What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Multiple Ejector Rack on British Phantoms.

F

FlyingOstridge

New Member
Hello everyone. Hope you're having a good time.
I was wondering if any British Phantoms used the MER when in service or during testing with XT595, 596, 597, or 598? Or the RAF's XT852 or 853?
Also wondering if anyone knows whether on the Triple ejector rack they used all 3 stations instead of just the two when using the 1000 lb bombs.
Also, also wondering if someone can identify these Mk 83 style bombs I found on www.phantomf4k.org. Just if they were dummy Mk 83 bombs or the fabled Mk N.1 bomb that was used/tested/trialled during this time on the Buccaneer, Sea Vixen, and Lighting (Yes the English Electric one).
1716290748091.png1716290757826.png
 
Last edited:
RAF Phantoms used a Carrier Bomb Triple Ejector (CBTE). Similar to a US triple ejector rack, but the angle between bomb racks was slightly more to fit British 1,000lb bombs. The CBTE (Carrier Bomb Triple Ejector) which was a "UK only" modified TER, modifications included the adaptation to UK bomb fusing.phoca_thumb_l_cat5.jpg6344395476_a748eb73ab_b.jpg
 
Interesting. However these bombs you are showing me appear to be the 540lb M.C bomb and 600lb BL755 which are smaller than the 1000lb bomb. What I wish to know is whether all 3 of the stations on the CBTE could carry the 1000lb bomb i.e having a total of 13 1000lb bombs like the American Phantom's.
 
The CBTE had slightly different geometry when it came to the shoulder stations when compared to the TER, which was a result of the CBTE being designed to carry the larger British ordnance (compare the diameter of a Mk 83 with a British 1,000lb bomb, for instance). It was optimised to carry Uk 1000lb and 540 lb bombs.

The CBTE could also carry SNEB rocket pods, but in this case It was used to carry 2" Rocket pods (RP) only - Its possible that the bottom station of the carrier was not used in this configuration as the RP might just have been too close to the ground. .

When carried on the Phantom by the RAF, then the innermost shoulder pylon on the CBTE was left empty if the CBTE was mounted on the outboard stations.

The RAF/RN has never used US Mk80 series bombs, they have never been in the UK inventory.

For information here's an copy of thw elevant page on loadouts of a RAF manual from 1977 showing the capacity of each loading stations.
It shows that the maximum load of 1000lb bpmbs on a CBTE was 2 and not 3 (the 2 lines before the yellow enhanced line)

UK Phantoms loadouts.png
 
I know the RAF and RN never used the Mk 80 series operationally however there was the N.1 bomb that was apparently based on the Mk 83 that was in use on the Buccaneer.
Am I reading the "Strike Camera Pod" correctly? Is that meant to be the Pave Spike or a different pod altogether?
Also here's something pretty.
1716375622099.png
 
Last edited:
The last bit from McDonnell vs a Brit manual. Like many aircraft bomb combinations, just because an aircraft COULD carry something doesn't mean it DID carry it...the A-10 and the B61 come to mind. The McDonnell chart shows "could."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top