dark light

superplum

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 12 posts - 61 through 72 (of 72 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: RAF Gun Camera Film Questions #1122983
    superplum
    Participant

    I have a G45 with `Long lens` that were apparently fitted in turrets in the place of a 303 for training purpose …were they fitted in fighters too ?

    Pretty sure that G45s were fitted to Hunters and ac of that ilk. Lightnings had a G90.

    in reply to: RAF Gun Camera Film Questions #1123101
    superplum
    Participant

    FYI, post WW II, from my Lightnng experiences, Gun Camera magazines would be changed by any engineering tradesman involved in the flight servicing of the ac. Gun cameras were periodically harmonised by the armourers to ensure they pointed where they were needed!

    in reply to: Elector Seats #1098641
    superplum
    Participant

    Martin Baker???

    :diablo:

    No pun intended!

    in reply to: Queens flypast #1121251
    superplum
    Participant

    Keith Sowter posted this very interesting item on Norwich Spotters earlier showing a practise over Norfolk today …..

    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NorwichSpotters/message/8320

    I saw them too, about 15 secs later (from Old Buckenham). From what I saw, I half expect to see them practising again today!
    🙁

    in reply to: Queens flypast #1122569
    superplum
    Participant

    Wot no helicopters?! 🙁

    Given they are such crucial assets, at least one would be good…but then again, they are probably all being utilised

    Nor Harriers (again!)

    :confused:

    in reply to: WW 2 bomb kills three in Germany #1127337
    superplum
    Participant

    I think that most wartime bombs had chemical fuses, which is why they are becoming more unstable as time goes on.
    G.

    Not true. Most UK bombs were fuzed by mechanical methods (pistols and detonators) which function like a firing pin hitting a percussion cap. Some delayed action systems would be based on acetone dissolving celluloid washers after impact to release the striker. As for German fuzes, they were generally divided into impact action and delayed – delayed being either electrical (capacitor powered) or clockwork. As for moving fuzed UXBs in this day and age, generally one would expect the main explosive filling to be removed first to reduce any risk.

    in reply to: WW 2 bomb kills three in Germany #1127342
    superplum
    Participant

    Is that true?

    No!:(

    in reply to: Why British Reluctance For Sidewinder #1135839
    superplum
    Participant

    As far as I remember, we only acquired it when we purchased the F-4K/M, and only as the AIM-9P which went on to be used by the Harrier Jaguar and eventually Tornado GRs as a last line of defence, prior to that we had Lightnings with Firestreak and Red Top only!!

    Tim S

    Don’t ever remember the AIM-9P in service! My recollections start with the 9B, thro’ 9G to 9L only. Loaded and stored enough of them to remember quite well! I also seem to recall that the UK 9L was “altered” by the UK to improve it. Also remember seeing an GCS working at Boscombe Down in the early 60’s.

    in reply to: Anti runway weapons #1803910
    superplum
    Participant

    JP233 was retired several years ago. AFAIK it’s now a job for missiles.

    Apache dispenses submunitions, but no mines AFAIK.

    Lets not forget that mines are now outlawed under the Ottawa Treaty. The JP 233 area-denial element (HB 876 Sub-Munitions) were classed as mines and couldn’t be retained. Only a few nations have not signed up to the treaty.

    in reply to: Valiants at Wittering #1146844
    superplum
    Participant

    They tried some form of rocket assisted takeoff system (RATO?, JATO? – somebody will know)

    It was RATO and has always stuck in my mind since I saw it demonstrated at Farnborough in the mid/late 50s. I seem to recall that I was young then!

    H

    in reply to: UK Aircraft delivered nuclear weapon #1805835
    superplum
    Participant

    Well maybe, yes, but at horrific expense…. Far cheaper to squirrel them away somewhere with all the attendant advantages that would / could bring. Maybe it’s just me but I don’t think even “Noo Labour” in their prime and pomp would be that short sighted……. Would they??

    I might be wrong but weren’t they deep serviced in the early nineties? That’d leave them with an awful lot of stable “Shelf life”

    Regards,
    Frank

    All scrapped – all too old and outdated compared to reasonably modern standards. Here is the last prior to dismantling.

    in reply to: UK bombs and Paveway's #1805987
    superplum
    Participant

    Mk 10 is standard freefall
    Mk 18 is retard version
    Mk 20 has airburst fuzing – possibly retard version
    Mk 13 is probably low drag with airburst

    Not true! All are the same shape and almost the same weight (1000lb). Slight weight variations result from different fillings and insulation etc; all are interchangeable as such and the role is decided by fuzes and tail units. However 10s are Naval surplus (ex early-Buccaneer fuzing system) and should be in very limited stock (if any left) 13 and 18s should have been phased out. 20s and 22s are the later variants whilst 15s are concrete filled for practice (have been used in earnest to prevent collateral damage.
    :).

    PS, SDB is a freefall bomb per se and should not be compared to Brimstone

Viewing 12 posts - 61 through 72 (of 72 total)