By: Paul Holtom
- 14th February 2009 at 20:51Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[ATTACH]169518[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]169519[/ATTACH]
Obi wan, your knowledge and photo records are superb! I think the mods (removal of cat hooks and hold back gear... etc) to the ex navy bucc's on the RN unit were carried out at Belfast. New fairings were added where the hold back was removed and the cat hook doors were removed and paneled over. One cab I worked on when on 809 squadron XV333 call sign 030 started off as a Navy cab then to the RAF and back to the Navy on 809. The only explanation I can think of is the RAF took over too many a/c and in the end had to give some back!
To keep this thread on track I thought it would be a good idea to attach these photos of the Vic during rebuild in the '50s.
By: Paul Holtom
- 14th February 2009 at 21:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[ATTACH]169527[/ATTACH]
Here is a shot of Victorious on her last commission. 801 squadron Buccaneers can be seen on deck in dark sea gray and white. As far as I know 801 was the only squadron to take the Bucc s2 on board in this colour scheme. However I have seen a shot of some 809 squadron aircraft on the Hermes some in all over dark sea gray and one or two in dark sea gray/white.
By: Paul Holtom
- 14th February 2009 at 22:08Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
237OCU handled all Buccaneer training from 72 onwards, taking over from 736NAS. All buccs were built for carrier ops, though RAF examples simply had the catapult spools 'unbolted' in service. converting them back wouldn't have been a big job, probably a few hours work. 237OCU operated a small pool of Navy configured Buccs not only to provide training for FAA crews but to act as rapid replacements for any aircraft lost by 809NAS in service, hence the 809 painted example mentioned above (the aforementioned PTF served a similar funtion for 892, and 849HQ flight operated three AEW3 Gannets in the seventies for B flight's benefit). The Buccs pictured here are painted in 809 colours, but the lack of side numbers on the nose indicates they are on the strength of 237 as reserve aircraft for 809. I have a picture (not on my computer sadly) of a 237 aircraft in RAF camo on the static steam catapult at RAE Bedford so some of the S2A/S2Bs also had catapult points.
Obi Wan, As you point out the Bucc's in your photos are reserve a/c for 809. They must have come out of storage for the air show(s) they are attending. The lack of under wing pylons and slipper tanks also points to this. I can identify them as S2C/D (the earlier S2 prior to 1973 can be visually identified by having two aerials of the same size on the spine) aircraft by the larger front aerial on the spine. Wonder why the letter "R" (Ark Royal code letter) has been left off the tail fin? It's not as if 809 could deploy to another carrier post '73!
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 14th February 2009 at 23:28Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, As you point out the Bucc's in your photos are reserve a/c for 809. They must have come out of storage for the air show(s) they are attending. The lack of under wing pylons and slipper tanks also points to this. I can identify them as S2C/D (the earlier S2 prior to 1973 can be visually identified by having two aerials of the same size on the spine) aircraft by the larger front aerial on the spine. Wonder why the letter "R" (Ark Royal code letter) has been left off the tail fin? It's not as if 809 could deploy to another carrier post '73!
As far as I know, the Buccs lacked Arks deck code R and side numbers on the nose because they were on charge to the RAF's 237OCU, and the RAF didn't use the same side number system as the FAA nor did they use deck codes. These would only be aplied to the aircraft if andd when they transferred to 809. Somewhat petty on the part of the RAF but there you go. Interestingly, the FJ sqns aboard Ark Royal used ranges of side numbers for their aircraft that exceeded the number of aircraft allocated to them. 892NAS used 001 to 014, though they only had 12 aircraft (013 was used), whilst 809NAS used 020 to 036, despite only 14 aircraft at any given time. 849Bflight used 040 for it's COD4 and 041 to 044 for it's AEW3s, 824NAS used 050 to 055 for it's six Sea King HAS1s and the ship's flight of two Wessex HAS 1s used for plane guard SAR were coded 046 and 047. After 1973 the COD4 Gannet was replaced by an extra Sea King, taking the Gannet's code 040.
As far as I know 801 was the only squadron to take the Bucc s2 on board in this colour scheme. However I have seen a shot of some 809 squadron aircraft on the Hermes some in all over dark sea gray and one or two in dark sea gray/white.
It's possible the Grey and White aircraft in the picture you describe are from the HQ sqn 803NAS, which in 1967 deployed four aircraft from the UK to Hermes in the Indian ocean to demonstrate the RNs ability to reinforce it's carriers deployed overseas at short notice. 803 was based at Lossiemouth until december 1969 when it was disbanded and during this time drew on a common pool of aircraft with 736, although individual aircraft were marked up as either one sqn or the other. Both sqns operated the few remaining S1s until 1969 when they were finally withdrawn because of serviceability problems with the Gyron Junior engines. In fact this was the second retirement for the S1s as they had been withdrawn in 66 once sufficient S2s were available, but once the decision had been made to transfer the Buccs to the RAF six S1s were taken out of storage in 67 to provide enough airframes for the extra workload. More were reactivated for 803NAS which was reformed as the Buccaneer HQ and trials sqn so both sqns had a mixed pool of S2s and S1s. During the seventies several Buccaneers switched back and forth between the FAA and RAF as they were technically drawn from a common fleet. Aircraft would typically spend 18 months serving with a sqn then be rotated back for deep maintenance, and once completed would be re issued to a frontline sqn as required. Thus Buccs coming out of maintenance had a one in six chance of being issued back to the RN for 809NAS.
NB. Several Buccaneer S1 survive aoround the country's museums, but some have been preserved in RAF camouflage. No S1 Buccaneer ever served with the RAF although as mentioned earlier, a number of RAF crews were trained on the S1s with 736NAS. It has always struck me as odd that the remaining S1s were not upgraded to S2 standard, after all it would have been a straightforward matter of re engining them with RR Speys. The prototype S2 was in fact a converted S1. All other systems eg avionics were identical. Later in the seventies there was a lack of airframes due to the wing spar fatigue problem which caused the RAF to disband 216sqn, only recently formed to take over 809s former aircraft. If the remaining fleet of S1s had been converted in the late 60s there would have been a larger fleet to draw on in the first place, at least an extra twenty aircraft. Production of the S1 had totalled 40 production standard plus 19 NA39 pre production aircraft, most of the latter had been brought up to S1 standard and issued to frontline sqns. Of these a large number had been lost in accidents (about 18 by 1970, mostly engine related) whilst several of the early NA39s were scrapped at the end of the test program from 1964 onwards. Also one S1 was dumped off the stern of Ark Royal in 1974 for a flight safety film! Of the survivors at least twenty to thirty aircraft could have been upgraded to S2 standard to increase the overall pool, allowing the RAF to still have their desired five frontline sqns plus OCU and the Navy could have retained 800NAS in commission (yes part of my cunning plan to keep Eagle in service...)
By: alertken
- 15th February 2009 at 15:55Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OWR: odd that the remaining S1s were not upgraded to S2 standard.
(similarly, Hunter F.4 junked just as supplies of F.6 for retread/export expired: assertions that HSAL "did not know" that big-Avon could be shoe-horned in.)
Re-engining is never fun (see Spey 201 into F-4) and maybe only CFM-56/KC-135/DC-8 ever worked. I offer 2 reasons for not retreading S.1:
- in late-1950s MoS believed UK to be bereft of general understanding of the intake:N1 interface, and that only 1 scientist at RAE Bedford was fit for this purpose: he, it was, that did the inflatable intake on P.1127. See compressor stall, Swift/Hunter, to understand why they took this position. Just too hard to carve a fat intake onto S.1, easier to build anew. And/or:
- (Hunter F.4 production and) NA.39 R&D had been part US DoD (MSP)-funded. Maybe (I don't know) S.1 production had also been US-part-funded. All too hard to carve up hulls not wholly-owned.
By: EdLaw
- 15th February 2009 at 18:58Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Forgive the semi off-topic what-if, but what impact on RN carrier ops (especially Vicky, Eagle and Ark) would selection of the F-8 Crusader have had? What changes to the carriers, if any, would the adoption of the Crusader have mandated?
In essence, would a slightly earlier adoption of the F-8 have given the RN a better chance of continued carrier ops, despite the tight budgetary situation? It seems unlikely that the RAF would have misappropriated a batch of Crusaders, in contrast to the situation with the Phantom deliveries!
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 15th February 2009 at 22:53Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OWR: odd that the remaining S1s were not upgraded to S2 standard.
(similarly, Hunter F.4 junked just as supplies of F.6 for retread/export expired: assertions that HSAL "did not know" that big-Avon could be shoe-horned in.)
Re-engining is never fun (see Spey 201 into F-4) and maybe only CFM-56/KC-135/DC-8 ever worked. I offer 2 reasons for not retreading S.1:
- in late-1950s MoS believed UK to be bereft of general understanding of the intake:N1 interface, and that only 1 scientist at RAE Bedford was fit for this purpose: he, it was, that did the inflatable intake on P.1127. See compressor stall, Swift/Hunter, to understand why they took this position. Just too hard to carve a fat intake onto S.1, easier to build anew. And/or:
- (Hunter F.4 production and) NA.39 R&D had been part US DoD (MSP)-funded. Maybe (I don't know) S.1 production had also been US-part-funded. All too hard to carve up hulls not wholly-owned.
It wasn't for lack of knowledge about how to do it, the prototype S2 was a re engined S1 anyway. The only difference between the S1 and the S2 was the engines and their intakes, and once the S2 entered service it would have been straightforward to convert the remaining S1s.
By: Paul Holtom
- 15th February 2009 at 23:23Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It wasn't for lack of knowledge about how to do it, the prototype S2 was a re engined S1 anyway. The only difference between the S1 and the S2 was the engines and their intakes, and once the S2 entered service it would have been straightforward to convert the remaining S1s.
Any idea why the Avon was never considered for the S1? I know the Sapphire was first choice and then for reasons of size dropped in favor of the Gyron Junior. The Spey engined S2 came soon after the S1 entered service. How would the Spey compare in size to the Avon? As the Spey wasn't around when the Buccaneer was in the development stage I always wondered why they never built an Avon engined Buccaneer from the outset!
Obi Wan, have you any data on the date of the last flight of an S1? Also did an S1 ever fly in RAF camouflage?
By: Paul Holtom
- 16th February 2009 at 00:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, your remark about the Buccs coming out of maintenance having a six in one chance of going back to the RN. Have you taken into account the following two points.
No airframe with a serial after XV869 ever served with the Navy!
No aircraft equipped with a bomb door tank ever served with the Navy!
I think all the S2B aircraft were fitted with this mod. The S2C/S2D aircraft never had this fitted. We had great fun on 809 removing and installing the bomb bay tank when a change of roll was required! You would normally end up soaked in and stinking of avcat.
Incidentally Buccaneer XV333 an aircraft I worked on in 1976 (809) is now in the fleet air arm museum, in the colours of 801 squadron which it wore 1969. However it has a bomb door tank fitted! This would have been installed sometime after 1978 when the aircraft was converted from an S2D to an S2B for RAF service.
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 16th February 2009 at 14:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, your remark about the Buccs coming out of maintenance having a six in one chance of going back to the RN. Have you taken into account the following two points.
No airframe with a serial after XV869 ever served with the Navy!
No aircraft equipped with a bomb door tank ever served with the Navy!
I think all the S2B aircraft were fitted with this mod. The S2C/S2D aircraft never had this fitted. We had great fun on 809 removing and installing the bomb bay tank when a change of roll was required! You would normally end up soaked in and stinking of avcat.
Incidentally Buccaneer XV333 an aircraft I worked on in 1976 (809) is now in the fleet air arm museum, in the colours of 801 squadron which it wore 1969. However it has a bomb door tank fitted! This would have been installed sometime after 1978 when the aircraft was converted from an S2D to an S2B for RAF service.
Yes I did take this into account. Prior to the Bomb door tank installation the RAF/FAA Bucc fleet was mostly interchangeable. The last 43 Buccs off the line were ordered for the RAF (and the last three of those went to the MOD(PE) for trials) The origin of the S2A/S2B designation was to differentiate between ex Navy airframes (S2A) and new build for the RAF (S2B). On this basis no S2B served with the Navy, but later in the 70s the designations were changed with the advent of the Martel missile, aircraft fitted to launch the Martel were given the S2B designation whilst those not converted were S2As. The Navy's Buccs recieved the parallell designations S2C (non martel) and S2D (Martel capable). The S2Cs were usually fitted out as tankers or recce aircraft. AFAIK no Bucc fitted with a bomb bay door was ever deck landed, most likely because of the reduced clearance under the aircraft when landing on.
By: alertken
- 17th February 2009 at 10:16Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
MM: (why was not) Avon considered for the S1? I know the Sapphire was first choice and then for reasons of size dropped in favor of the Gyron Junior
1953. Avon didn't work. RR did not then show signs of becoming esteemed monopoly, and were in no way superior to ASM, Bristol, DH, Napier, all stronger financially within heftier entities. Much was expected of Halford's H.4 Gyron and H.6 Gyron Jr., originated 1945. By 1955 they had found berths in F.155T (H.4) and (H.6) SR.177, T.188 and Blue Steel Mk.2 as well as NA.39 (Sapphire and Avon having so many other berths as to consume their design teams). Lots of R&D money. All these platforms expired, except NA.39, by when the DH Enterprise was distracted on Blue Streak. Modest RN production run attracted lower priority, drift, distress, so by 1960 Spey was preferred for Mk.2 Bucc.
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 17th February 2009 at 14:42Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, have you any data on the date of the last flight of an S1? Also did an S1 ever fly in RAF camouflage?
The S1s were last flown in 1970 AFAIK when the last examples were withdrawn from service with 736NAS. 803NAS, the other user of S1s at Lossiemouth was disbanded in december 1969. The two sqns pooled their aircraft and carried side numbers in the 600 series. The S1s were withdrawn because of maintenance issues with the Gyron Junior engines leading to a poor availability rate and some crashes. No S1 ever served with the RAF, or flew in RAF camo, though several preserved examples are in RAF colours. This because they were taken on by museums at a time when no S2s were available (ie late 70s/early 80s). The only 'service' with the RAF that any S1 saw was as ground instructional airframes, as seen in the last pic. These aircraft retained their Navy camoflage but lost their sqn insignia, 'Royal Navy' titling and side numbers, and were allocated four digit numbers ending with the letter M (ground instructional airframes used by the Navy had the suffix A). A number of Sea Vixens were also passed to the RAF in the 70s for Ground instructional use, and recieved similar treatment to their paintwork though they gained new two digit side numbers unrelated to their previous Navy ones.
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 17th February 2009 at 19:16Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Anyway, back on topic as this thread is about HMS Victorious, here's some pics of one of the most beautiful ships ever to serve with Grey Funnel Cruises:
By: Paul Holtom
- 18th February 2009 at 12:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Superb shots Obi Wan, I agree the Vic was the best looking carrier we ever had. Pity about her premature end.
Capt Eric "Winkle" Brown in his book -Wings On My Sleeve- made the following statement about this episode;- "The year 1969 found the Fleet Arm absorbing the sad truth that the labour government was hell-bent on inflicting irreparable damage on naval aviation,for it had decided to axe yet another fleet carrier after CVA 01.It was now the turn of HMS Victorious,which had gone into dock in 1967 for a major refit, during which it suffered a minor fire in the galley. On that flimsy excuse it was paid off in 1968 and was earmarked for the ship breakers yard".
His book also contains a photo of an 801 squadron Buccaneer S2 in all over dark sea gray, call sign 234 with Victorious code letter "V" on the fin. 801 never embarked on the Vic with this colour scheme.
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 18th February 2009 at 12:10Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What was the diameter of the radar dish in the Phantom and how big a dish could have been fitted in the Buccaneer (assuming an enlarged nose).
One of the last three Buccs delivered in 77 which went to the MOD(PE) for trials work was fitted with the Tornado GR1 nose and avionics. this may give some idea of what could be achieved. The pseudo naval colour scheme is harder to explain, as the Navy had switched to all over dark sea grey ten years before this aircraft was built, and no naval aircraft had fin flashes either
By: Obi Wan Russell
- 18th February 2009 at 12:26Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Superb shots Obi Wan, I agree the Vic was the best looking carrier we ever had. Pity about her premature end.
Capt Eric "Winkle" Brown in his book -Wings On My Sleeve- made the following statement about this episode;- "The year 1969 found the Fleet Arm absorbing the sad truth that the labour government was hell-bent on inflicting irreparable damage on naval aviation,for it had decided to axe yet another fleet carrier after CVA 01.It was now the turn of HMS Victorious,which had gone into dock in 1967 for a major refit, during which it suffered a minor fire in the galley. On that flimsy excuse it was paid off in 1968 and was earmarked for the ship breakers yard".
His book also contains a photo of an 801 squadron Buccaneer S2 in all over dark sea gray, call sign 234 with Victorious code letter "V" on the fin. 801 never embarked on the Vic with this colour scheme.
It is possible the photo is of an aircraft preparing to embark for the cancelled final commission of Victorious. Her air group (893 Vixens, 801 Buccs, 814 Wessex and 849A Gannets) were working up ready to embark later in the year and the photo possibly dates from this period. After Victorious was 'binned' by the Labour government, her place was taken by Hermes which was also undergoing a small refit. Hermes air group at the time (892 Vixens, 809 Buccs, 826 Wessex and 849B Gannets were further back in their training cycle so Victorious' air group were switched to Hermes, as indeed was Victorious complement and the ship made ready for sea at the earliest opportunity so that there would be no gap in the deployments. 892 and 809 spent a couple of years providing display teams for air shows then in 1969 892 re equipped with Phantoms, whilst 809 increased in size from six to fourteen aircraft ready to embark in the newly refitted Ark Royal.
By: PMN1
- 18th February 2009 at 22:06Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Out of interest, given that Ark Royal had for a short time a deck edge lift, would the structure of the Illustrious, Ark Royal, Colossus, Majestic and Hermes classes have allowed when rebuilt for a lift arrangement similar to that of option D of the 1952 carrier with a CL lift forward and a deck edge lift aft clear of the angled deck plus a waist catapult?
By: Bager1968
- 19th February 2009 at 06:36Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Illustrious class (Victorious was one)... certainly not, as the hangar floor on Vicky was not far enough above the new full-load waterline.
It isdoubtful that one could be worked into a Colossus/Majestic either.
However... I have often wondered why the designers of Hermes' modifications felt it was a good idea to put both elevators where they would interfere with landing operations.
Surely, moving the aft elevator to the deck-edge behind the island and leaving the fore elevator on the centerline would result in more efficient, smoother, and faster launch/recovery operations.
Even if the fore elevator had to be moved a bit to the starboard to allow the port bow cat to be as long as needed, and the starboard bow cat moved to the angle (where it could be longer as well) this would be a better arrangement... especially as it would minimize wave effects on the deck-edge elevator (by moving it aft quite a bit).
I really wish the RN had done that with Hermes and at least one of the other 3.
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 14th February 2009 at 20:51 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[ATTACH]169518[/ATTACH]
[ATTACH]169519[/ATTACH]
Obi wan, your knowledge and photo records are superb! I think the mods (removal of cat hooks and hold back gear... etc) to the ex navy bucc's on the RN unit were carried out at Belfast. New fairings were added where the hold back was removed and the cat hook doors were removed and paneled over. One cab I worked on when on 809 squadron XV333 call sign 030 started off as a Navy cab then to the RAF and back to the Navy on 809. The only explanation I can think of is the RAF took over too many a/c and in the end had to give some back!
To keep this thread on track I thought it would be a good idea to attach these photos of the Vic during rebuild in the '50s.
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 14th February 2009 at 21:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
[ATTACH]169527[/ATTACH]
Here is a shot of Victorious on her last commission. 801 squadron Buccaneers can be seen on deck in dark sea gray and white. As far as I know 801 was the only squadron to take the Bucc s2 on board in this colour scheme. However I have seen a shot of some 809 squadron aircraft on the Hermes some in all over dark sea gray and one or two in dark sea gray/white.
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 14th February 2009 at 22:08 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, As you point out the Bucc's in your photos are reserve a/c for 809. They must have come out of storage for the air show(s) they are attending. The lack of under wing pylons and slipper tanks also points to this. I can identify them as S2C/D (the earlier S2 prior to 1973 can be visually identified by having two aerials of the same size on the spine) aircraft by the larger front aerial on the spine. Wonder why the letter "R" (Ark Royal code letter) has been left off the tail fin? It's not as if 809 could deploy to another carrier post '73!
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 14th February 2009 at 23:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
As far as I know, the Buccs lacked Arks deck code R and side numbers on the nose because they were on charge to the RAF's 237OCU, and the RAF didn't use the same side number system as the FAA nor did they use deck codes. These would only be aplied to the aircraft if andd when they transferred to 809. Somewhat petty on the part of the RAF but there you go. Interestingly, the FJ sqns aboard Ark Royal used ranges of side numbers for their aircraft that exceeded the number of aircraft allocated to them. 892NAS used 001 to 014, though they only had 12 aircraft (013 was used), whilst 809NAS used 020 to 036, despite only 14 aircraft at any given time. 849Bflight used 040 for it's COD4 and 041 to 044 for it's AEW3s, 824NAS used 050 to 055 for it's six Sea King HAS1s and the ship's flight of two Wessex HAS 1s used for plane guard SAR were coded 046 and 047. After 1973 the COD4 Gannet was replaced by an extra Sea King, taking the Gannet's code 040.
It's possible the Grey and White aircraft in the picture you describe are from the HQ sqn 803NAS, which in 1967 deployed four aircraft from the UK to Hermes in the Indian ocean to demonstrate the RNs ability to reinforce it's carriers deployed overseas at short notice. 803 was based at Lossiemouth until december 1969 when it was disbanded and during this time drew on a common pool of aircraft with 736, although individual aircraft were marked up as either one sqn or the other. Both sqns operated the few remaining S1s until 1969 when they were finally withdrawn because of serviceability problems with the Gyron Junior engines. In fact this was the second retirement for the S1s as they had been withdrawn in 66 once sufficient S2s were available, but once the decision had been made to transfer the Buccs to the RAF six S1s were taken out of storage in 67 to provide enough airframes for the extra workload. More were reactivated for 803NAS which was reformed as the Buccaneer HQ and trials sqn so both sqns had a mixed pool of S2s and S1s. During the seventies several Buccaneers switched back and forth between the FAA and RAF as they were technically drawn from a common fleet. Aircraft would typically spend 18 months serving with a sqn then be rotated back for deep maintenance, and once completed would be re issued to a frontline sqn as required. Thus Buccs coming out of maintenance had a one in six chance of being issued back to the RN for 809NAS.
NB. Several Buccaneer S1 survive aoround the country's museums, but some have been preserved in RAF camouflage. No S1 Buccaneer ever served with the RAF although as mentioned earlier, a number of RAF crews were trained on the S1s with 736NAS. It has always struck me as odd that the remaining S1s were not upgraded to S2 standard, after all it would have been a straightforward matter of re engining them with RR Speys. The prototype S2 was in fact a converted S1. All other systems eg avionics were identical. Later in the seventies there was a lack of airframes due to the wing spar fatigue problem which caused the RAF to disband 216sqn, only recently formed to take over 809s former aircraft. If the remaining fleet of S1s had been converted in the late 60s there would have been a larger fleet to draw on in the first place, at least an extra twenty aircraft. Production of the S1 had totalled 40 production standard plus 19 NA39 pre production aircraft, most of the latter had been brought up to S1 standard and issued to frontline sqns. Of these a large number had been lost in accidents (about 18 by 1970, mostly engine related) whilst several of the early NA39s were scrapped at the end of the test program from 1964 onwards. Also one S1 was dumped off the stern of Ark Royal in 1974 for a flight safety film! Of the survivors at least twenty to thirty aircraft could have been upgraded to S2 standard to increase the overall pool, allowing the RAF to still have their desired five frontline sqns plus OCU and the Navy could have retained 800NAS in commission (yes part of my cunning plan to keep Eagle in service...)
Posts: 887
By: alertken - 15th February 2009 at 15:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
OWR: odd that the remaining S1s were not upgraded to S2 standard.
(similarly, Hunter F.4 junked just as supplies of F.6 for retread/export expired: assertions that HSAL "did not know" that big-Avon could be shoe-horned in.)
Re-engining is never fun (see Spey 201 into F-4) and maybe only CFM-56/KC-135/DC-8 ever worked. I offer 2 reasons for not retreading S.1:
- in late-1950s MoS believed UK to be bereft of general understanding of the intake:N1 interface, and that only 1 scientist at RAE Bedford was fit for this purpose: he, it was, that did the inflatable intake on P.1127. See compressor stall, Swift/Hunter, to understand why they took this position. Just too hard to carve a fat intake onto S.1, easier to build anew. And/or:
- (Hunter F.4 production and) NA.39 R&D had been part US DoD (MSP)-funded. Maybe (I don't know) S.1 production had also been US-part-funded. All too hard to carve up hulls not wholly-owned.
Posts: 1,327
By: EdLaw - 15th February 2009 at 18:58 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Forgive the semi off-topic what-if, but what impact on RN carrier ops (especially Vicky, Eagle and Ark) would selection of the F-8 Crusader have had? What changes to the carriers, if any, would the adoption of the Crusader have mandated?
In essence, would a slightly earlier adoption of the F-8 have given the RN a better chance of continued carrier ops, despite the tight budgetary situation? It seems unlikely that the RAF would have misappropriated a batch of Crusaders, in contrast to the situation with the Phantom deliveries!
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 15th February 2009 at 22:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It wasn't for lack of knowledge about how to do it, the prototype S2 was a re engined S1 anyway. The only difference between the S1 and the S2 was the engines and their intakes, and once the S2 entered service it would have been straightforward to convert the remaining S1s.
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 15th February 2009 at 23:23 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Any idea why the Avon was never considered for the S1? I know the Sapphire was first choice and then for reasons of size dropped in favor of the Gyron Junior. The Spey engined S2 came soon after the S1 entered service. How would the Spey compare in size to the Avon? As the Spey wasn't around when the Buccaneer was in the development stage I always wondered why they never built an Avon engined Buccaneer from the outset!
Obi Wan, have you any data on the date of the last flight of an S1? Also did an S1 ever fly in RAF camouflage?
Posts: 338
By: PMN1 - 15th February 2009 at 23:48 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
What was the diameter of the radar dish in the Phantom and how big a dish could have been fitted in the Buccaneer (assuming an enlarged nose).
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 16th February 2009 at 00:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Obi Wan, your remark about the Buccs coming out of maintenance having a six in one chance of going back to the RN. Have you taken into account the following two points.
No airframe with a serial after XV869 ever served with the Navy!
No aircraft equipped with a bomb door tank ever served with the Navy!
I think all the S2B aircraft were fitted with this mod. The S2C/S2D aircraft never had this fitted. We had great fun on 809 removing and installing the bomb bay tank when a change of roll was required! You would normally end up soaked in and stinking of avcat.
Incidentally Buccaneer XV333 an aircraft I worked on in 1976 (809) is now in the fleet air arm museum, in the colours of 801 squadron which it wore 1969. However it has a bomb door tank fitted! This would have been installed sometime after 1978 when the aircraft was converted from an S2D to an S2B for RAF service.
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 16th February 2009 at 14:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Yes I did take this into account. Prior to the Bomb door tank installation the RAF/FAA Bucc fleet was mostly interchangeable. The last 43 Buccs off the line were ordered for the RAF (and the last three of those went to the MOD(PE) for trials) The origin of the S2A/S2B designation was to differentiate between ex Navy airframes (S2A) and new build for the RAF (S2B). On this basis no S2B served with the Navy, but later in the 70s the designations were changed with the advent of the Martel missile, aircraft fitted to launch the Martel were given the S2B designation whilst those not converted were S2As. The Navy's Buccs recieved the parallell designations S2C (non martel) and S2D (Martel capable). The S2Cs were usually fitted out as tankers or recce aircraft. AFAIK no Bucc fitted with a bomb bay door was ever deck landed, most likely because of the reduced clearance under the aircraft when landing on.
Posts: 3,614
By: Bager1968 - 17th February 2009 at 05:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Sapphire 200 series: 125" long; 37.5" diameter; 3,180 lb weight; 11,000 lb.s.t.
Avon 200 series: 126.9" long; 42.0" diameter; ~2,800 lb weight; 11,250 lb.s.t.
Gyron Jr: 102" length; 32.3" diameter; ? weight; 7,200 lb.s.t.
Spey mk101 (S.2): 114.6 " long; 32.5" diameter; 2,471 lb weight; 11,030 lb.s.t.
Posts: 887
By: alertken - 17th February 2009 at 10:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
MM: (why was not) Avon considered for the S1? I know the Sapphire was first choice and then for reasons of size dropped in favor of the Gyron Junior
1953. Avon didn't work. RR did not then show signs of becoming esteemed monopoly, and were in no way superior to ASM, Bristol, DH, Napier, all stronger financially within heftier entities. Much was expected of Halford's H.4 Gyron and H.6 Gyron Jr., originated 1945. By 1955 they had found berths in F.155T (H.4) and (H.6) SR.177, T.188 and Blue Steel Mk.2 as well as NA.39 (Sapphire and Avon having so many other berths as to consume their design teams). Lots of R&D money. All these platforms expired, except NA.39, by when the DH Enterprise was distracted on Blue Streak. Modest RN production run attracted lower priority, drift, distress, so by 1960 Spey was preferred for Mk.2 Bucc.
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 17th February 2009 at 14:42 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The S1s were last flown in 1970 AFAIK when the last examples were withdrawn from service with 736NAS. 803NAS, the other user of S1s at Lossiemouth was disbanded in december 1969. The two sqns pooled their aircraft and carried side numbers in the 600 series. The S1s were withdrawn because of maintenance issues with the Gyron Junior engines leading to a poor availability rate and some crashes. No S1 ever served with the RAF, or flew in RAF camo, though several preserved examples are in RAF colours. This because they were taken on by museums at a time when no S2s were available (ie late 70s/early 80s). The only 'service' with the RAF that any S1 saw was as ground instructional airframes, as seen in the last pic. These aircraft retained their Navy camoflage but lost their sqn insignia, 'Royal Navy' titling and side numbers, and were allocated four digit numbers ending with the letter M (ground instructional airframes used by the Navy had the suffix A). A number of Sea Vixens were also passed to the RAF in the 70s for Ground instructional use, and recieved similar treatment to their paintwork though they gained new two digit side numbers unrelated to their previous Navy ones.
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 17th February 2009 at 19:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Anyway, back on topic as this thread is about HMS Victorious, here's some pics of one of the most beautiful ships ever to serve with Grey Funnel Cruises:
Posts: 136
By: Paul Holtom - 18th February 2009 at 12:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Superb shots Obi Wan, I agree the Vic was the best looking carrier we ever had. Pity about her premature end.
Capt Eric "Winkle" Brown in his book -Wings On My Sleeve- made the following statement about this episode;- "The year 1969 found the Fleet Arm absorbing the sad truth that the labour government was hell-bent on inflicting irreparable damage on naval aviation,for it had decided to axe yet another fleet carrier after CVA 01.It was now the turn of HMS Victorious,which had gone into dock in 1967 for a major refit, during which it suffered a minor fire in the galley. On that flimsy excuse it was paid off in 1968 and was earmarked for the ship breakers yard".
His book also contains a photo of an 801 squadron Buccaneer S2 in all over dark sea gray, call sign 234 with Victorious code letter "V" on the fin. 801 never embarked on the Vic with this colour scheme.
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 18th February 2009 at 12:10 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
One of the last three Buccs delivered in 77 which went to the MOD(PE) for trials work was fitted with the Tornado GR1 nose and avionics. this may give some idea of what could be achieved. The pseudo naval colour scheme is harder to explain, as the Navy had switched to all over dark sea grey ten years before this aircraft was built, and no naval aircraft had fin flashes either
Posts: 519
By: Obi Wan Russell - 18th February 2009 at 12:26 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
It is possible the photo is of an aircraft preparing to embark for the cancelled final commission of Victorious. Her air group (893 Vixens, 801 Buccs, 814 Wessex and 849A Gannets) were working up ready to embark later in the year and the photo possibly dates from this period. After Victorious was 'binned' by the Labour government, her place was taken by Hermes which was also undergoing a small refit. Hermes air group at the time (892 Vixens, 809 Buccs, 826 Wessex and 849B Gannets were further back in their training cycle so Victorious' air group were switched to Hermes, as indeed was Victorious complement and the ship made ready for sea at the earliest opportunity so that there would be no gap in the deployments. 892 and 809 spent a couple of years providing display teams for air shows then in 1969 892 re equipped with Phantoms, whilst 809 increased in size from six to fourteen aircraft ready to embark in the newly refitted Ark Royal.
Posts: 338
By: PMN1 - 18th February 2009 at 22:06 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Out of interest, given that Ark Royal had for a short time a deck edge lift, would the structure of the Illustrious, Ark Royal, Colossus, Majestic and Hermes classes have allowed when rebuilt for a lift arrangement similar to that of option D of the 1952 carrier with a CL lift forward and a deck edge lift aft clear of the angled deck plus a waist catapult?
Posts: 3,614
By: Bager1968 - 19th February 2009 at 06:36 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The Illustrious class (Victorious was one)... certainly not, as the hangar floor on Vicky was not far enough above the new full-load waterline.
It isdoubtful that one could be worked into a Colossus/Majestic either.
However... I have often wondered why the designers of Hermes' modifications felt it was a good idea to put both elevators where they would interfere with landing operations.
Surely, moving the aft elevator to the deck-edge behind the island and leaving the fore elevator on the centerline would result in more efficient, smoother, and faster launch/recovery operations.
Even if the fore elevator had to be moved a bit to the starboard to allow the port bow cat to be as long as needed, and the starboard bow cat moved to the angle (where it could be longer as well) this would be a better arrangement... especially as it would minimize wave effects on the deck-edge elevator (by moving it aft quite a bit).
I really wish the RN had done that with Hermes and at least one of the other 3.