Author Topic: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983  (Read 9870 times)

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« on: December 16, 2012, 12:15:26 PM »
In 1971, the Aéronavale trialled the Jaguar M aboard Clemenceau.  The outcome was generally successful but it was felt that a larger wing (15%) and more powerful engines were required to make the aircraft a success.   SEPECAT therefore initiated design work to produce a larger wing, with blown flaps and more powerful, dry thrust, engines.

The result was the Jaguar M1.  A single-seat naval attack aircraft.  The M2 was a two seater trainer version.   This was adopted by the Aéronavale in 1977.  However, its all weather attack capabilities were limited without a surface search radar.  Initial thought was to add the Agave radar to the centreline drop tank and trials were carried out with this configuration but in doing so, limited the amount of fuel that could be carried in the pod and reduced the radar's range due to the vibration experienced when carried on the centre-line weapons station (this produced the unusual effect of effectively "stuttering" the radar, which meant that false returns were detected, so that targets appeared further away than they actually were or displaced in one or two dimensions by an appreciable distance).

The Aéronavale therefore requested a version of the Jaguar M with an Agava radar system in the nose.  SEPECAT duly complied and produced the M4.   This was a much more successful version and worked well.   India, seeking an maritime strike version of the Jaguar was later to adapt this to its land-based license built version of the Jaguar as the Jaguar IM but that came later.

In 1979, the Royal Australian Navy was seeking a new carrier, to replace its aging Majestic Class, HMAS Melbourne.   France, sensing the possibility of a windfall sale, both of a carrier and aircraft, offered a revised Clemenceau class, with a slightly longer hull and flight deck, with a commensurate increase in tonnage.  The aircraft on offer were to be SEPECAT Jaguar Ms and Mirage F1Ms.   However, France was not exactly flavour of the month in the Pacific, with its ongoing nuclear tests in the region and so any major purchase from them was politically unpalatable.   The British offered as an alternative a commercial design adapted to a carrier, built to the cheaper and simpler requirements of a commercial hull.  They offered the SEPECAT Jaguar M as strike aircraft and as fighters as well.

The RAN decided to go with the British offering, the Australian Government unwilling to spend the required funds for a dedicated carrier design.   HMAS Australia entered service in 1982.  It carried an airwing of 24 Jaguars and 12 A-4G Skyhawks, Trackers and helicopters.  The Jaguar version chosen was the Jaguar MO5, a two seat version of the Jaguar MO (for "Ostralien") equipped with the Agave radar.  The RAN felt that the duties required of the Jaguar was more suited to a two seat aircraft, rather than a single seat one.

The aircraft depicted is a Jaguar MO5 of VF-805 Squadron, HMAS Australia in 1983, when it arrived in Australia after its delivery journey from the UK.  It is shown carrying a typical anti-shipping strike weapons load of an AM-39 Exocet missile, with two Matra Magic 550 IR missiles, as well as drop tanks.  It carries the VF-805 symbol of a chess Knight on the tail.










The Kit

The model is a Hasagawa Jaguar T2 with Hasagawa Mitsubishi F1 outer wing panels and single wheel main gear.  The nose gear came out of the spares box.   The missiles from the Heller weapons set.  The radome comes from a Jaguar IM resin nose conversion (Flightline?).
« Last Edit: December 16, 2012, 01:25:26 PM by Rickshaw »

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #1 on: December 16, 2012, 12:24:53 PM »
Excellent backstory and a clever way to get to a 'big wing' Jaguar  :)
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #2 on: December 16, 2012, 12:25:30 PM »
Very nice.  I love it.  I like the wing tip missiles, especially.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Cliffy B

  • Ship Whiffer Extraordinaire...master of Beyond Visual Range Modelling
  • Its ZOTT!!!
    • My Artwork
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #3 on: December 16, 2012, 01:21:54 PM »
Bravo sir, bravo!!!!  She's a real beaut  :-*  Loved the back story, now I want to see the CV!
"Radials growl, inlines purr, jets blow!"  -Anonymous

"Helos don't fly.  They vibrate so violently that the ground rejects them."  -Tom Clancy

"If all else fails, call in an air strike."  -Anonymous

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #4 on: December 16, 2012, 02:18:46 PM »
Cool.  I have something similar planned in 1/48 and in Aéronavale colours.
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

You can't outrun Death forever.
But you can make the Bastard work for it.

Offline Buzzbomb

  • Low Concentration Span, oft wanders betwixt projects
  • Accurate Scale representations of fictional stuff
    • Club and my stuff site
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #5 on: December 17, 2012, 06:45:34 AM »
Nicely done and colour scheme is comtemporarily nice as well

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #6 on: December 17, 2012, 08:32:23 AM »
I like the wing tip missiles, especially.

Which, IIRC, were in the RW 'big wing' Jag proposal. It'd be kind of cool if they kept the overwing pylons as well for the 'MO  :D
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #7 on: December 19, 2012, 06:02:58 AM »
I like the wing tip missiles, especially.

Which, IIRC, were in the RW 'big wing' Jag proposal. It'd be kind of cool if they kept the overwing pylons as well for the 'MO  :D

I see no reason why they couldn't.  The structure was the same, although in this naval application I must admit I envisioned a wing fold just outboard of the fence which is the basis for the overwing station.

I'm surprised no one has noted that this version of the Jaguar has an extra hard point under each wing!

Logan,  the overwing missiles were, according to BAe, in a better position than those carried under the wing, both from what their sensors could "see" in a turn and their departure as far as ingesting stuff was concerned.    Overwing rails are not, IMHO as bizarre as the fuselage top locations which were proposed (and in the case of the Grumman Tiger, actually tested).

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #8 on: December 19, 2012, 06:36:08 AM »
Logan,  the overwing missiles were, according to BAe, in a better position than those carried under the wing, both from what their sensors could "see" in a turn and their departure as far as ingesting stuff was concerned.    Overwing rails are not, IMHO as bizarre as the fuselage top locations which were proposed (and in the case of the Grumman Tiger, actually tested).
I didn't know that, but I'm not terribly surprised.  For me, I always saw the main issue with wing top pylons were loading the suckers.  Other than that, I never thought them to be conceptually that crazy, just weird-looking.

Thanks,

Logan

Offline apophenia

  • Perversely enjoys removing backgrounds.
  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #9 on: December 19, 2012, 12:22:17 PM »
They do look weird and must be a swine to load but it's an easy way to get more pylons on a wing. Neither Lightnings nor Jags had a surfeit of pylons so it all helped. Of course, a 'big wing' Jaguar doesn't really need the pylon help and it would interfere with wing-folding.
"It happens sometimes. People just explode. Natural causes." - Agent Rogersz

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #10 on: December 19, 2012, 04:58:47 PM »
They do look weird and must be a swine to load but it's an easy way to get more pylons on a wing. Neither Lightnings nor Jags had a surfeit of pylons so it all helped. Of course, a 'big wing' Jaguar doesn't really need the pylon help and it would interfere with wing-folding.

Not sure if it would actually interfere but it may slow operational tempo if you have to load the overwing pylon before you can launch, whereas you would normally load A-A stuff after you land, to enable you to launch more quickly.

As to the difficulties of loading, shouldn't really be all that much harder if the correct MHE is available.   Something to lift and hold the missile in position while it's attached to the pylon wouldn't be hard to build but it would take longer perhaps, I admit.  As you would need that anyway, when loading a conventional pylon, I can't see it being a real problem.   Overwing might work best in this sort of situation for a BVR missile, if one was to be provided.

The wingtip station however it should be noted brings added aerodynamic benefits, creating a twisting downwards motion on the wing, which is very useful at higher speeds.  The overwing station doesn't provide that.

The Lightning needed the overwing pylons simply because the wing structure would not allow both underwing pylons and landing gear.   The developed Lightning, the EE P.8 removed the undercarriage and placed it in the fuselage sides, thereby freeing up the area under the wing for an additional pylon.  It wasn't as if the Lightning couldn't carry the loads, it was more a problem of sharing the space with the main undercarriage legs.

Offline KiwiZac

  • The Modeller Formerly Known As K5054NZ
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #11 on: February 21, 2013, 04:55:36 AM »
Oh that's veeeeeery nice! The Jag has a very strong appeal to me, even on the ground, and this is a very cool concept and model.
Zac in NZ
#avgeek, modelbuilder, photographer, writer. Callsign: "HANDBAG"
https://linktr.ee/zacyates

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #12 on: February 21, 2013, 06:15:10 AM »
That's a looker - nice one!  :)
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline finsrin

  • The Dr Frankenstein of the modelling world...when not hiding from SBA
  • Finds part glues it on, finds part glues it on....
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #13 on: February 21, 2013, 06:33:48 AM »
Missed this Jaguar in posting browsing.  Clever, I like it  :)
Finished well and looks like a model of the "real" thing.
Fun to place it in a lineup with other jets at a model show and see how many folks notice.

Offline taiidantomcat

  • Plastic Origamist...and not too shabby with the painting either!
  • Full Member
  • Stylishly late...because he was reading comics
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #14 on: February 23, 2013, 09:41:31 AM »
Best Jag I have ever seen  :)
"They know you can do anything, So the question is, what don't you do?"

-David Fincher

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #15 on: February 24, 2013, 11:40:49 PM »
Yipee! I got to go to sea! ;D ...........

Hang on a minute...... I don't remember that! ???

Bugger! :icon_crap:

Still, cool build & a great idea, Brian! :)

(Pity I didn't really get to go to sea with the Grey Grumblies, though!)

Cheers!

Guy
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #16 on: February 27, 2013, 08:40:06 PM »
Yipee! I got to go to sea! ;D ...........

Hang on a minute...... I don't remember that! ???

Bugger! :icon_crap:

Still, cool build & a great idea, Brian! :)

(Pity I didn't really get to go to sea with the Grey Grumblies, though!)

Cheers!

Guy

Keep on dreamin' mate, you need something to occupy those long tropical nights...  ;D

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2013, 10:37:14 PM »
Yeah, it's called sleep! :icon_sleep:

But, sometimes, I get side-tracked & end up here! :-\

Cheers!

Guy O0
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Rickshaw

  • "Of course, I could be talking out of my hat"
Re: Jaguar MO5, Royal Australian Navy, 1983
« Reply #18 on: March 01, 2013, 01:32:19 PM »
Yeah, it's called sleep! :icon_sleep:

But, sometimes, I get side-tracked & end up here! :-\

Cheers!

Guy O0

Well, you got to admit, there's never a dull moment here!   ;)