A-5 Vigilante conventional weapon load?

[minoslas]

in http://www.vectorsite.net/ava5.html, talk the A-5 has equiped with 4 subalar weapons sopports and the train bomb bay, the last carried the train fuel nuclear bomb cargo, but, my question has if the A-5 make conventionals attacks, the weapons load carried of them and the capables missions. The train bomb load has interesting to convert in multiple dumb boms or dispersed bombs options. The other problem has the attack pattern used by the A-5 in a attack run. Can be make a poput toss atack or a lofftier attack?

 

[sferrin]

Conventional weapons were carried on pylons not in the tunnel.

 

[dragon72]

Putting dumb bombs in the tunnel wouldn't be very accurate anyway. Apparently anything released from the tunnel tended to get caught up in the jet blast and get dragged behind the aircraft for a bit.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

Putting dumb bombs in the tunnel wouldn't be very accurate anyway. Apparently anything released from the tunnel tended to get caught up in the jet blast and get dragged behind the aircraft for a bit.

Internal stores delivery accuracy was not as good as external according to the A3J trials report, but it does not mention any wake influence on the ejected store. Reading between the lines, the poorer accuracy was probably due to the lack of ballistics data on the rearward ejection from the tunnel at about 50 feet per second (30 knots) vice the external pylon drop. The bombing computer reliability/accuracy was the major problem.

 

[minoslas]

What dimension was the internal bomb train and the internal bomb bay?. I´m interested in adapt 70´s and 80´s armament inside for test proposed. The poor acurated of the bombing computer has not a problem, has only a HUD simbology modification and a release warload ejection to addapted to the tunnel perfomance. I used for them harpoon wargame rules for that tests.

 

[minoslas]

In the Nº 51 RA-5C Vigilante units in combat of Osprey Combat Aircraft Series found in google book, found in the Charpter 1 Lineage, two interesting photos.

1st: Page nine up
"This photograph war released by NAA when it war touting the A-5´s conventional wapons capabilities following problemas with the jet´scomplex nuclear bomb delivery system. This particular aircraft is probably a rare A-5B. While a full series of ordnance test were conducted, furing which the Vigilante proved itself to be a stable and effective weapons platforme, the A-4 never shot a rocket or dropped a bomb in anger (EBAL)"

2nd: Page thirteen up
"The A3J initilly had two wing stations, but NAA strngthethed the wing structure of the A3J-2/A-58B model so that four srores struts could be installed to carry weapos or fuel tanks. In the frontline, these statios were most frequently usde to carry a small pod that dispensed 5-bl practice bombs, or as the attachment point for the cameras´flasher pode. The huge 400-gallon drop tanks seen in the photograph were intended to give the Vigilante more range in tis strategic role. Even the RVAH squadrons were required to carry them for contingency operations. Because of the tans´s weight and drag, less then a quarter of the fuel they housed added to the jet.s range, the rest being burned while carring the tanks themselves. These stores were never carried operationally (EBAL)

I only identificate some weapons in that 1st photo:
1 AGM-12D
4 AGM-12B
4 Zunny 5" pod
4 19 and 7 2" Hydra70 Rocket pod
4 8 SPU-7 practique bomb container
4 Mk-117 demolition bombs
4 Mk-84 bombs
4 Mk-83
4 3*Mk-82
4 6*Mk-81
4 Mk-20 Rockeyes disperser bombs
4 400 USG fuel drop tanks
1 600? USG fuel drop tanks
4 Gun pods?

 

[Jemiba]

From squadron/signal Mini N°3 two drawings one drawing of the weapons pack
and of the refueling kit. Maybe helpful at least for estimating the dimensions.

 

[The Artist]

I recall reading somewhere that there were problems with that internal carriage system - something about the train separating from the aircraft during the launch from the carrier deck.

 

[Jemiba]

Yes, that's mentioned in the sqadron/signal issue, too, that at least on one occasion,
the payload was left on the carrier deck, when the aircraft was catapulted.

 

[AL]

Both the WINGS OF FAME, Vol.19, pg.87 and the Ginter book, NF 64, pg.148, have the same picture of the 9/4/69 incident with Ginter book having a second picture of the aftermath.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

The dimensions of the A3J linear bomb bay are:

Bay Length (from top to expendable tail cone): 32'4"
Fuel Can Length (up to three in bay): 8'4"
Fuel Can Diameter: 2'6"

 

[Abraham Gubler]

I recall reading somewhere that there were problems with that internal carriage system - something about the train separating from the aircraft during the launch from the carrier deck.

This is more likely to be a mechanical fail rather than a design fault. Same thing could happen for external storage except the store would be a bit more robust when it bounces on the deck.

 

[Tailspin Turtle]

From the A3J SAC

 

[Michel Van]

some picture about Vigilante Tanks&Bomb and it bomb drop

about the last two pic

Sometimes the Vigilante's unique linear bay fuel cans would come loose during a catapult shot, land on the flight deck and explode with spectacular results. In this sequence, all three tanks (and the 885 US gallons of fuel they contained) were lost from the RVAH-12 jet flown by Cdr John Huber when launching from Independence on 4 September 1969. Three cans are visible in the lower photo. The Vigilante usually remained flyable in the wake of such an incident.

source:
http://forum.perryrhodan.net/index.php?showtopic=20272&st=440
http://forum.perryrhodan.net/index.php?showtopic=20272&st=220

 

[LowObservable]

Awesome!

Was it designed by the USAF?

 

[JFC Fuller]

From: http://www.bobjellison.com/RA5C_Vigilante3.htm

[font=arial, helvetica, sans-serif]...and even though the A-5 could haul a variety of missiles, among them the Martin Bullpup B with its 1,000 lb. warhead...In a conventional attack mode - not counting 8,000 lbs, of internal bomb bay capability - the Vigilante could have carried two 1,000 lb. bombs on inboard pylons, plus twelve 500 lb. bombs on multiple ejector racks outboard, or twelve 500 lb. weapons outboard, along with two 400 gallon external fuel tanks, inboard, giving it a combat radius of 1,500 miles at a standard cruise of 500 mph a 900 mph. approach speed, a dash over the target area of 1200 mph and a maximum escape speed of 1300 mph.[/font]

I can't not seem to find any pictures of a Vigilante with any A2G ordnance actually attached though.

 

[sferrin]

Here's one

 

[JFC Fuller]

Thanks sferrin, 12x 500lb I believe. I have also found this one, though with nothing actually attached:

 

[Jemiba]

From Squadron Signal Mini N° 3, a photo of one of two aircraft ,which
were converted as RA-5C prototypes, carrying AGM-42 Bullpup missiles
and Mk.43 (nuclear) training devices.The other photo shows an RA-5C
with twelve Mk.82 bombs.

 

[Grey Havoc]

Awesome!

Was it designed by the USAF?

;D

 

[Archibald]

A silly question maybe but... could the "linear bomb bay" be turned into a *conventional* bay ? I mean, cutting a rectangular opening into the belly to drop bombs the usual way ?

 

[Jemiba]

Considering, that cutting/repositioning fuselage frames would mean a major redesign, maybe thepart in front of the engines ?
The next section between the engines may already have been to far away from the CG, I think.
(cut away via aviadejavu.ru/Images6/ )

 

[Archibald]

Clever ! Would be a bit like the FB-111A SRAM bay, except a tad longer, since the Vigilante undercarriage took less fuselage space than the F-111 very bizarre folding sequence....

Fuel Can Length (up to three in bay): 8'4"

So just one of these ?

 

[Scott Kenny]

So just one of these ?

Maybe 2, or 1.5 of them. The rear frames that supported the engines were massive forgings, you don't want to cut those.