems unlikely, any comments?

What the article probably meant to say was …coverted from Imperial measurements to american measurements,from memory the US standard for (say) an inch was slightly different to the imperial standard (UK)

cheers baz

I know virtually nothing in depth about Canberras so the link posted by Bager1968 was useful and very detailed.

http://www.vectorsite.net/avcanbra.html

One very minor point mentioned jumped out at me: “plans flown from the UK to be converted from Imperial to metric measurements”.

Seems unlikely, any comments?

It is very interesting about the twin SNEBs I agree, honestly I don’t know why (if that was the case) Brit Canberras were not fitted for this, but I am in touch with a former B.15/16 navigator who was in the Akrotiri Strike Wing and I’ll ask him what he knows on it. You are right though – twin pods could not have been a weight problem.

I do have to agree with the earlier commets about the B(I) shortcoming on the lack of bang seat for the nav- on that one the B-57 clearly trumps the UK version. One other B-57 innovation I thought rather natty was the downwards firing guns in the bomb bay (I forget which variant that was, but I think it was Vietnam era).

Phantom, earlier you asked about the amount of space the B(I) gun pack took up- this was the just a little less than half the full bay, and special door were fitted forward of this to store 3x 1,000lb bombs or other stores. Les B confirmed these were a b***er to fit 🙂

Interesting thoughts regarding Argie Canberras. I guess my next question is why would the aircraft not be able to carry dual launchers on the pylons? They are stressed weight wise for that right? Surely two SNEB pods doesn’t weigh more than a 1,000-lb. bomb…..do they?

To be honest I was joking and taking the opportunity to remind people of the Anniversary Display. Hence the :diablo:

I understand that if there’re sufficient volunteers around that it might be open throughout Cokcpitfest!

hehe don’t worry, I was just playing along! 😀

…

Should’ve made it clear I was speaking with my hangar Pilot/Nav hat on trying to imagine the awful prospect of trying to get out of a B(I)8 in a hurry 😮

Glad to have cleared that up..:o

To be honest I was joking and taking the opportunity to remind people of the Anniversary Display. Hence the :diablo:

I understand that if there’re sufficient volunteers around that it might be open throughout Cokcpitfest!

Any idea what variety of munitions that were carried on the two underwing pylons in the Mk.8?

Some sources state that each pylon could take a 1,000-lb. bomb. Is that a misprint with each pylon capable of carrying a 500-lb. weapon thus being 1,000-lbs. total?

I’ve seen a picture of an Argentine Canberra with dual rocket pods on each pylon for a total of four. Could Brit Canberras carry four rocket pods?

This is a great topic, just stumbled across it. I have to echo Tim’s comments about it being hard to palette the idea of the US version being an improvement over the classic Brit design, but I have read many a comment to say this was true, simply from the tandem standpoint alone. That said, the offset angle of the B(I) canopy must have been nice for pilots.

One thing I think was a major improvement was the rotating bomb bay, reducing drag etc over target. Very natty idea, that. Interesting concept putting the MGs and later cannons in the wings too – from an interdictor standpoint, I wonder however if it was better to have massed firepower in a belly gun pack vs. spread in the wings? I guess having the bomb bay free though meant you could carry full internal bomb load over the 3x in the B(I).8 with gun pack.

Regarding Argentine Canberras with the twin Matras, I am not sure if the later B.15/16 Canberras could also carry this arrangement; it’s possible and perhaps someone can confirm. Even so, I doubt the earlier B(I) types could carry twin rockets like that. The Roland Beaumont book states 1x 1,000 bomb on each underwing plyon, or Sneb rocket launchers but not 2x on each station.

You Tube had a cracking documentary about the B-57 development a while ago which talked a lot about a lot of this discussion. Here is a small nice B-57 vid with some early colour footage of the RAF B.2 pattern model arriving in the US:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBsqy5MFFDY

Ah – don’t say that! Still a few days left to check it out! :diablo:

Oh no! Of course as a Canberra fanatic clambering around a gorgeous rare example of the type, it’s a truly fantastic place to be! Highly recommended to anyone who gets the chance..don’t miss out!!

Should’ve made it clear I was speaking with my hangar Pilot/Nav hat on trying to imagine the awful prospect of trying to get out of a B(I)8 in a hurry 😮

Glad to have cleared that up..:o

I’ve clambered into Newarks hybrid B2/8 which has essentially a B(I)8 cockpit layout, and I can assure you, it ain’t a nice place to be 😮

Ah – don’t say that! Still a few days left to check it out! :diablo:

Works now.

The Mk.68 tip tanks look like those found on F-80 Shooting Stars.

I think only the Mk.56 showed..could you repost the other picture?

I edited to include the correct photo – about 3 seconds after I posted it….

Is it OK now ??

Ken

I think only the Mk.56 showed..could you repost the other picture?