All ex Buccaneer Pilots we need your help, Beware Big Pics

[NutLoose]

Trumpeter are going to produce a kit in 1/32 scale (we think) that will be huge but can someone tell me for them, this is the info at the moment we are after

"The bucc had 2 different wingtips, and I've only been able to find a possible drawing of the short version in a (probably wrong, ironically) magazine. Before I pass the information on, can anyone please confirm who used, when, and how, the two different tips"

As for the model, feast your eyes at work in progress, there is a stunning Jaguar too if anyone wants to see it, complete with engine. We want them to get these right so we are helping out :ok:

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/DSC_0592.jpg


http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/DSC_0607.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/1-1.jpg

Taster for you

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/DSC_6952.jpg

[Jackonicko]

A French Jag.

Yuk!

[Hueymeister]

The detail is amazing...:ok:

[vecvechookattack]

Very good. They look like plastic though....!!!!

[NutLoose]

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/DSC_6976.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/DSC_6972.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/DSC_6946.jpg

[BossEyed]

Those are stunning! Got any pics alongside a coin or something to show just how big a 1:32 model is?

vecvec - ever heard of Humbrol?

[barnstormer1968]

The Bucc is a stunner!
I take it this is the prototype, and am keen to know how much detail will be kept in production models?

[NutLoose]

The one showing is the protottype they use and is in we think 1/48th at the moment but they use that to build the others from

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/DSC_0606.jpg

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u79/EdgarBrooks/DSC_1080.jpg

[Jackonicko]

That's more like it....

Impressive level of detail.

[vecvechookattack]

13 minutes....thats not bad.


Superb pics and a great model. Trumpeter are much better at reproducing the finite detail than other model makers.

[Always a Sapper]

Nice, but will it fly? ......







As a kid all my 'airfix' ones did, for a short distance anyway :E catapult launch too! ;)

[kitwe]

Buccaneer Wingtips - NutLoose

The Buccaneer S1 and S2 had wingtips of different shapes (seem to remember that the S1's were rounded and the S2's were more swept). When I was on "A" Sqn at A&AEE (as a nav, not a pilot) we did some handling trials on XV350, an S2, retro-fitted with S1 wingtips. This was during Jun, Jul and Aug 1984. Sad to say, I cannot remember the reasons for or the outcome of the trial but I don't think it came to anything.

[forget]

Nut Loose, This may explain things.

GW1. Within 3 days the teams at RAF Lossiemouth had prepared six aircraft (newly painted desert pink, fitted with new secure radios, old-style S.1 wingtips for a smoother ride over the flat desert floor.

T + L.

[Union Jack]

Nut Loose

.... and also available with recommended FAA colours I presume - preferably with 801 NAS markings!:ok:

Jack

[cornish-stormrider]

Why would Anyone want colours for Wavy Wafu flying???

I mean it's not like they did that Belize mission I read about in a book once:E.

I have added this item to my shiny shiny thing list, Nutloose - please to keep us informed of when where etc to purchase one so I can ruin it in my cack handed way.

[Sgt.Slabber]

Nutloose,

To answer your query re wingtips, they were fitted mostly 1989 onwards to cabs that had undergone the Avionics upgrade - ASR1012, Mod 1736. The short tips reduced wing-loading, particularly whilst pulling 6G at 30 feet, with the throttle levers through the panel... allegedly... and therefore extended the fatigue life. Note that the cabs did not return from Avionics upgrade with the shorter tips; they were fitted later, e.g., XV161 - 12 Sqn "AF" returned to Lossie/12 late '87 - early '88, but was not fitted with the short tips until sometime in '89.

You may find some more info on which cabs were modded, and when, here:

Contents Page (http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/0_Contents.html)

Looks like a good kit in the offing - any idea on the role fits likely to be offered, e.g., TV Martel + Data Link Pod, TVAT, etc?

[LowObservable]

Just Like The Real Thing!

It even has folding wings!

[foldingwings]

Well it would have wouldn't it!

It even has folding wings!

May I enquire if all the detail behind the various panels will be visible once the model is completed? If the hatches have to be glued closed then there is probably no point in some of the internal detail and the consequent likely increased purchase price.

Foldie:ok:

PS. Just a query as to the title of the thread, NutLoose? Why 'Buccaneer Pilots'? I will ask 2 of my fellow Navs on the Bucc Aircrew Association Committee for the definitive answer as they will have much more reliable info than the pilots; the 2 in mind have published 2 excellent books on the Bucc and one is our historian with a vast library of info.
PPS. Just for your info - the Bucc was very much a 2-man aircraft with absolute equality in the cockpit. Notwithstanding that navs were never allowed to be captain they often authorised student pilots when they were in the back seat on his FAM 2 on the OCU!

[Jackonicko]

Absolute equality?

No stick, no vote!

And not having any Buccs with a stick in the back made me wonder, fairly hard, as to the nerve and backbone of those who flew with studes on their first solos when I had my handful of trips in the back of a 208 Squadron jet, all those years ago.

[foldingwings]

Jacko

No stick, no vote!


That's my very point! In the Bucc force, the lack of a stick in the back did not normally affect the voting rights of the nav who was often vastly more experienced than the kid up front!

We were 2-man through and through and equal in all areas of operating the jet (eg. both pilot and nav did independent walk rounds before flight) although I concede that the guy up front had ultimate control (with my permission!).

Foldie:ok:

[jumpseater]

From the image with the hand that's 1/48th. Foldie, the panels are normally made to be displayed open, so you don't 'loose' the detail, see here
Spitfire Mk.IXc by Marcus Nicholls (Tamiya 1/32) (http://hyperscale.com/2009/galleries/spitfireixc32tamiyamn_1.htm)
F-105G by Paul Coudeyrette (Trumpeter 1/32) (http://hyperscale.com/2009/galleries/spitfireixc32tamiyabg_1.htm)



Price has risen accordingly, this kit retails around the 100 beer token mark

[BEagle]

The short tips reduced wing-loading How does reducing wing area reduce wing loading?

That truly is a stunning model - is there a miniature foldie to pop in the back seat?

The 2-person crew thing was indeed paramount on the Bucc - we had it instilled in us on Day 1. If I recall correctly, we used to ensure that the weapon safety breaks were left swinging during the walk round (which we did in opposite directions) so that whoever got there second had proof positive that his chum had checked them.

It got a bit daft during the sim phase - the ever present monitoring and "Check cheeses' call from the chap (not 'kid') in the back was a bit too enthusiastic once and off we went with the GPI still stored.... So next time, it went "Airborne, gear up, lights out, flap up...moving together, stop together"..."Check cheeses"..."Check GPI!!" "OK", said the instructor, "..maybe a little more time in your own cockpits, please chaps!".

I once had 'one of those feelings' when climbing out after a trip and checked the rear seat pins - to find that the almighty staff Nav had put the wrong one in the wrong hole - so the seat wasn't safe as one pin was shorter than the correct one. I swapped them back to their correct locations - and made the seat safe. Did I get any thanks? 3 guesses.......

Anyway, a very nice model. Perhaps both wing tip options should be available?

[foldingwings]

Beags,

is there a miniature foldie to pop in the back seat?


I am honoured but I had my last trip in one at Thunder City only 14 months ago, so give somebody else the ride!

Did I get any thanks? 3 guesses.......


Do get a grip, old chap, you were a stude and it was the 70s!!!

Damn, I've started you off again about your short journey with 237! Sorry!

Happy New Year:ok:

Foldie:cool:

[BEagle]

Hey, Foldie you lucky sod getting that trip in Thunder City!

Were you on the Bucc during GW1? That Bucc model would look good in a 'worn' desert nipple-pink paint scheme, with all the nose art and mission tallies.

I must still have a few slides of your jets sitting outside my VC10K window back then.

Happy New Year to you too - and at least some of what I was taught at 237 has come in useful over the years!

Have a look in your logbook - were you on that 'say hello to a Sverdlov' trip in the late 1980s with a VC10K generated at short notice towing the Buccs north? It seems that AOC maritime assets had decided that all this Glasnost business was fine, but the Sovs had to know that we (you) were still serious!

[foldingwings]

Left the Bucc in 1983 and onto Tornado!

However, was tasked as a pair and found a group of: 2 x Krivaks; Kresta II and Boris Chilikin off the north of Scotland in 1977 that had been lost by the Kipper Fleet. Went from Honington (12 Sqn) armed with 2 x ARM (real) seeker heads and managed to gain a lock on the Topsail as we left the Victor over Tain Range! Brilliant day out beating 7 shades out of the Soviets, who were in alternating RAS at the time, before landing at Lossie for a nightstop and a long session in the Scruffs! Those were the days. However, I guess we must have pi**ed off one of the Krivak captains as he made a point, upon completion of his RAS, in showing us just how quickly he could get it from 0-60! (well 40 actually)!

Hey, Foldie you lucky sod getting that trip in Thunder City!

It's nice to have mates!

Foldie:cool:

[NutLoose]

Thanks guys this all helps, now we are on page 2 i have added some more that had been posted :)

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/33.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/55.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Black%20room/44.jpg

BossEyed this is a 1/32 hunter to give you an idea of scale

http://www.skywriters.net/wibble/brtimodeller/009models0025.JPG


More of the Jag detailing French variant, they were looking at omani GR1 GR3 French and Tbird, can post more if wanted :}


http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Sepecat%20Jaguar/DSC_6905.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Sepecat%20Jaguar/DSC_6913.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Sepecat%20Jaguar/DSC_6921.jpg

http://i511.photobucket.com/albums/s351/andlovemen/Sepecat%20Jaguar/DSC_6928.jpg

[kitwe]

Buccaneer Rear Stick

RAE Farnborough had a Buccaneer in the 1980s (think it was in the "Nightbird" programme) which was apparently trialled with a control "stick" in the rear cockpit. I understood this to be a "last ditch" safety device in the event of problems at low-level at night. I don't think it was a success.

[stepwilk]

"May I enquire if all the detail behind the various panels will be visible once the model is completed? If the hatches have to be glued closed then there is probably no point in some of the internal detail and the consequent likely increased purchase price."

We modelers know what's "inside," and we're quite happy to pay for it.

[Rigga]

The Bucc featured in these pictures is an S2B not an S2A. And because of that there should not be a choice of Wing Tip fairings unless other details are changed.

The question is... Do crews know the difference? - clearly shown in these pics.

Not a driver or a shouty map reader - just an old Cpl Rigga.

[MAINJAFAD]

As regards the Jag.... I don't think the end of the cannon barrel comes past the opening of the faring in front of it (not on the ones fitted with the Aden it doesn't). The port side of the cockpit combing on the GR3 doesn't look right either. Picky point's I know, but if you're forking out £100 plus on a model, it would be nice not to have to fork out for replacement resin parts because something is totally the wrong shape (Like the arse end of the Lightning kits they did), please pass it on. Well done to Trumpter for doing these two types though :cool: 1/32 Scale Phantom FG1/FGR2 and Hawk T1A next please ;) (Oh and seeing they have done a large scale SAM kit (i.e. SA-2), could we have a Bloodhound 2 kit in 1/32 Scale as well (and don't use the missiles at Cosford or Hendon as the source of reference either, as they are not standard production missiles).

[Alber Ratman]

I would also mention the mass of holes seen in the rear heat shields at the rear of the fuselage. These panels were held on on their extremities by mush head screws. The rest of their internal structure was rivetted on with tiny (3/32") countersunks. The fwd heat shield panels had cut outs for mounting the tailplane range measuring protractors. Again, small details but seeing they have gone to town on it.

Yeph, the GR1 /GR3 ADEN barrels do not protude out of the blast fairing. There are two gas deflector plates in that area of the Brit kites. Also the Brit nose is missing the standby pitots, the TAT sensor and AOA sensor. The AJAX / Dash pot panel on the starboard side was never hinged either. It was release the QRFs and take it off.:8

[NutLoose]

Thanks guys the canopy and gun are on their list already, will pass them all on :)

MAINJAFAD Your wish partially sorted

04284Bae Hawk T.1 Red Arrows1/3211/2010New
Revell Neuheiten 2010 (http://www.ipmsdeutschland.de/FirstLook/Hersteller_News/Revell_News_2010.html)

[BossEyed]

BossEyed this is a 1/32 hunter to give you an idea of scale

Thanks for making the effort to post that, NL. A 1/32 Bucc would be something to behold.

vecvec sorry - it's just that I'd never seen you anything like that subtle before. :}

[Jackonicko]

For the RAF Jag, how about the RWR and the GPS jamjar lid on the top of the nose. And the HMS sensor in the top of the canopy.....

[Alber Ratman]

Its a bit hard to show an HMS tracker when there is no inmatation plexiglass to stick it on...

Another major glaring cockpit error is the lack of the Sky G / RWR display on the RH glareshield as well as the INDU on the left.

And please make Trumpeter aware that of the GR1 G Meter supporting structure + the meter itself was binned post GR 1B/GR 3 upgrades, if they are doing a GR 1 or T 2.:8:8

[MAINJAFAD]

Cheers Nutloose... All I need now is one of the decal sheet manufacturers to do markings for a grey T1A of 234(R) Sqn with the black tail (the one in the photo below to be precise, because I've flown in it).

http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1128499F.jpg


XX317 DL 234(R) Sqn RAF Valley 1993

As regards the Jag kit, Ratman is a bit of a rigger god on the type and does know the structure of the Jag backwards (on more than one occasion I've seen him pull a Jag kit out of the box and while the pieces are still on the sprue say...That panel's wrong shape / size / position...That bit is the wrong shape / in the wrong place...there's a bit / panel / vent missing there...etc). May be worth contacting him as regards anything the manufacturer requests as regards correction info.

[Tim McLelland]

This story has been going-around on two modelling forum sites for days and days now. The photos come from a guy who claims to represent the manufacturer (Trumpeter), but - inexplicably - the guy seems incapable of answering even the most direct questions. Despite repeated requests he strenuously avoids stating what scale the finished kit will be, and when it is likely to be released. This has led some of us to believe that the guy may well not be who he says he is, and is merely some random model builder who has access to the company's images - and enjoys teasing modellers who are too childish to know any better.

The threads on the modelling sites are almost hilarious. Endless posts from modellers whipping themselves into a state of frenzy even though the kit may well turn-out to be merely the same scale as Airfix's kit which has been available for years (at less than half the price). Some people insist that the mysterious man from Trumpeter is "for real" because they've actually emailed him directly and (*gasp*) sent him information! Seriously, you couldn't make it up, it's co comical.

Needless to say, I'm being branded as almost Hitler-esque by mentioning to these crazed people that they are probably being fooled. There's an unwritten rule on modelling forums that you can only say what people want to hear, otherwise everyone bursts into tears. However, now that this crazy tale has drifted into a more professional forum, might I suggest (yet again) that somebody persuades the mysterious man from Trumpeter to actually explain who the hell he is, before even more people waste their time sending him material?

Just a thought...

[MAINJAFAD]

Same bloke who no doubt posted photos of a 1-32 scale Lightning F1/3 test shot.... A 1-32 scale Typhoon T1/F2 test shot and a 1-32 scale Harrier GR7/AV8B test shots a while back on the modelling forums. Well he wasn't wrong about that lot as the Tiffy kit is now sitting in my loft. Level of detail on the models shown...1/32 scale minimum (I've got the Airfix kits of both in 1/48 with resin detail sets which don't have half the detail that are on those photos). Trumpeter have been making a habit of doing British stuff that other mainstream kit producers haven't touched (who thought that anyone would do a 1-48 scale injection kit of a Wyvern!!!), hence they are most likely genuine.

[Tim McLelland]

Well no, not quite.

The photographs are genuine, but they're purely representative. The "test shot" of the Buccaneer as illustrated is undoubtedly 48th scale (we see a human hand on one photo which confirms this) but countless modellers on the modelling sites (most of whom base their conclusions on hope rather than knowledge) are convinced that the finished kit will be 32nd scale, even though there's no reason to reach this decision. The Jaguar appears to be planned for 32nd scale but again there doesn't seem to be any official word from the manufacturer.

Photos of the Lightning kit did emerge prior to its release but Trumpeter were clear about this kit and it appeared in their production schedule and catalogue very quickly. Now we have the appearance of a mysterious guy called "Mr.Song" who seems to be claiming (on various forums) that he is working on these kits for Trumpeter, but he steadfastly refuses to provide any direct answers, and merely teases modellers on their forums with cryptic comments. Consequently, I think it unwise to be wasting anybody's time gathering reference material for someone who could well turn-out to be some random lunatic who simply enjoys winding-up modellers with mental ages of five or less! It's simple - if Trumpeter want the assistance of people who can help and know what they're talking about, then maybe they could try asking in a more adult manner?

This is the kind of thing that is going on - as illustrated at the very start of this thread:-
Trumpeter are going to produce a kit in 1/32 scale (we think) that will be huge but can someone tell me for them, this is the info at the moment we are after
I mean, are you suggesting that you're striving to help someone who can't even be bothered to tell you what scale the kit will be?! Madness!

As for the Buccaneer kit, it will be very welcome if it does turn-out to be 32nd scale but in the absence of any facts from the manufacturer, nobody knows. If it is 48th scale then it will merely duplicate the kit which Airfix has been producing for years. Admittedly it looks much better in terms of quality and detail but it will inevitably cost 2-3 times the price of the Airfix kit, so it will hardly be worth it. Trumpeter do produce many aircraft in 48th scale (their new Su-24 and F-100 for example) so both the Jaguar and Buccaneer may well turn out to be only 48th scale kits. Hopefully they will not be!

[NutLoose]

Fraid that in all walks of life there are some people that will bark at the moon and one is posting above, we know who Mr Song is and have contact with him by email directly, but as in the case of all things in life you get the odd disbeliever.........

You will just have to take in on good faith guys and we do really need your help.....

MAINJAFAD is correct.

[foldingwings]

But I would just say, why don't they ask the people who built the originals for a copy of their drawings or direct access to the individuals who built them - they both still exist although the latter are probably in their late 70s now.

All you ever get on here is opinion whereas the manufacturers would provide fact.

Just another thought!

Foldie:ok:

[pmills575]

Assuming that the S1 wing hinges are the same/similar the front hinge and lock pins looks a little "lightweight". The picture below of an S1 shows the wing break clearly and the various attachments.
http://gatwick-aviation-museum.co.uk/Buccaneer/s1-wing.jpg

P Mills
Gatwick Aviation Museum - Charlwood (http://gatwick-aviation-museum.co.uk)

[Tim McLelland]

we know who Mr Song is

Oh good :rolleyes:

This saga really is quite comical but maybe it's best left for the modelling forums. I rather thought (or hoped) that Pprune was a forum for serious discussions!

[Discus_296]

Comical in the sense of watching you get banned from multiple forums in turn?

:}

The reason no-one on the modelling forums believed you is that you managed (over a course of a number of months/years) to piddle away any personal credibility you may have had over there.

So when a number of members with significant personal credibility (who are know to be helping model makers, outside of Mr S's threads) vouch for someone, your evidence-less assertion that that person is false didn't carry much weight...

Funny that...

[barnstormer1968]

Nutloose.
Even thought the detail shown in your pics is very good, will the kits have any etched parts in them (I have to admit not having built a model from this company). The seat harnesses looked good, and would be easier than making my own from foil from the top of a wine bottle!

[rolandpull]

Tim,

this thread seems to have enough of your attention seeing as you don't do nonsense - or are you cracking?

[Discus_296]

But then you're making the mistake of thinking that I would care what a bunch of random fools on model-building forums might think - which of course I do not.

Then why have you been banned from one site at least 4 times because of incessant trolling? That's a lot of effort who doesn't "care what a bunch of random fools on model-building forums might think"

All I do is occasionally point-out nonsense when I see it

Now where I come from you're particular brand is just called trolling

Modelling forums seem to be a haven for schoolboy nonsense

Also known as social iteraction... Try it sometime....

they inevitably get upset when you tell them something they don't want to hear

No... They get upset when you start attempting to destroy the reputation of new members who may/may not be part of a manufacturer, without evidence... Funny that.....

Like I keep saying, if anyone seriously believes this ludicrous notion that Trumpeter has embarked upon some sort of direct dialogue with random people on modelling forums, then I think some people need psychiatric help.
<SNIP>
I mean, what are they seriously imagining? Do they think that Trumpeter is going to seek their advice or something? It's quite hilarious.


They have already done so (prior to Mr S). I believe it was the Trumpeter Hellcat that was recalled after forum outcry and the resulting cancelling of pre-orders put pressure on the distributors and they refused to take the kit! That kit was re-worked in conjunction with at least one well known modeller/website owner. Following on from that it would be daft not to look at/communicate with the forums. What's the saying, "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"?

I'm not in a position to personally vouch for or call BS on Mr S, but I fail to see why it's such an unlikely move? In a market that is essentially a bunch of people doing their stuff individually behind closed doors, forums would seem a good place (if not the only place) to listen to your customers, or a reasonable sized section of them anyway.

how come he's unwilling (or incapable) of answering even a simple question as to what scale the kit is?

Even without having mystic mind reading, there are many possible reasons; it hasn't been decided, he isn't allowed to say, he may even not *want* to say (he's not a walking press release, he is allowed to be a little "less than proffessional"). I honestly don't know, but there are multiple perfectly plausible reasons... Maybe he just doesn't like you... :E


The modelling sites are naturally welcome to wrap themselves in a silly frenzy over a piece of plastic

So are you really modeller? Or do you just troll there for fun? I don't recall seeing your work posted anywhere.... I recall you were surprised people weren't whipped up into a complete frenzy about a recent large Tamiya release, bemoaning the excitement about an Airfix release... Breathe it in.... That's the smell of hypocrisy right there...

You are obviously a pretty knowledgeable guy, I quite like your recent Lightning book and have a copy on my shelves at home, it's just a shame you seem to feel the need to aptly demonstrate a complete lack of social awareness and judgement....


All I'm doing is pointing-out nonsense when I see it....

[MAINJAFAD]

But I would just say, why don't they ask the people who built the originals for a copy of their drawings or direct access to the individuals who built them - they both still exist although the latter are probably in their late 70s now.

All you ever get on here is opinion whereas the manufacturers would provide fact.

Just another thought!

Foldiehttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

You would like to think so Foldie, However having actually tried to get my hands on a set of blueprints of a piece of kit from the manufacturer in question I can tell you that it is not as straightforward as you would think. Yes the company in question does have a heritage department who do hold blueprints. But their policy is to only release them to organisations doing full size restorations, that are of course if the blueprints have not been put in a skip. Secondly they normally want more than a few pennies in payment.

[jumpseater]

I doubt TM is an active modeller with this statement
If it is 48th scale then it will merely duplicate the kit which Airfix has been producing for years. Admittedly it looks much better in terms of quality and detail but it will inevitably cost 2-3 times the price of the Airfix kit, so it will hardly be worth it.

otherwise he'd realise that the Airfix version currently isn't available. Also he'd realise that to get the Airfix version to the quality of this one, assuming it's 1/48th he'd need to buy aftermarket products, which would push the price up by three or four times the price he paid for the kit. Then there's the time and skill required to fit them, rarely an easy task. The tooling on the Buc appears extraordinary, the separate wiring looms, fluid pipes and ducting are a quantam step forward if that is what will be available in the kit.


For the record manufacturers do look at fora and can detect the BS merchants, 'foamers' and armchair modellers. Just on this forum alone Trumpeter have three pages of unofficial advertising, Mr Song, who's name I came across on a modelling forum at least four years ago, connected to Trumpeter, will no doubt be sitting 'grasshopper' :8 styley smiling at those shouting, 'I'll fire aimlessly if you don't come out' ...


Foldie see post #16 for why manufacturers drawings don't tell the full story :ooh:

[sharasec]

I contacted the Fleet Air Arm Buccaneer Association and got this reply

"From my recollection the wingtips were extended in about 1970 (800 Sqdn) to improve handling, but this led to a problem in 1980 when the RAF retired one at Nellis during Red Flag. After this several Mods were tested.:8

Mod.1736 'Modified' - Smaller Wingtips
— Fitted to extend airframe flying hours by reducing wing-loading. Result of fatigue testing of XN982 (http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/S2_XN982_files/0_S2_XN982.html) at HS Brough, to determine cause of the crash of XV345 (http://www.blackburn-buccaneer.co.uk/S2_XV345_files/0_S2_XV345.html) while participating in 'Red Flag 80' on 07/02/1980 - (Fatigue testing commenced Jun. 1982 - solution implimented to specific airframes from Aug.1989-onwards)"

They are going to put it a call out on their website tomorrow so you may get some replies. Hope this helps.

[BEagle]

My first model Buccaneer wasn't even called a Buccaneer - it was the Airfix NA 39, released in about 1960:

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a341/nw969/NA39.jpg

Usual indifferent build quality, with rather wobbly folding wings (no slur, mate!), rotating bomb door (with 'atomic bomb'!) and a folding nose - but it was my pride and joy at the time!

[jumpseater]

TM
So I'm afraid you're slightly wide of the mark there if you're suggesting that I don't know what I'm talking about

Show us one of yours then. On the put up or shut up basis you're arguing about Mr Song on.

http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c270/2012images/_B6O7091.jpg
Complimentary :8 badge to anyone who idents the 'office'

I find it odd that a previous editor of such journals seems to think that the progress these kits would appear to offer is hardly worth it. It seems a very retrograde opinion. I'd have a dim view of an editorial that suggested this sort of progress wasn't worth the effort or money. Are you 'current' though? Seeing as you mention your model journal experience. I can't recall your name appearing of late.

And er what's the point about thirty years in the aerospace industry? it hardly makes you unique. I've been in the industry twenty eight if we're counting, anyone been in less then me?

[PPRuNe Pop]

This thread is developing into advertising too much - this NOT a modeling forum - or site. You can find them, if you are welcome there.

Together with the level of angst and toys out of the pram nonsense the thread is now closed.