Buccaneer as a british F6D Missileer... AAM truck

A

Archibald

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
6 June 2006
Messages
11,820
Reaction score
13,476
As said in the tin. Phantoms are doomed by Audacious and CVA-01 going away. Leaving one alternative to "SHAR on Invincibles": Buccaneers on Centaur carriers.
Performance wise a Bucc is worth a SHAR and has far more internal space for fuel radar and missiles.
Which bring us to a F6D role.
Would it be possible to build fleet defence Buccs ? what radar and missiles for them ? Red Dean / Red Hebe ? could Gannet AEW 3 guide them ?
 
You are thinking along the lines of something based on P.150?
p150-gif.8068
 
Supposed it comes down to how minimally capable a RN missileer would have to be to be considered viable by the RN.
In this specific time period the UK missile and radar technology considerably lagged behind the US (especially re: viable radar guided AAMs).
Hence true equivalence to what the US were considering with their Missileer concept in terms of range/ reach wasn’t on offer from UK systems - at best we are talking about approx. Sparrow equivalent capacity but at many times the cost and in this scenario carried by a subsonic platform (so likely quite inferior to an F-4 against higher performance opponents). But if deemed minimally acceptable a Bucaneer with UK licenced versions of the Phantoms weapon system and the Sparrow (the cheapest way of fielding this minimal capacity) could have been fielded but not clear why you just wouldn’t buy the F-4 instead.
 
Last edited:
@Grey Havoc, brilliant memory on the Blackburn project numbers, always great to see people link to actual project studies rather than just rely on their own prejudice.

To keep up the theme, we could infer from Archibald's scenario that the radar and missiles proposed under the Future Naval Fighter Systems study of 1960/61 enter development. For whatever reason, the associated aircraft fails and the radar and missile combination is installed in a Buccaneer derivative instead. One can scale back ambition by using radar homing (SARH) Red Top rather than the higher specced big missiles if it suits.
 
Last edited:
Many thanks JFC.

This is a desperate solution from the 70's to keep some Centaurs and their Buccaneer strike capability, when the Audacious fall appart - and to budget cuts.
 
Can we have the need for a shore based long range asset, to cover any gaps around the fleet? Maybe just as the number of Vulcans needed, reduces, just by say 24 aircraft....
 
P150 was a land based design for the RAF, and included a non-folding wing and and new tail unit. It weighed 7000lb more than the original Buccaneer, gaining a further 8000lb with the fuel-and-stores-pallet, and hence may exceed the shipboard weight take-off limitations.

More relevant are the B.112, B.117, B.129 and P.140 (which was a revived P.129 proposed in 1964)) versions all of which were proposed as carrier-based interceptors.
 
Certainly a version of the OR.346 system (FMICW radar and A5 seeker equipped missile) is possible and could be fitted to a new variant of the Buccaneer.
 
JFC Fuller said:
@Grey Havoc, brilliant memory on the Blackburn project numbers, always great to see people link to actual project studies rather than just rely on their own prejudice.

To keep up the theme, we could infer from Archibald's scenario that the radar and missiles proposed under the Future Naval Fighter Systems study of 1960/61 enter development. For whatever reason, the associated aircraft fails and the radar and missile combination is installed in a Buccaneer derivative instead. One can scale back ambition by using radar homing (SARH) Red Top rather than the higher specced big missiles if it suits.
Click to expand...

One problem would be accommodating a large fighter radar in the nose of a plane designed as a strike asset. IIRC ‘Fighters over the Fleet’ has something on fighter versions of the Bucc. Possibly using SLAR for search and a smaller nose-mounted radar for targeting. There is the possibility that I am conflating the Bucc fighter with the TSR-2 fighter plans - and my FotF is far away from me now, so no ability to check.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom