RAF Nimrod 'bomber'
Mac
capability, though I dunno about payload, and they have a decent range.
Just wondering if there is any possibilty of them being used in
Afghanistan to supplement the B-52s which seem to keep on proving the
usefulness of heavy bombers.
--
Mac.
Richard Hockey
"Mac" <mac...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com> wrote in message
news:3BEADC...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com...
The Nimrod is available in maritime patrol and AWACS (minus E-3 style
radome) variants. I don't seem to recall it carrying any bombs, although the
maritime version can probably carry torpedoes, depth charges and
sea-skimming anti-shipping missiles.
Damien Burke
<elys...@freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>The Nimrod is available in maritime patrol and AWACS (minus E-3 style
>radome) variants. I don't seem to recall it carrying any bombs, although the
>maritime version can probably carry torpedoes, depth charges and
>sea-skimming anti-shipping missiles.
The AWACS variant was cancelled many years ago. They can carry and drop
bombs - the current issue of Jets magazine has photographic proof - but
there's no chance whatsoever of them being used as bombers, they're too
valuable to risk on token gestures.
Robert Briggs
> Richard Hockey wrote:
>
> > The Nimrod is available in maritime patrol and AWACS (minus E-3 style
> > radome) variants. I don't seem to recall it carrying any bombs, although
> > the maritime version can probably carry torpedoes, depth charges and
> > sea-skimming anti-shipping missiles.
>
> The AWACS variant was cancelled many years ago. They can carry and drop
> bombs - the current issue of Jets magazine has photographic proof - but
> there's no chance whatsoever of them being used as bombers, they're too
> valuable to risk on token gestures.
I guess that's fair comment.
AIUI, the maritime recce Nimrods are much more likely to drop life rafts
to airmen or mariners in distress in the North Atlantic.
Matt Clonfero
<elys...@freeserve.co.uk> wrote:
>The Nimrod is available in maritime patrol and AWACS (minus E-3 style
>radome) variants.
The Nimrod is available in ELINT (Nimrod R Mark 1) and Maritime
Reconnaissance (Nimrod MR Mark 2) versions. Prototypes of an airborne
early warning variant (Nimrod AEW Mark 3) were built, but the project
was cancelled. BAE SYSTEMS are in the process of rebuilding the Nimrod
MR.2s into the new Nimrod MRA.4 configuration.
None of the above carry iron bombs, but the Maritime recce version can
carry sonobuoys, lightweight torpedoes, and sidewinder air-to-air
missiles. ISTR that harpoon was considered, but did we ever buy any?
Aetherem Vincere
Matt
--
To err is human
To forgive is not
Air Force Policy
Peter Stickney
Don't bet on it. Shackletons (The Nomrod's predecessor, for the Young
Folks out there) were used as bombers in Kenya and, I think, Borneo.
But, having saifd that, it's very unlikely tht we'll need more heavy
bomber type stuff anytime soon.
--
Pete Stickney
A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many
bad measures. -- Daniel Webster
Simon Robbins
Richard Hockey <elys...@freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9seou6$5d8$1...@news5.svr.pol.co.uk...
> The Nimrod is available in maritime patrol and AWACS (minus E-3 style
> radome) variants. I don't seem to recall it carrying any bombs, although
the
> maritime version can probably carry torpedoes, depth charges and
> sea-skimming anti-shipping missiles.
The Nimrod AEW was cancelled in favour of buying the Boeing AWACS aircraft.
I believe the airframes still exist (saw them up at Waddington a few years
ago) but I don't know whether they're still serviceable.
The current MR2 maritime patrol variant is essentially an anti-ship and
anti-sub aircraft but also claims to be the largest fighter in the world due
to it's ability to carry sidewinders on wing pylons. The new MRA4 variant
(due in service around 2005) will be able to carry a larger range of
weapons, but it's role isn't being expanded to bomber. (Although I know MR2s
have occasionally done damage in the past accidentally dropping sonobuoys
over land in bad weather!!)
I can't see any purpose for the Nimrods in the Afghan theatre, other than to
support and protect the navy convoy.
Si
Keith Willshaw
"Simon Robbins" <si...@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1005252952.26074....@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> I can't see any purpose for the Nimrods in the Afghan theatre, other than
to
> support and protect the navy convoy.
>
The Nimrod R1 ELINT aircraft are rumored to be operational
in the theatre
Keith
richard.leszczynski
"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
news:2vqlutog8i9pikn61...@4ax.com...
It's a great shame that Jets is only a twice yearly magazine,
If the Nimrod were to be used, I don't know how the media would take to its
etched-Perspex-stuck-to-the-windshield bombsight given the fuss they make
over the inaccuracy of PGMs!
Richard L
Mac
http://www.raf.mod.uk/airpower/nimrodmr2.html
Armament: Internal bay for up to nine torpedoes, bombs and depth charges
http://paris.janes.com/aircraftdata/bae_nimrod_mr2_03.shtml
(MR. Mk 2) 14.78 m (48 ft 6 in) long weapons bay, with two pairs of
doors, in unpressurised lower fuselage pannier, able to carry up to six
lateral rows of ASW weapons, including up to nine torpedoes as well as
bombs. A hardpoint is provided beneath each wing, just outboard of the
mainwheel doors, on which can be carried two AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air
missiles, a Harpoon air-to-surface missile, rocket or cannon pod, or
mine, according to mission requirements.
[Cannon pod! A strafing ground attack by a Nimrod? Interesting concept]
--
Mac.
Damien Burke
<si...@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>The Nimrod AEW was cancelled in favour of buying the Boeing AWACS aircraft.
>I believe the airframes still exist (saw them up at Waddington a few years
>ago) but I don't know whether they're still serviceable.
AFAIK they've all been scrapped.
Damien Burke
Stickney) wrote:
>Don't bet on it.
I will bet any amount of money you care to lose.
Tarver Engineering
"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
Oddly enough, the Nimrod just underwent an avionics upgrade.
John
Tarver Engineering
"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
How much ya' got?
John
Kulvinder Singh Matharu
<jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
>"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
>news:6cfout8h4b4mgudeo...@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:57:03 -0000, "Simon Robbins"
>> <si...@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >The Nimrod AEW was cancelled in favour of buying the Boeing AWACS
[snip]
>> AFAIK they've all been scrapped.
>
>Oddly enough, the Nimrod just underwent an avionics upgrade.
Not the AEWs...or are you saying that the old AEW airframes have been
converted and re-equiped for another role?
--
Kulvinder Singh Matharu
E-mail : ksmatharu # ieee . org [without the spaces and where #=@]
Website: http://www.matharu.demon.co.uk/
World Trade Center Tribute :
http://www.matharu.demon.co.uk/myphotos/usa/worldtradecenter.htm
Tarver Engineering
"Kulvinder Singh Matharu" <Real-Addr...@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:l3moutgbcl7d5au6a...@news.demon.co.uk...
> On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:49:36 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
> >news:6cfout8h4b4mgudeo...@4ax.com...
> >> On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:57:03 -0000, "Simon Robbins"
> >> <si...@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >The Nimrod AEW was cancelled in favour of buying the Boeing AWACS
> [snip]
> >> AFAIK they've all been scrapped.
> >
> >Oddly enough, the Nimrod just underwent an avionics upgrade.
>
> Not the AEWs...or are you saying that the old AEW airframes have been
> converted and re-equiped for another role?
I am saying Brit Nimrods got new radios this year.
John
Peter Stickney
But then again, we're talking about the MOD. They can be downright
unpredictable. After all, look at all the shanannigans the various
Brit Governments pulled trying to give the Falklands to Argentina in
the '60s and '70s, even going to the point of considering revoking the
citizenship of the inhabitants. Then they pull just about all of
their military and naval forces out, and when the Argentines see this
as a welcome mat, they get all huffy and recomission the ships that
they had deadlined for scrapping, and have a war. Never can tell.
David E. Powell
Twin GAU8A cannons?
TJ
XV259's forward fuselage is privately owned and on display at the Solway Aviation Museum, Carlisle
Airport.
XV263's forward fuselage is at Warton (instructional use) and the rear fuselage at Hurn.
XZ286's rear fuselage is at RAF Kinloss's Fire Section.
XZ287's fuselage is in the hands of the Tactical Supply Wing RAF Stafford.
TJ
John Halliwell
<jta...@sierratel.com> writes
>I am saying Brit Nimrods got new radios this year.
Them valves finally given up then?
--
John
Preston, Lancs, UK.
John Halliwell
<mac...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com> writes
>[Cannon pod! A strafing ground attack by a Nimrod? Interesting concept]
I believe Shakletons performed this role in the '60s (Suez perhaps?).
Keith Willshaw
"John Halliwell" <jo...@photopia.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:lFVJZWA4...@photopia.demon.co.uk...
> In article <3BEC38...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com>, Mac
> <mac...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com> writes
> >[Cannon pod! A strafing ground attack by a Nimrod? Interesting concept]
>
> I believe Shakletons performed this role in the '60s (Suez perhaps?).
>
Malaya is more likely
Keith
Lee Hutchinson
fighting training somewhere. The current upgrades are being done at Bae
Woodford, near macclesfield, i have seen a couple of them parked out on the
apron when im passing by.
hutch
Dr Hackenbush
> In article <3bec...@news.sierratel.com>, Tarver Engineering
> <jta...@sierratel.com> writes
> >I am saying Brit Nimrods got new radios this year.
>
> Them valves finally given up then?
For the loyalty-to-the-British-crown-impaired out there (yes yoo
Americans!)
valves are limey-talk for tubes.
--
Hackenbush: Oh, well, uh, to begin with I took four years at Vassar.
Mrs. Upjohn: Vassar? But that's a girls' college.
Hackenbush: I found that out the third year. I'd've been there yet,
but I went out for the swimming team.
Tarver Engineering
"John Halliwell" <jo...@photopia.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:jV4INRAN...@photopia.demon.co.uk...
> <jta...@sierratel.com> writes
> >I am saying Brit Nimrods got new radios this year.
>
> Them valves finally given up then?
All new digital type stuff.
John
TJ
>None of the above carry iron bombs, but the Maritime recce version can
> carry sonobuoys, lightweight torpedoes, and sidewinder air-to-air
> missiles. ISTR that harpoon was considered, but did we ever buy any?
The Nimrod MR does have the capability to drop iron bombs.
http://www.kinloss.raf.mod.uk/station/graphics/nimweaps.jpg
The above image is a bit small, but the various ordnance is laid out including the Harpoon.
Snippet from Royal Air Force Nimrods in the Gulf By Group Captain B K Burridge, RAF:
"In the Nimrod's case, these advantages are further enhanced by its extended range with and varied
weapon capability, ranging from 1,000 pound bombs, through torpedoes and the Harpoon missile, to
the Sidewinder for self protection."
MoD website also lists "bombs" as being carried.
Along with iron bombs the BL-755 was also cleared for carriage.
TJ
Simon Robbins
news:3bee2c6e$1...@news.sierratel.com...
> All new digital type stuff.
Also got an entirely new sonar suite.
Si
Simon Robbins
Mac <mac...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com> wrote in message
news:3BEC38...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com...
I think that would probably be geared towards the maritime role, strafing
ships and surfaced subs.
Si
Matt Clonfero
<tom...@lineone.net> wrote:
>Matt wrote:
>
> >None of the above carry iron bombs, but the Maritime recce version can
>> carry sonobuoys, lightweight torpedoes, and sidewinder air-to-air
>> missiles. ISTR that harpoon was considered, but did we ever buy any?
>
>The Nimrod MR does have the capability to drop iron bombs.
Well, I stand corrected. I find it hard to believe that the RAF would
have bothered to conduct the weapon clearance trials for iron bombs from
a Nimrod (after all, that kind of involves flying over the target; and
the kinds of targets a Nimrod would be bombing would be shooting
back...)
Kulvinder Singh Matharu
<jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>
>"Kulvinder Singh Matharu" <Real-Addr...@lineone.net> wrote in message
>news:l3moutgbcl7d5au6a...@news.demon.co.uk...
>> On Fri, 9 Nov 2001 12:49:36 -0800, "Tarver Engineering"
>> <jta...@sierratel.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Damien Burke" <dam...@jetman.dircon.co.u> wrote in message
>> >news:6cfout8h4b4mgudeo...@4ax.com...
>> >> On Thu, 8 Nov 2001 20:57:03 -0000, "Simon Robbins"
>> >> <si...@NOSPAMsjrobbins.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >The Nimrod AEW was cancelled in favour of buying the Boeing AWACS
>> [snip]
>> >> AFAIK they've all been scrapped.
>> >
>> >Oddly enough, the Nimrod just underwent an avionics upgrade.
>>
>> Not the AEWs...or are you saying that the old AEW airframes have been
>> converted and re-equiped for another role?
>
>I am saying Brit Nimrods got new radios this year.
OK, thanks for that clarification, esp as the discussion was in the
middle of discussing the AEW Nimrods.
Tarver Engineering
Nice.
John Cook
wrote:
>In article <3bee6...@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>, TJ
><tom...@lineone.net> wrote:
>>Matt wrote:
>>
>> >None of the above carry iron bombs, but the Maritime recce version can
>>> carry sonobuoys, lightweight torpedoes, and sidewinder air-to-air
>>> missiles. ISTR that harpoon was considered, but did we ever buy any?
>>
>>The Nimrod MR does have the capability to drop iron bombs.
>
>Well, I stand corrected. I find it hard to believe that the RAF would
>have bothered to conduct the weapon clearance trials for iron bombs from
>a Nimrod (after all, that kind of involves flying over the target; and
>the kinds of targets a Nimrod would be bombing would be shooting
>back...)
Spy trawler?, the Nimrod would certainly get a few seconds grace from
the fact it looks so harmless ;-), who would think a an airliner
would drop a bomb!!! or a BL-755, that would be absolutly crazy....
At least they were never fitted with the JP-233 (runway denial
munition.) ;-)
>Aetherem Vincere
>Matt
John Cook
Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.
Email Address :- Jwc...@ozemail.com.au
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter.pso-online.com/
Lee Hutchinson
for fire fighting training
Lee hutch
Tarver Engineering
"Lee Hutchinson" <blak...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:3BF022E3...@btinternet.com...
> AEW nimrods were scrapped or used for instructional use, at least one was
used
> for fire fighting training
That doesn't cover Mr. Burke's wager.
John
Tom Schoene
used
> for fire fighting training
Weren't several Nimrod MR airframes taken out of service for conversion to
the AEW configuration, but then simply stored without actually undergoing
conversion work? IIRC, one of these was used to replace the R.2 that
crashed a few years back. Or am I making a horrible muddle of things?
--
Tom Schoene (replace "invalid" with "net" to email)
We must welcome the future, remembering that soon it will be the
past; and we must respect the past, knowing that once it was all that
was humanly possible. - George Santayana
Peter Kemp
news:9spol3$mgp$1...@bob.news.rcn.net...
>
> Lee Hutchinson <blak...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:3BF022E3...@btinternet.com...
> > AEW nimrods were scrapped or used for instructional use, at least one
was
> used
> > for fire fighting training
>
> Weren't several Nimrod MR airframes taken out of service for conversion to
> the AEW configuration, but then simply stored without actually undergoing
> conversion work? IIRC, one of these was used to replace the R.2 that
> crashed a few years back. Or am I making a horrible muddle of things?
The R.1 that crashed was replaced by an MR.2 pulled from line service I
believe. AFAIK all the AEW.3 airframes died, which is a damn shame as we
could do with a few more, and using them for the MRA.4 upgrade would mean we
wouldn't have to take any offline during the program.
Peter Kemp
TJ
during 1995.
XV249 was converted into an R.1 under the project name of "Operation Anneke" (Anneke Rice - UK TV
Celebrity).
Surviving bit and bobs of some of the 11 AEW.3's:
Damien Burke
>Nimrod MR.2, serial XV249, was converted into an R.1 after R.1, serial XW666 (Damien), was lost
>during 1995.
They named it after me? Aw. How touching :)
Vic Flintham
<jo...@photopia.demon.co.uk> writes
>In article <3BEC38...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com>, Mac
><mac...@ntlworldTAKEOUT.com> writes
>>[Cannon pod! A strafing ground attack by a Nimrod? Interesting concept]
>
>I believe Shakletons performed this role in the '60s (Suez perhaps?).
>
detachments in 1956 and 1964 respectively. Strafing with 20mm cannon
and dropping bombs.
--
Vic Flintham
The reliable cold-war military aviation site
http://www.vflintham.demon.co.uk
Tom Schoene
Charlie Whitaker <char...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:charlie_-4B8F2C...@news.freeserve.net...
> Surely Storm Shadow is the answer. If MRA.4 can carry nine torpedoes
> internally, presumably it could carry nine cruise missiles instead.
Hmm. Those Stingray lightweight torpedoes are 324mm in diameter, 2.6m long,
and weigh ~300kg. Storm Shadow is over 500mm wide (3-m wingspan), 5.1 m
long, and weighs 1200kg. You are not trading these for even. In fact, I
doubt you'll get hem in be bomb bay at all; Storm Shadow carriage on Nimrod
is likely to be limited to the same four underwing hardpoints as Harpoon or
Sidewinder.