I've been to a lot of UK airshows, but the most impressive thing I ever saw was a single Buccaneer at Woodford. The pilot threw that thing around around like a Spitfire, and the low and fast passes, wow!!
And a aircraft that was rejected by the raf and one they wanted to reject again when they were transferred from the fleet air arm. Proved them wrong in the end.
@@bionicgeekgrrl The Buccaneer was designed from the outset as a Naval aircraft. This is on Wikipedia, but there are better sources too, and all confirm the fact it was designed as a carrier based aircraft in accordance with the requirements of the Admiralty and the RAF had mo involvement or interest. The Buccaneer was originally designed in response to the Soviet Union introducing the Sverdlov class of light cruisers. Instead of building a new class of its own cruisers, the Royal Navy decided that it could address the threat posed via low-level attack runs performed by Buccaneers, so low as to exploit the ship's radar horizon to minimise the opportunity for being fired upon. The Buccaneer could attack using nuclear weapons or conventional munitions. During its service life, it would be modified to carry anti-ship missiles, allowing it to attack vessels from a stand-off distance and thus improve its survivability against modern ship-based anti-aircraft weapons.[2] The Buccaneer performed its maiden flight in April 1958 and entered Royal Navy service during July 1962. Mountbatten (an arrogant twat if ever there was one), presented an argument of 'One of these [TSR2], or 6 of these [Buccaneers]) to various committees, and totally ignored the fact that the two aircraft were designed for different roles.
The stories of their low level capabilities are legendary. On exercises having to pull up to 20’ to reduce the dust clouds they were kicking up that gave away their positions and such.
Indeed. the radio chatter informed them that they shouldnt go below 100 feet due to dust clouds, to which they replaied - Roger, coming back up to 100 feet.
During Red flag am American General laughed at the old buccaneer..so he was taken for a ride. He was asked for his opinion. His response was.." we had to assened go over a f@#@ing horse .
In a wargames in the US (1980s), the Brits were tasked with attacking a US 'base' with simulated SAMs. The US saw one blip on their radar and chuckled that the Brits would do this. It was a Vulcan bomber. What the US team didn't realise that ether side of the Vulcan, under the wings, was a Buccaneer. The US painted the 'one' target and at the last moment, the two Buccaneers detached, and to much astonishment from the US team, proceeded to simulate a devistating bombing run. The chuckles swiched to the Brits at that point!
Whatever you do, don't tell the Americans about how 8 Vulcans 'nuked' New York on 2 separate occasions. They hate learning about how they are not the best in the business
The Royal Air Force was invited to take part in RED FLAG 77-9 from 6 August to 3 September 1977 and were the first foreign air arm to do so. The events were hosted by the US Air Force at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. Each RED FLAG consists of 2 separate 2-week exercises with crews rotating after the first fortnight and for 77-9, 10 Buccaneers from RAF Honington and 2 Vulcans from RAF Scampton were deployed.
My father was stationed at RAF Laarbruch in the early 1970s with Buccaneers. My school bus would go past the end of the runway every day, the road was about quarter of a mile away and we'd see the planes come down the runway lift-off, tuck away the landing gear and and buzz our bus at about 50ft which I can tell you is very low. But one day one pilot decided he'd give us an even closer look of his underbelly. I reckon he was somewhere between 20 and 30 feet you've never seen a school bus full of kids hit the deck so quickly in all you life. Amazing aircraft true fast ultra-low level aircraft and hewn from granite.
You totally ignored it's phenomenal low level performance. Far from the specified 200' of the RN's proposal, the Blackburn (note, NOT HS) Buccaneer was capable of 50' or less at high Mach number. Even today a new tranche of Buccaneer airframes fitted with modern engines, weapons systems and avionics would still give any air defence system a good kick in the bollocks.
Yup, they used to specifically use this aircraft type on "Thursday Wars" for Royal Navy Operational Sea Training off Portland. They would come in skimming the wavetops pretending to be enemy missiles. It was quite exhilarating watching them fly by at flight deck level whilst on a Frigate or Destroyer (approx 20' off the water) those pilots had large testicles.
To some, there's "low", "stupid low" & "Buccaneer low". To some Buccaneer pilots, 200 feet is deemed to be high altitude! There's an (apocryphal) story of an American pilot who sat in the #2 seat & swore blind that they had to climb to avoid a horse in a field!
@@stephenphillip5656 There's the old gag that Bucc pilots retracted the landing gear to descend to operational height. Honestly, instead of the tornado, should have been new Buccs built. There simply should have been Buccs as far as the eye could see.
It's just amazing that the Blackburn Aircraft Company produced so many duff aircraft down the decades, but came up with an absolute winner with the Buccanneer! It's been one of my all-time favourite UK Cold War aircraft for years. I never knew they flew in Gulf 1, more power to them and their pilots.
Its important to understand that the split-tail assembly wasn't just an air brake, it is a thrust-foil and works like modern cowling thrust reversers that don't actually reverse the thrust but produce a low pressure area generating immense drag behind the aircraft. So it deflects the existing engine thrust AND creates drag while being external to the engines themselves and greatly reducing complexity of housing and fuselage.
Groundcrews working with Buccs were always aware of how powerful the hydraulics were, as that tail could snap shut and crush anyone, the bomb bay could rotate and cut you in half, and even a hydraulic leak could cut into your fingers if touched. If there was power on the aircraft, or if there was not, we kept a wide berth.
@@stevetheduck1425we always put the bomb door key in on see ins so it isolated the door and prevented it from being rotated whilst hydraulic power was on or engines running.
It was not just the Buccs that were so good but the complete and utter madness of the pilots.I served in the RN in the 70's and have seen these aircraft in action many times. Low passes past a ship where on the bridge wing of a Leander class frigate I was looking DOWN into the cockpit, low passes over the bows of said frigate where the aircraft had to pull UP to clear the forecastle. The piolots were certifiable, but the aircraft could do it, the veritable brick shithouse.......
Ditto, I was on the Bulwark in 72 sailing out of Valletta when a Buccaneer did a fly by - below the height of the flight deck - insane. Having said that I was equally amazed when a Nimrod did something very similar, bridge level of a type 42, off Ascension Island on our way back from the Falklands
I think they did some exceedingly naughty things with allied aircraft carriers. Fly the approach, slip sideways, tip through 90 degrees and give it the beans. Chances are, anyone on deck would just see a black shark's fin travelling along with the godawful howl of the engines. Told you it was naughty. 🙂
Kind of like the freakout when B-52’s flew above the water past a carrier strike group. Chops to any pilots flying ground or sea-level. Video on youtube.
Raise the undercarriage to descend to cruising altitude. IRC that at RAF Laarbruch (15 & 16 squadrons) there was a hump in the runway and when the squadrons were sortie-ing on excersise the pilots would select gear up as the Bucc went light over the hump then sink back gear up almost on deck. I know this because during excercise's I was sat in a sanger on alongside the peri track with a LMG and 60 rounds of 7.62mm (blanks) to stop the soviet hordes sweeping across the German plains! 1980ish.
I'm not a big fan of music over aircraft videos but the piece from Gibralta is absolutely nailed. REF Bucccaneers attacking HAS Liverpool. As the film cautions catch the second take off shot. It shows the descent from undercarriage retraction.
Love the fact that in the gulf war they had the tornados and low flying them was proving to be a bit tricky so they just said let’s dust off those Bucks and get them out there. They may be old but they did what they did well.
@@ToddBrooks-o5mThe runway denial munition they were tasked to deliver, required them to fly down the line of the runway, ridiculously dangerous in the face of antiaircraft artillery, to say nothing of the dangers they faced from US Patriot crews.
I grew up on the Clee Hill in Shropshire, atop which is a RADAR station. The RAF and the USAAF which were in the UK at the time, used to practice flying under the RADAR. We saw Tornadoes, Harriers, Gnats, Hawks, A10's, F4's, the occasional Canberra, but my favourite was always the Buccaneers. I now live near the Brecon beacons and for the past month we've had a Spitfire flying over and someone nearby has a Fieseler Storch.
I fly often around the Clee's, you never see any military aircraft these days. Back in the 90's you could turn a Cherokee on an A-10, so slow in a turn.
for quite a number of years in a downtown Toronto Neighbourhood, i would rush out of the house to see the Canadian Heritage Museum Lancaster fly overhead, sometimes 2 or 3 times a week. Once going to Wasaga Beach, north of TO, a Lysander flew right over the top of my car while on approach to landing... a specacular view as it was likely under 100ft...
Was in Goose Bay, Labrador in the Summer of '79. Sitting on a bluff above a river, I heard them coming. We knew they were training locally from the newspapers. Below, I saw something moving fast. I saw it, then it was gone. Then movement behind. Another, then it was gone. They were still there, but invisible due to their upper body camouflage. It was so weird. I could see/sense fast movement below me, but only glimpsed them for a fraction of a second. Wow!!
In the 1970's my old Dad took me to Donna Nook on the Lincolnshire Coast to watch Buccaneers target practicing on low level runs. It's one of the most spectacular things I've ever seen.
The Buccaneer was one of the most underrated aircraft in the history of aviation, its high-speed, low-level capabilities unmatched for decades. No wonder it was sent to the desert.
It was very good but a F105 could outrun it at ultra low level by a hundred knots, well over Mach 1, it’s only limit was the canopy melting/softening temp due to friction! Also a beast of an aircraft!
@@billpugh58 OI - FOUL The Thunderchief needed WET THRUST to exceed Mach 1 low level (as did Tornado) It wouldn't outrun a Bucc for VERY LONG Bucc was Designed NOT to be supersonic And Its NOT a Navy Bird
Flown with a couple of the Buccaneer pilots who were in Gulf War I (now senior airline captains), some of the training stories and how low they REALLY flew is somewhat eyebrow raising!
They were designed to ride the transonic shock wave produced by the area ruled fuselage at very low level, it was quite safe as at that speed it wasn't possible to go lower than 15 feet as the shock wave wouldn't let it.
I was a Helicopter Engineer in the Royal Navy in 87 on HMS Illustrious on exercise. We were at action stations and a mate and myself were on the flight deck and could see would looked like a smoke trail far off on the horizon at about 10 miles but didn’t think anything of it. We continued to look in that direction but couldn’t see anything, then moments later two Blackburn Buccaneers came over the back of the flight deck. They scared the crap out of us as the heat of the jet wash hit us and you could smell the burnt aviation fuel. They couldn’t have been more than 30ft above the deck. Both aircraft had been flying below the flight deck on their attack approach. I used to think these aircraft were old fashioned and outdated but wow have I changed my mind. I never saw a Sea Harrier do anything like that. I have a great respect for the pilots who flew them and the aircraft.
A few 'Buccs' were also used in the various Balkan wars in the 1990, operated by the RAF from East Anglia and Cyprus. These planes did not form a single designated squadron but were used in groups of 2 or 4 to "cement" ops which used Harriers and Tornadoes in very challenging terrain. This sometimes meant pathfinding with plotted approaches for the partner aircraft via computers on board some specialized Tornadoes. 'Buccs' could be seen tucked away at aerodromes such as RAF Marham and Wittering. The other main work they did in Yugoslavia was fast ground attack and toss bombing in seemingly inaccessible places. The rotating weapons bay was a stroke of genius and some very skilled pilots used the strange air brakes for advanced manouvering which they practised in Welsh valleys and the Peak District like the Dam Buster Lancasters years before.
I’m afraid the Bucks never performed this role in the Balkans. It was planned to pair them with the GR1s is Central Europe before the Tornado got its own laser pod but that mission became redundant when TIALD came in in 1991. The Bucks were all retired years before the RAF bombed the Balkans in the NATO ops at the end of the 90s.
and when corrupt politicians dont interfere, our military history is rife with stories of politician x interfering and us not getting some great stuff or getting massive delays to a lot of them appearing, usual greedy people wanting projects they are involved with to get the contracts rather than the better military option.
Buccaneers were the first aircraft to self-designate and hit a target in combat, previously one aircraft would laser designate whilst accompanying aircraft would drop LGB's on the target.
Are you sure that’s true? In the gulf war buccaneers were used to laze targets for tornados. I’ve never heard of a buccaneer dropping its own guided bombs.
Remember a story at red flag in the US which included the exchange: US commander: "so what height were you flying at?" Bucc pilot: "So we did our usual and descended to treetop height" US commander: "there are no trees in the desert, those are bushes"
A nice feature to mention in a video would be that air was vented through tubes along the flaps so landing speed could be reduced while landing on a Carrier. A pretty damn unique feature at the Time..
Boundary Layer Control. Basically, air vented along the leading edge of the wing, hot from the engine, causes airflow over the wing to remain attached down to very low speeds. It was a spin-off from the research that led to the Hawker Harrier (the Handley-Page HP115 research vehicle), and was used on a number of other aircraft, usually carrier-borne, as it meant that a large, heavy, nuclear-equipped bomber could fly from a carrier of modest size, saving tens of millions of pounds.
They were never "shot down" in red flag exercises. Even F15s could not get them and there was even a special prize offered for the pilot if they did. The story of this is funny.
Just a quick word about Royal Navy/Fleet Air Arm Squadron numbers. We don't call them the 801st, we just call them by the numbers, so eight oh one, or whatever.
The 1950s-60s were a golden age for military aviation. So many interesting planes. Modern aviation seems to lack something. Too much computer junk maybe, I don't know.
Same as with cars, those of a few decades ago each had it's own unique look, and real "spirit". Modern technology, whether automotive or aviation, seems to mean function trumps form. All blend into one boring style, no matter the company name stamped on it. It makes being an automotive or aviation enthusiast difficult.
It's too much control over design an engineering now back then a lot of Engineers used to theorycraft all kinds of stuff some crazy ideas it definitely was the Golden Age
The Buccaneer relied on the Mk1 eyeball for terrain following. It was used to develop terrain following for the TSR2 a good five years in advance of the F111's effort. It was also used to develop terrain following for the Tornado. 'The powers that be' never thought of fitting TF to operational Buc's.
I worked on 3 buccs during my time at Farnborough. Never before or since have I mat with an aircraft so ever engineered. Made to rake all the punishment for life at sea, and then some. It was the Spey powered S-2s we had there. I remember one time when one returned from a sortie, and half way down the runway, a tyre burst on the main gear. I was about 8oo yards away, and it went with such force that it felt like a shove in the chest even that far away. I could share a few stories about the planes I worked with from that era. I could share some stories from that time, some risky, some funny some tragic, several run of the mill events, but all are interesting. However, some things I'm bound to silence over I don't want to take any risks for entertainment.
theres an old saw that bucks weren't built but had their keels laid down😮 not far from the truth? Blackburn had to wait almost a year to get the special jigs from the states😮
Not only a wonderful air frame but great bit of war kit. Verry user friendly. Imagine it with Gen 5 stealth kt now...Backed up by Tornado F5 Cnc plains
NA39 required a total bombload of 8000lb, not 4000; the 4000lb was for just internal stores. The 400nm unrefuelled range was also just at low-level; the aircraft had to be able to do 800 nm at high altitude. And rather than just being a tanker, the requirement asked for an aircraft that could both donate and receive fuel. I also love the clip of the officers assessing the NA39 bids while aboard a submarine. What you mean to say is that the small wings would have required a high landing speed if it hadn't had the blown surfaces to compensate. The small wing was necessary to provide stability at high speed in a turbulent low-level environment. The aircraft shown at 5:16 to illustrate the double pylons is a Supermarine Scimitar, not a Bucc. 'The 800-first Sqn' is another horrible americanism. In the RN it is known as 'Eight-Oh-One Sqn' or formally 'Number Eight-Oh-One Sqn'. The S1s with the original engines could take off from carriers. The Spey engines with 40% more power allowed take-off with max fuel and a full load-out. The bridge being (repeatedly) dropped does not appear to relate to the narrative on nukes; otherwise the camera would not have survived. And the aircraft shown flying past at low level (was this from some movie or other) is a Hawker Hunter, not a Bucc. The South African aircraft still had folding wings and the BS605 engines weren't rocket assisted; they were bolt on rocket motors. It would have been worth clarifying for the US audience that the 'FAA clearance' required to cross the Atlantic came from the Fleet Air Arm, who owned the jets. The US Federal Aviation Authority were not involved. The Buccaneers in the Gulf were not 'guided by the Tornados' laser-guided ordnance'. That is utterly meaningless. The 2 AN12s were destroyed by Buccs using their own Pave Spike pods; there was no 'dive bombing' on that occasion. There seems to be a problem with the timeline in the script, possibly due to the layout of the source wikipedia entry, but the Buccs had all transferred to the RAF long before Gulf War 1. I think the last of the old full size carriers was retired more than 10 years previously. The last sqn of Buccs shown at 12:29 are F-4s. The biggest issue I have with is though is the title. The Bucc was not 'ultra fast' by any stretch of the imagination; it was firmly subsonic. And then you don't mention anything about how 'insanely low' they could fly. The examples of 480kts at 50 feet in RED FLAG and in the Gulf War need telling, and in Beruit they were flying at 50 feet and less down the city streets, being fired on sometimes from above! Sometimes it's good to quit the wiki page and get some wider gen.
Your knowledge of the Buccaneer is incredibly interesting plus pointing out the other aircraft in video. Not being RAF or Navy (or any service, I was already too old for call up by Falklands) I had no idea. It's probably better to have any documentary 'for the masses' than none though?
I remember as a child watching Buccaneers from Lossimouth flying up Loch Linnie quite often kicking up water they were so low before climbing slightly to head up the Great Glen or turning to make a bombing run on the BA. Growing up in Fort William in the 70's was so good for aircraft spotting saw all types from NATO countries
One of the requirements of a warplane is that you can fight a war with it. Many of the Blackburn products failed this simple test. Then when they did get it right (BIG TIME) they were taken over and shut down.
9:25, there is an excellent book detailing this 'raid', also ask the colonial chappies about the Buccaneers on Red Flag. Several interesting interviews and videos of them playing out there.
pre Falklands 2 of these passed 30ft over my Father and I's head on a local golf course going full chat as the Western Isles were a realistic training environment for the Falklands- pretty impressive
Remember I did the model when was young. Weird tail... from 🇫🇷 we should admire ( lots do) the incredible diversity of what came out from "rosbifs" brains.. from end of ww2 to end of 60's we should make a list of everything they produced. The more symbolics to me are electric lighning and supeb delta bombers fogot name + harriers. FR and UK are very different I think we shared the Jaguar we should have done more together. Hopefully we share... missiles and is a big success. UK first ever to help 🇫🇷 gave lots of its blood ww1 and ww2 always first !!! . je n'oublie pas ❤ " concorde" was the best ever name for a plane ...
Was once at a picnic bench above Betws-y-Coed, in Wales. Heard a low whistle and looked DOWN on a Buccaneer twisting through the valley. Moments later, it, or another, flew close over our heads, from behind. BIG moments for us.
During the development of the Tornado, they tested avionics in the cockpit of the buccaneers. The test pilots said that they didn’t need to make the tornado but instead outfit the Buccs with the Tornado avionics. It was an exceptionally capable and popular aircraft.
So happy that the Buccaneer got a chance to prove itself in action and what it was capable of. I’ve always thought it was a mean looking aircraft with its engine intakes almost as wide as the fuselage. Go Blackburn.
Great seeing this video of a lovely aircraft - thank you. I remember watching SAAF Buccaneers in air displays in Cape Town in the 1960s. With rc and engine capabilities reaching levels that they have now, I might even try to build a flying model Buccaneer.
In the (hot!) summer of 1976 I was walking with my father across the North York Moors. Buccaneers were simulating attacks on the early earning radars near there, and RAF Phantoms and Lightnings were trying to catch them. No chance! Now, one Lightning managed to intercept a U2 at 87,000' during an exercise (a surprise to the USAF!) and the Phantom was legendary and held several speed records too. But at moortop height the Buccaneer could sustain speeds only just below the speed of sound and was still able to turn sharply, so it could always evade the theoretically-faster aircraft. The later Jaguar aircraft (a carrier-based version was designed for the French navy but not purchased) had a pretty similar philosophy, but was capable of modest supersonic speeds at equally low altitudes. I think that the only aircraft likely to catch a Buccaneer would have been the F14 and the F3 fighter version of the Tornado, both of which were swing-wing aircraft. The Boundary Layer Control of the Buccaneer allowed it to enjoy some of the same advantages as a swing-wing; lower landing speeds and less high-speed drag, but was probably much easier to maintain, especially on board a carrier. I don't think the Soviet Navy ever had anything that stood a chance, not even in their considerable fleet of shore-based aircraft. (The F3 was designed mainly to deal with big supersonic aircraft like the Tu22M and Tu160, hence demonstration where one kept pace with Concorde at full tilt for more than twenty minutes. Comparisons to "air superiority" fighters always ignore the fact that the F3's purpose was to not only stop the biggest and fastest targets which could sustain supersonic speeds for a long time, but to do so _before_ those targets had released stand-off weapons.)
I was at Boys Brigade camp in Scalby Mills that year, we were about two miles away from the town and at the bottom of an escarpment. A couple of us decided to climb up the escarpment to the trig point. I stood on top of the trig point and next thing a Buccaneer came screaming over the top of me, I felt like it was going to hit me but must have been no more than 50ft over me. I thought I’d need fresh underwear 😂😂😂
Many venerable platforms were used in the first gulf war. I recall seeing a number of F4 Phantoms parked on Lakenheath air base at the time pending possible demand for designator platforms.
Probably one of the most beautiful military jets ever made. The totally black one flown in South Africa by a civilian owner until relatively recently was gorgeous. Carrying on the tradition of Buccaneer pilots being quite mad to the end. The only old AND bold pilots were those guys.
If anyone was wondering, the Buccaneer is actually a lot of fun in War Thunder. It's bombs glide extremely far allowing you to drop early and ditch the scene and I prefer to equip 1 flare pod which has saved my life more times than I can count. Most jets chase you for a bit but because you're decently fast they don't prefer to spend that long chasing you since your team will pose a threat to them. Usually I get away unscratched after dropping a whole lot of bombs. It can destroy 2.8 bases WITH a flare pod equipped.
They flew that low that any fighter had to be nose down to fire anything at them. By which point the fighter either chickened out before getting a lock on it or crashed in to the floor
"Blackburn were not known for building warplanes" apart from all the planes they made that served in the first and second world wars. Research is a thing, you know.
In the 1920s and early 1930s, Blackburn made many planes, none known for their successful characteristics. Look up the Blackburn 'Blackburn', 'Blackburd', 'Baffin', and compare with aircraft coming from the Fairey Company at the same time. Then look up the Avro Aldershot to see what the Ministry of flailing and failure was ordering at the time.
@@stephenchappell7512 Maybe, Maybe not. If Argentina had had more capable aircraft they might have tried. In any case, a lot of lives were lost on both sides because of slashed defense budgets in the UK. And a total misreading of the UK’s willingness to fight for its territory and people.
1991 war was great to watch. Me introducing it to my dad, " Dad, get up - it's started " said from our new build house in a valley in the Northern Ireland countryside. Safe as houses.
8:58 Love this channel and love the Buccaneer but FAA stands for Fleet Air Arm not Federal Aviation Administration (sorry if anyone else has pointed this out) 👍
I seem to recall reading that the Buccaneer was the first choice for the raid on Port Stanley in the Falkland Islands, with its refuelling capability allowing it to be extended, and its laser designator/LGB combo being perfect for taking out airfield defences. It was quickly realized, however, that its oil tank was too small to last for the extreme length of such a flight. Can’t imagine being the crew in one of those runs had it been possible to fit a secondary oil reservoir! At least you could stand up and stretch a bit in a Vulcan. If everyone cooperated.
Does England still love her boffins? This machine shows some design details that took inspiration, and careful and cool thought. Boffin territory. Perhaps, sadly, exclusively boffin territory. That this aircraft was built and put into service shows MPs and Whitehall weren't insane at that time, perhaps in contrast to our present day.
It's a 'stopped clock' moment for politicals. They cancelled the TSR2 after all the money had been spent, did incalculable damage to an entire aircraft industry, chose an American F-111 carrier version version that didn't and never would exist, that failed, realised they were now a whole generation behind, flailed around for a cheap solution, scrapped some aircraft carriers and gave the Royal Navy Buccs to the RAF. Win. - against the odds and by accident. - and we have never had an overseas strike capacity since.
The Bucc is one of my favourite British built war machines, only beaten by the Tornado (a superb coalition with French and Italian aerospace industries ! ) 💪🇬🇧👍
In the RN you knew when the Buccs were coming from a spray on the horizon. They were so low that the air pressure was picking up spray and throwing it over the wings, then lifting up to go over the flight deck of a Leander. On one occasion even looked down on a Shackleton from Bristol's bridge wing. Once the Buccs transferred to RAF, they never flew as low.
My parents and I where on holiday in Scotland in the late 70’s when a Buccaneer flew at low(f**k all) feet over Loch Ness. I always wanted to join up and after watching that display, that was it. I was able to work on this wonderful aircraft on all its bases in the 1980’s and always love watching videos of this incredible aircraft. Oh, the way to crest a hill that you see in Top Gun ‘Maverick’ was pioneered by the Brits on Red Flag in the 1970’s. Watch the Nationwide episode on why the RAF should fly so low in the UK.if you can find it.
The Buccaneer aircraft deployed in the first gulf war, carried TIALD pods developed by Ferranti, as was the Blue Parrot radar and the INAS. The pods were development prototypes and were supported by civilian engineers. At that time there were only two pods in existence. Eventually the Buccaneers also carried bombs, because of the poor serviceability of the Tornados and that they could not keep up at low level. One benefits of this pod is that it could continue to illuminate the target having passed it, looking over your shoulder. Latter the pod was integrated with the Tornado.
Buccaneer did not cary TIALD. That was Tornado using two prototype pods called 'San' and 'Tray' after Viz magazine characters. It was the old Pave Spike pod on Buccaneer.
@@dogsnads5634 Indeed, I was on 237 OCU at the time and our war role was to deploy to Germany to use the Pavespike for attacks on bridges and similar targets, so the crews were well prepared. Lossie also sent all but one of the Pavespike capable airframes (12 out of 13 from memory) to the Gulf, not just six as mentioned in the video.
@@dabrab The weird thing is the Pave Spike and Paveway combination on Buccaneer was originally purchased specifically for anti-shipping strikes...used alongside Martel. When Sea Eagle arrived it became moot for that, and was used more overland (plus I think the RAF had realised just how useful LGB's could be in the Falklands with the GR.3's dropping on lased targets and an effort to install Paveway on Vulcan, which was near complete at wars end).
Well not quite. They hooked a sling under the fuselage and tilted the whole aircraft up resting on a rear skid. The RN Phantoms had an extending nose wheel oleo that lifted the nose 40 inches.
When he said low level he did mean bloody low level! Those Buccaneers flew between the wave tops they were so low. I'm sure if the airframes had been up to it. They would still be flying in combat today, with the necessary upgrades.
The Buccaneer was according to everything I've read an extremely stable aircraft to fly at ultra low levels and even over water .... The Tornado Pilots,who transitionsed from the Buccaneer, when it took over its anti shipping role said that it bucked all over the place and required constant inputs to keep it at height compared to the Buccaneers
Include promo-code “DARK” which the users can use at checkout on www.recwatches.com/timepieces/limited-editions/aircraft/ to get 15% off.
What has insane got to do with any of this.
We are currently restoring Buccaneer xv350 at the east midlands aeropark
The latest Airfix model based
off that particular airframe
Awesome thanks.
I've been to a lot of UK airshows, but the most impressive thing I ever saw was a single Buccaneer at Woodford. The pilot threw that thing around around like a Spitfire, and the low and fast passes, wow!!
I saw a buck doing hesitation rolls down the runway at an airshow in the 70s.
The Bucc is a true classic. The aircraft delivered its missions in all conditions and its pilots loved it. Very stable platform for surface attack
And a aircraft that was rejected by the raf and one they wanted to reject again when they were transferred from the fleet air arm. Proved them wrong in the end.
@@bionicgeekgrrl The Buccaneer was designed from the outset as a Naval aircraft. This is on Wikipedia, but there are better sources too, and all confirm the fact it was designed as a carrier based aircraft in accordance with the requirements of the Admiralty and the RAF had mo involvement or interest.
The Buccaneer was originally designed in response to the Soviet Union introducing the Sverdlov class of light cruisers. Instead of building a new class of its own cruisers, the Royal Navy decided that it could address the threat posed via low-level attack runs performed by Buccaneers, so low as to exploit the ship's radar horizon to minimise the opportunity for being fired upon. The Buccaneer could attack using nuclear weapons or conventional munitions. During its service life, it would be modified to carry anti-ship missiles, allowing it to attack vessels from a stand-off distance and thus improve its survivability against modern ship-based anti-aircraft weapons.[2] The Buccaneer performed its maiden flight in April 1958 and entered Royal Navy service during July 1962.
Mountbatten (an arrogant twat if ever there was one), presented an argument of 'One of these [TSR2], or 6 of these [Buccaneers]) to various committees, and totally ignored the fact that the two aircraft were designed for different roles.
The stories of their low level capabilities are legendary. On exercises having to pull up to 20’ to reduce the dust clouds they were kicking up that gave away their positions and such.
They were what American Intercept Pilots' nightmares were made of.
0:18 Two legendary low level fighter bombers in one frame
Indeed. the radio chatter informed them that they shouldnt go below 100 feet due to dust clouds, to which they replaied - Roger, coming back up to 100 feet.
During Red flag am American General laughed at the old buccaneer..so he was taken for a ride.
He was asked for his opinion.
His response was.." we had to assened go over a f@#@ing horse .
In a wargames in the US (1980s), the Brits were tasked with attacking a US 'base' with simulated SAMs. The US saw one blip on their radar and chuckled that the Brits would do this. It was a Vulcan bomber. What the US team didn't realise that ether side of the Vulcan, under the wings, was a Buccaneer. The US painted the 'one' target and at the last moment, the two Buccaneers detached, and to much astonishment from the US team, proceeded to simulate a devistating bombing run. The chuckles swiched to the Brits at that point!
OI WUS ALL THIS INNIT?
Simulated Sam's? Got that story out of your arse end didn't you?
Surface to Air Missiles.. S.A.M...someone is correct. Your ass must be sore after pulling a couple of Buccaneers and a vulcan out of it !
Whatever you do, don't tell the Americans about how 8 Vulcans 'nuked' New York on 2 separate occasions. They hate learning about how they are not the best in the business
The Royal Air Force was invited to take part in RED FLAG 77-9 from 6 August to 3 September 1977 and were the first foreign air arm to do so.
The events were hosted by the US Air Force at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada.
Each RED FLAG consists of 2 separate 2-week exercises with crews rotating after the first fortnight and for 77-9, 10 Buccaneers from RAF Honington and 2 Vulcans from RAF Scampton were deployed.
My father was stationed at RAF Laarbruch in the early 1970s with Buccaneers. My school bus would go past the end of the runway every day, the road was about quarter of a mile away and we'd see the planes come down the runway lift-off, tuck away the landing gear and and buzz our bus at about 50ft which I can tell you is very low. But one day one pilot decided he'd give us an even closer look of his underbelly. I reckon he was somewhere between 20 and 30 feet you've never seen a school bus full of kids hit the deck so quickly in all you life. Amazing aircraft true fast ultra-low level aircraft and hewn from granite.
I will never forget Laarbruch. Don't look at photos of it now, it's bloody heartbreaking.
You totally ignored it's phenomenal low level performance. Far from the specified 200' of the RN's proposal, the Blackburn (note, NOT HS) Buccaneer was capable of 50' or less at high Mach number.
Even today a new tranche of Buccaneer airframes fitted with modern engines, weapons systems and avionics would still give any air defence system a good kick in the bollocks.
Yup, they used to specifically use this aircraft type on "Thursday Wars" for Royal Navy Operational Sea Training off Portland. They would come in skimming the wavetops pretending to be enemy missiles. It was quite exhilarating watching them fly by at flight deck level whilst on a Frigate or Destroyer (approx 20' off the water) those pilots had large testicles.
To some, there's "low", "stupid low" & "Buccaneer low". To some Buccaneer pilots, 200 feet is deemed to be high altitude!
There's an (apocryphal) story of an American pilot who sat in the #2 seat & swore blind that they had to climb to avoid a horse in a field!
@@stephenphillip5656 There's the old gag that Bucc pilots retracted the landing gear to descend to operational height.
Honestly, instead of the tornado, should have been new Buccs built. There simply should have been Buccs as far as the eye could see.
It's just amazing that the Blackburn Aircraft Company produced so many duff aircraft down the decades, but came up with an absolute winner with the Buccanneer! It's been one of my all-time favourite UK Cold War aircraft for years. I never knew they flew in Gulf 1, more power to them and their pilots.
Its important to understand that the split-tail assembly wasn't just an air brake, it is a thrust-foil and works like modern cowling thrust reversers that don't actually reverse the thrust but produce a low pressure area generating immense drag behind the aircraft. So it deflects the existing engine thrust AND creates drag while being external to the engines themselves and greatly reducing complexity of housing and fuselage.
Groundcrews working with Buccs were always aware of how powerful the hydraulics were, as that tail could snap shut and crush anyone, the bomb bay could rotate and cut you in half, and even a hydraulic leak could cut into your fingers if touched.
If there was power on the aircraft, or if there was not, we kept a wide berth.
@@stevetheduck1425we always put the bomb door key in on see ins so it isolated the door and prevented it from being rotated whilst hydraulic power was on or engines running.
Thank you for explaining this. Fascinating detail.
It also holds a fair amount of chaff, to dump in front of chasing US fighters in Red Flag
It was not just the Buccs that were so good but the complete and utter madness of the pilots.I served in the RN in the 70's and have seen these aircraft in action many times. Low passes past a ship where on the bridge wing of a Leander class frigate I was looking DOWN into the cockpit, low passes over the bows of said frigate where the aircraft had to pull UP to clear the forecastle. The piolots were certifiable, but the aircraft could do it, the veritable brick shithouse.......
One low passed over my school in the early 80s. He was banking and I could see the pilot looking at me. I waved. I bet the height was illegal.
That is cool!
Ditto, I was on the Bulwark in 72 sailing out of Valletta when a Buccaneer did a fly by - below the height of the flight deck - insane. Having said that I was equally amazed when a Nimrod did something very similar, bridge level of a type 42, off Ascension Island on our way back from the Falklands
I think they did some exceedingly naughty things with allied aircraft carriers.
Fly the approach, slip sideways, tip through 90 degrees and give it the beans.
Chances are, anyone on deck would just see a black shark's fin travelling along with the godawful howl of the engines.
Told you it was naughty. 🙂
Kind of like the freakout when B-52’s flew above the water past a carrier strike group. Chops to any pilots flying ground or sea-level. Video on youtube.
The only aircraft that descends to cruising altitude after takeoff🗿
Love your comment 😂
And ascends to lower the undercarriage for landing.
Raise the undercarriage to descend to cruising altitude. IRC that at RAF Laarbruch (15 & 16 squadrons) there was a hump in the runway and when the squadrons were sortie-ing on excersise the pilots would select gear up as the Bucc went light over the hump then sink back gear up almost on deck. I know this because during excercise's I was sat in a sanger on alongside the peri track with a LMG and 60 rounds of 7.62mm (blanks) to stop the soviet hordes sweeping across the German plains! 1980ish.
It doesnt take off, it just raises the landing gear while on the runway. Video on Yt of it doing that at Gibraltar.
I'm not a big fan of music over aircraft videos but the piece from Gibralta is absolutely nailed. REF Bucccaneers attacking HAS Liverpool. As the film cautions catch the second take off shot. It shows the descent from undercarriage retraction.
Love the fact that in the gulf war they had the tornados and low flying them was proving to be a bit tricky so they just said let’s dust off those Bucks and get them out there. They may be old but they did what they did well.
The old'ens are the best as they say.
During the Gulf War the Tornadoes got blown out of the sky .
@@ToddBrooks-o5m they had the riskiest mission, runway bombing, very dangerous
@@ToddBrooks-o5mThe runway denial munition they were tasked to deliver, required them to fly down the line of the runway, ridiculously dangerous in the face of antiaircraft artillery, to say nothing of the dangers they faced from US Patriot crews.
I grew up on the Clee Hill in Shropshire, atop which is a RADAR station. The RAF and the USAAF which were in the UK at the time, used to practice flying under the RADAR. We saw Tornadoes, Harriers, Gnats, Hawks, A10's, F4's, the occasional Canberra, but my favourite was always the Buccaneers. I now live near the Brecon beacons and for the past month we've had a Spitfire flying over and someone nearby has a Fieseler Storch.
I fly often around the Clee's, you never see any military aircraft these days. Back in the 90's you could turn a Cherokee on an A-10, so slow in a turn.
for quite a number of years in a downtown Toronto Neighbourhood, i would rush out of the house to see the Canadian Heritage Museum Lancaster fly overhead, sometimes 2 or 3 times a week. Once going to Wasaga Beach, north of TO, a Lysander flew right over the top of my car while on approach to landing... a specacular view as it was likely under 100ft...
Was in Goose Bay, Labrador in the Summer of '79. Sitting on a bluff above a river, I heard them coming. We knew they were training locally from the newspapers. Below, I saw something moving fast. I saw it, then it was gone. Then movement behind. Another, then it was gone. They were still there, but invisible due to their upper body camouflage. It was so weird. I could see/sense fast movement below me, but only glimpsed them for a fraction of a second. Wow!!
200ft : Cows have legs...
50ft : Cows have brand marks
Buccaneer pilot measuring low flying height restrictions. 😂😂😂
In the 1970's my old Dad took me to Donna Nook on the Lincolnshire Coast to watch Buccaneers target practicing on low level runs. It's one of the most spectacular things I've ever seen.
Would love to see that, must have been awesome .
Dark you seem to have a genuine love for these old warbirds, always providing sympathetic review history of each type. It’s much appreciated.
50s and 60s jet aircraft are still my favourites..
The Buccaneer was one of the most underrated aircraft in the history of aviation, its high-speed, low-level capabilities unmatched for decades. No wonder it was sent to the desert.
Although it went to the desert to operate at medium level.
It was very good but a F105 could outrun it at ultra low level by a hundred knots, well over Mach 1, it’s only limit was the canopy melting/softening temp due to friction! Also a beast of an aircraft!
@@billpugh58
OI - FOUL
The Thunderchief needed WET THRUST to exceed Mach 1 low level (as did Tornado)
It wouldn't outrun a Bucc for VERY LONG
Bucc was Designed NOT to be supersonic
And Its NOT a Navy Bird
Flown with a couple of the Buccaneer pilots who were in Gulf War I (now senior airline captains), some of the training stories and how low they REALLY flew is somewhat eyebrow raising!
Some below 50 feet!
Scream if you wanna go lower
They were designed to ride the transonic shock wave produced by the area ruled fuselage at very low level, it was quite safe as at that speed it wasn't possible to go lower than 15 feet as the shock wave wouldn't let it.
I was a Helicopter Engineer in the Royal Navy in 87 on HMS Illustrious on exercise. We were at action stations and a mate and myself were on the flight deck and could see would looked like a smoke trail far off on the horizon at about 10 miles but didn’t think anything of it. We continued to look in that direction but couldn’t see anything, then moments later two Blackburn Buccaneers came over the back of the flight deck. They scared the crap out of us as the heat of the jet wash hit us and you could smell the burnt aviation fuel. They couldn’t have been more than 30ft above the deck. Both aircraft had been flying below the flight deck on their attack approach. I used to think these aircraft were old fashioned and outdated but wow have I changed my mind. I never saw a Sea Harrier do anything like that. I have a great respect for the pilots who flew them and the aircraft.
A few 'Buccs' were also used in the various Balkan wars in the 1990, operated by the RAF from East Anglia and Cyprus.
These planes did not form a single designated squadron but were used in groups of 2 or 4 to "cement" ops which used Harriers and Tornadoes in very challenging terrain. This sometimes meant pathfinding with plotted approaches for the partner aircraft via computers on board some specialized Tornadoes. 'Buccs' could be seen tucked away at aerodromes such as RAF Marham and Wittering.
The other main work they did in Yugoslavia was fast ground attack and toss bombing in seemingly inaccessible places. The rotating weapons bay was a stroke of genius and some very skilled pilots used the strange air brakes for advanced manouvering which they practised in Welsh valleys and the Peak District like the Dam Buster Lancasters years before.
I’m afraid the Bucks never performed this role in the Balkans. It was planned to pair them with the GR1s is Central Europe before the Tornado got its own laser pod but that mission became redundant when TIALD came in in 1991. The Bucks were all retired years before the RAF bombed the Balkans in the NATO ops at the end of the 90s.
I love the bucs. My grandfather flew one in the SAAF and it was deadly precise
Far and away Blackburn's best looking and best performing aircraft. 😎👍
Blackburn Beverly 😎
They had set the bar incredibly low up to this point but, to mangle the metaphor, the Bucc was so good it could get under it!
No, that honour has to be the Blackburn Roc...😉
The buccaneer was a masterpiece of British engineering, we can turn out some fantastic stuff when we’re given the chance (and the funding)
That was then !!
and when corrupt politicians dont interfere, our military history is rife with stories of politician x interfering and us not getting some great stuff or getting massive delays to a lot of them appearing, usual greedy people wanting projects they are involved with to get the contracts rather than the better military option.
Buccaneers were the first aircraft to self-designate and hit a target in combat, previously one aircraft would laser designate whilst accompanying aircraft would drop LGB's on the target.
Are you sure that’s true? In the gulf war buccaneers were used to laze targets for tornados. I’ve never heard of a buccaneer dropping its own guided bombs.
Hmmm...I'm sure A-6 Intruders and F-111F's did so prior to the Buccaneer.
@@thefrecklepunyNegative,the Buccaneer was the first and it also took to the air in 1958
@@thefrecklepuny Correct, the Bucc used the Pave Spike pod already proven by the USAF.
Remember a story at red flag in the US which included the exchange:
US commander: "so what height were you flying at?"
Bucc pilot: "So we did our usual and descended to treetop height"
US commander: "there are no trees in the desert, those are bushes"
A nice feature to mention in a video would be that air was vented through tubes along the flaps so landing speed could be reduced while landing on a Carrier. A pretty damn unique feature at the Time..
The video mentions this but didn't explain it properly, maybe confusing it with de-icing.
Flap blowing was found to reduce landing speed and minimum control speed by a remarkable amount.
Boundary Layer Control. Basically, air vented along the leading edge of the wing, hot from the engine, causes airflow over the wing to remain attached down to very low speeds.
It was a spin-off from the research that led to the Hawker Harrier (the Handley-Page HP115 research vehicle), and was used on a number of other aircraft, usually carrier-borne, as it meant that a large, heavy, nuclear-equipped bomber could fly from a carrier of modest size, saving tens of millions of pounds.
They were never "shot down" in red flag exercises. Even F15s could not get them and there was even a special prize offered for the pilot if they did. The story of this is funny.
Thats a solid testiment to their power and speed
In many ways the spiritual successor to the Mosquito. At low level, in thick air, it was faster than a fighter.
Just a quick word about Royal Navy/Fleet Air Arm Squadron numbers. We don't call them the 801st, we just call them by the numbers, so eight oh one, or whatever.
The 1950s-60s were a golden age for military aviation. So many interesting planes. Modern aviation seems to lack something. Too much computer junk maybe, I don't know.
Delta Dart and Lightning
Same as with cars, those of a few decades ago each had it's own unique look, and real "spirit". Modern technology, whether automotive or aviation, seems to mean function trumps form. All blend into one boring style, no matter the company name stamped on it. It makes being an automotive or aviation enthusiast difficult.
It's too much control over design an engineering now back then a lot of Engineers used to theorycraft all kinds of stuff some crazy ideas it definitely was the Golden Age
The first aircraft to feature terrain following radar and the ability to fly at maximum speed under power lines while totally under control.
The Buccaneer relied on the Mk1 eyeball for terrain following. It was used to develop terrain following for the TSR2 a good five years in advance of the F111's effort. It was also used to develop terrain following for the Tornado. 'The powers that be' never thought of fitting TF to operational Buc's.
Fairly sure the Wright brothers’ aircraft could fly at max under power lines...😂 But Yes, I get you.
No TFR. Just terrain following pilots.
@@everTriumphwasn’t the tornado TFR tested and developed in the Hunter T (?)
Rowland White's Phoenix Squadron is an excellent book on the Honduras mission.
that was 'British Honduras' aka Belize
Brilliant Book , as much about the FAA /RN of the time, as about the mission
I worked on 3 buccs during my time at Farnborough. Never before or since have I mat with an aircraft so ever engineered. Made to rake all the punishment for life at sea, and then some. It was the Spey powered S-2s we had there. I remember one time when one returned from a sortie, and half way down the runway, a tyre burst on the main gear. I was about 8oo yards away, and it went with such force that it felt like a shove in the chest even that far away. I could share a few stories about the planes I worked with from that era. I could share some stories from that time, some risky, some funny some tragic, several run of the mill events, but all are interesting. However, some things I'm bound to silence over I don't want to take any risks for entertainment.
Calm down lad
800 yrds? A tyre?
Big fish there mate..
Good man respect the official secrets act even after you have left the service. I still do too.
Which squadron was that at Farnborough?
theres an old saw that bucks weren't built but had their keels laid down😮 not far from the truth? Blackburn had to wait almost a year to get the special jigs from the states😮
Not only a wonderful air frame but great bit of war kit. Verry user friendly. Imagine it with Gen 5 stealth kt now...Backed up by Tornado F5 Cnc plains
NA39 required a total bombload of 8000lb, not 4000; the 4000lb was for just internal stores. The 400nm unrefuelled range was also just at low-level; the aircraft had to be able to do 800 nm at high altitude. And rather than just being a tanker, the requirement asked for an aircraft that could both donate and receive fuel. I also love the clip of the officers assessing the NA39 bids while aboard a submarine.
What you mean to say is that the small wings would have required a high landing speed if it hadn't had the blown surfaces to compensate. The small wing was necessary to provide stability at high speed in a turbulent low-level environment.
The aircraft shown at 5:16 to illustrate the double pylons is a Supermarine Scimitar, not a Bucc.
'The 800-first Sqn' is another horrible americanism. In the RN it is known as 'Eight-Oh-One Sqn' or formally 'Number Eight-Oh-One Sqn'.
The S1s with the original engines could take off from carriers. The Spey engines with 40% more power allowed take-off with max fuel and a full load-out.
The bridge being (repeatedly) dropped does not appear to relate to the narrative on nukes; otherwise the camera would not have survived. And the aircraft shown flying past at low level (was this from some movie or other) is a Hawker Hunter, not a Bucc.
The South African aircraft still had folding wings and the BS605 engines weren't rocket assisted; they were bolt on rocket motors.
It would have been worth clarifying for the US audience that the 'FAA clearance' required to cross the Atlantic came from the Fleet Air Arm, who owned the jets. The US Federal Aviation Authority were not involved.
The Buccaneers in the Gulf were not 'guided by the Tornados' laser-guided ordnance'. That is utterly meaningless. The 2 AN12s were destroyed by Buccs using their own Pave Spike pods; there was no 'dive bombing' on that occasion.
There seems to be a problem with the timeline in the script, possibly due to the layout of the source wikipedia entry, but the Buccs had all transferred to the RAF long before Gulf War 1. I think the last of the old full size carriers was retired more than 10 years previously.
The last sqn of Buccs shown at 12:29 are F-4s.
The biggest issue I have with is though is the title. The Bucc was not 'ultra fast' by any stretch of the imagination; it was firmly subsonic. And then you don't mention anything about how 'insanely low' they could fly. The examples of 480kts at 50 feet in RED FLAG and in the Gulf War need telling, and in Beruit they were flying at 50 feet and less down the city streets, being fired on sometimes from above! Sometimes it's good to quit the wiki page and get some wider gen.
Your knowledge of the Buccaneer is incredibly interesting plus pointing out the other aircraft in video.
Not being RAF or Navy (or any service, I was already too old for call up by Falklands) I had no idea.
It's probably better to have any documentary 'for the masses' than none though?
That is an incredible as well as beautiful plane. Thank you for this presentation.
I remember as a child watching Buccaneers from Lossimouth flying up Loch Linnie quite often kicking up water they were so low before climbing slightly to head up the Great Glen or turning to make a bombing run on the BA. Growing up in Fort William in the 70's was so good for aircraft spotting saw all types from NATO countries
Unless you've had one fly over you at zero feet at close to .85 mach , there are no words
3:15 "Blackburn was not known for building warplanes"... What the fuck? Blackburn was ONLY known for building warplanes!
Maybe he's getting confused with the football club
One of the requirements of a warplane is that you can fight a war with it.
Many of the Blackburn products failed this simple test.
Then when they did get it right (BIG TIME) they were taken over and shut down.
No links to Red Flag in the U.S.A. successes, with mentions of the Vulcan?
9:25, there is an excellent book detailing this 'raid', also ask the colonial chappies about the Buccaneers on Red Flag. Several interesting interviews and videos of them playing out there.
pre Falklands 2 of these passed 30ft over my Father and I's head on a local golf course going full chat as the Western Isles were a realistic training environment for the Falklands- pretty impressive
Notice how the Russian SU25 looks like the result of a one night stand between the Buccaneer & the Jaguar after a night on Vodka?
Remember I did the model when was young. Weird tail... from 🇫🇷 we should admire ( lots do) the incredible diversity of what came out from "rosbifs" brains.. from end of ww2 to end of 60's we should make a list of everything they produced. The more symbolics to me are electric lighning and supeb delta bombers fogot name + harriers. FR and UK are very different I think we shared the Jaguar we should have done more together. Hopefully we share... missiles and is a big success. UK first ever to help 🇫🇷 gave lots of its blood ww1 and ww2 always first !!! . je n'oublie pas ❤ " concorde" was the best ever name for a plane ...
Was once at a picnic bench above Betws-y-Coed, in Wales. Heard a low whistle and looked DOWN on a Buccaneer twisting through the valley. Moments later, it, or another, flew close over our heads, from behind. BIG moments for us.
During the development of the Tornado, they tested avionics in the cockpit of the buccaneers. The test pilots said that they didn’t need to make the tornado but instead outfit the Buccs with the Tornado avionics. It was an exceptionally capable and popular aircraft.
do I remember right? the altimeter was actually graduated in inches for the first 10 feet?
So happy that the Buccaneer got a chance to prove itself in action and what it was capable of. I’ve always thought it was a mean looking aircraft with its engine intakes almost as wide as the fuselage. Go Blackburn.
Great seeing this video of a lovely aircraft - thank you. I remember watching SAAF Buccaneers in air displays in Cape Town in the 1960s. With rc and engine capabilities reaching levels that they have now, I might even try to build a flying model Buccaneer.
In the (hot!) summer of 1976 I was walking with my father across the North York Moors. Buccaneers were simulating attacks on the early earning radars near there, and RAF Phantoms and Lightnings were trying to catch them. No chance!
Now, one Lightning managed to intercept a U2 at 87,000' during an exercise (a surprise to the USAF!) and the Phantom was legendary and held several speed records too. But at moortop height the Buccaneer could sustain speeds only just below the speed of sound and was still able to turn sharply, so it could always evade the theoretically-faster aircraft.
The later Jaguar aircraft (a carrier-based version was designed for the French navy but not purchased) had a pretty similar philosophy, but was capable of modest supersonic speeds at equally low altitudes.
I think that the only aircraft likely to catch a Buccaneer would have been the F14 and the F3 fighter version of the Tornado, both of which were swing-wing aircraft. The Boundary Layer Control of the Buccaneer allowed it to enjoy some of the same advantages as a swing-wing; lower landing speeds and less high-speed drag, but was probably much easier to maintain, especially on board a carrier. I don't think the Soviet Navy ever had anything that stood a chance, not even in their considerable fleet of shore-based aircraft.
(The F3 was designed mainly to deal with big supersonic aircraft like the Tu22M and Tu160, hence demonstration where one kept pace with Concorde at full tilt for more than twenty minutes. Comparisons to "air superiority" fighters always ignore the fact that the F3's purpose was to not only stop the biggest and fastest targets which could sustain supersonic speeds for a long time, but to do so _before_ those targets had released stand-off weapons.)
I was at Boys Brigade camp in Scalby Mills that year, we were about two miles away from the town and at the bottom of an escarpment. A couple of us decided to climb up the escarpment to the trig point. I stood on top of the trig point and next thing a Buccaneer came screaming over the top of me, I felt like it was going to hit me but must have been no more than 50ft over me. I thought I’d need fresh underwear 😂😂😂
Honestly gotta love the buccaneer.
Many venerable platforms were used in the first gulf war. I recall seeing a number of F4 Phantoms parked on Lakenheath air base at the time pending possible demand for designator platforms.
The only aircraft to gain altitude for landing
RR Spey engine refit 60s ,a MONSTER of an engine for low level GRUNT.🤠🤘🚀
I grew up in the Spey Valley and the Cairngorms. Wasn't a proper day out unless you found yourself on a hill looking down at a Bucc going by lol
Probably one of the most beautiful military jets ever made. The totally black one flown in South Africa by a civilian owner until relatively recently was gorgeous. Carrying on the tradition of Buccaneer pilots being quite mad to the end. The only old AND bold pilots were those guys.
I worked on the Buccaneer at the ETPS at Farnborough in the 1980s. Alongside that, we had a Jaguar, a Comet, and two Hunters.
Looks like a pretty tough bird. Nothing fancy. Nice plane. We need to get back to simpler times
Always loved the story of 617sq training for the dams raid,while flying at 50ft they got a shock as another lanc passed UNDERNEATH 😅
If anyone was wondering, the Buccaneer is actually a lot of fun in War Thunder. It's bombs glide extremely far allowing you to drop early and ditch the scene and I prefer to equip 1 flare pod which has saved my life more times than I can count. Most jets chase you for a bit but because you're decently fast they don't prefer to spend that long chasing you since your team will pose a threat to them.
Usually I get away unscratched after dropping a whole lot of bombs. It can destroy 2.8 bases WITH a flare pod equipped.
A great aircraft indeed 🇬🇧👍
I read that the Buck with a 4000 lb. load was super hard to intercept at sea level for the F16. Almost impossible. That's impressive!
They flew that low that any fighter had to be nose down to fire anything at them. By which point the fighter either chickened out before getting a lock on it or crashed in to the floor
Buccaneer SOP "Lift Off, raise gear, descend to operating altitude."
Thanks for this. HMS Eagle visted NZ in the early 70s and I been interested in the the Buccaneer ever since. 👍🇳🇿
Fascinating Story. Strangely beautiful aircraft.
"Blackburn were not known for building warplanes" apart from all the planes they made that served in the first and second world wars. Research is a thing, you know.
In the 1920s and early 1930s, Blackburn made many planes, none known for their successful characteristics.
Look up the Blackburn 'Blackburn', 'Blackburd', 'Baffin', and compare with aircraft coming from the Fairey Company at the same time.
Then look up the Avro Aldershot to see what the Ministry of flailing and failure was ordering at the time.
One of the reasons it was underated is you don't tell your enemy what you have got ! 😅😅😅😅 !
Brilliant aircraft pilots loved its stability and manouverability
The Royal Navy really could have used HMS Ark Royal with her Buccs and Phantoms (and Gannet AEW!) during the Falklands War.
There wouldn't have been a Falklands war if the UK had kept its conventional deterrent's (Fleet carriers)
@@stephenchappell7512 Maybe, Maybe not. If Argentina had had more capable aircraft they might have tried. In any case, a lot of lives were lost on both sides because of slashed defense budgets in the UK. And a total misreading of the UK’s willingness to fight for its territory and people.
@@philsmith2444 Arguably, it was the FCO's sending of false signals to the Argentinians which incited the invasion.
The Bucc is my favourite aeroplane of all time
Brilliant aircraft...I've never seen an aircraft twist and turn they that one did..even now.
Very informative,,love this aircraft,
1991 war was great to watch. Me introducing it to my dad, " Dad, get up - it's started " said from our new build house in a valley in the Northern Ireland countryside. Safe as houses.
The Bucaneers were actually laser designating for the tornadoes, then dropping their own bombs.
8:58 Love this channel and love the Buccaneer but FAA stands for Fleet Air Arm not Federal Aviation Administration (sorry if anyone else has pointed this out) 👍
Good spot.
I seem to recall reading that the Buccaneer was the first choice for the raid on Port Stanley in the Falkland Islands, with its refuelling capability allowing it to be extended, and its laser designator/LGB combo being perfect for taking out airfield defences. It was quickly realized, however, that its oil tank was too small to last for the extreme length of such a flight. Can’t imagine being the crew in one of those runs had it been possible to fit a secondary oil reservoir! At least you could stand up and stretch a bit in a Vulcan. If everyone cooperated.
What a tough old bird!! 💙
The cat shot must have been terrifying with that nose up attitude on the ramp.
never heard of this plane before, it has some impressive and innovative features
What?
Chad buccaneer
Bucc 🗿
Does England still love her boffins? This machine shows some design details that took inspiration, and careful and cool thought. Boffin territory. Perhaps, sadly, exclusively boffin territory. That this aircraft was built and put into service shows MPs and Whitehall weren't insane at that time, perhaps in contrast to our present day.
It's a 'stopped clock' moment for politicals.
They cancelled the TSR2 after all the money had been spent, did incalculable damage to an entire aircraft industry, chose an American F-111 carrier version version that didn't and never would exist, that failed, realised they were now a whole generation behind, flailed around for a cheap solution, scrapped some aircraft carriers and gave the Royal Navy Buccs to the RAF.
Win. - against the odds and by accident.
- and we have never had an overseas strike capacity since.
Fascinating. Thank you again, Dark guy.
The mid-roll ad for the watches made from a melted down spitfire, broke my heart. How the hell could you do that to a fucking Spitfire?!?!?!
They are using badly corroded metal that has to be replaced
Time-ecpired airftames?
The Bucc is one of my favourite British built war machines, only beaten by the Tornado (a superb coalition with French and Italian aerospace industries ! ) 💪🇬🇧👍
In the RN you knew when the Buccs were coming from a spray on the horizon. They were so low that the air pressure was picking up spray and throwing it over the wings, then lifting up to go over the flight deck of a Leander. On one occasion even looked down on a Shackleton from Bristol's bridge wing. Once the Buccs transferred to RAF, they never flew as low.
Talk about knap of the earth ...
Close enough to spit on !!!
0:18 two legendary low level jets in one frame
Great aircraft!
Lower Faster better - The Mighty Buc - Uk Made UK ftw!
My parents and I where on holiday in Scotland in the late 70’s when a Buccaneer flew at low(f**k all) feet over Loch Ness. I always wanted to join up and after watching that display, that was it. I was able to work on this wonderful aircraft on all its bases in the 1980’s and always love watching videos of this incredible aircraft. Oh, the way to crest a hill that you see in Top Gun ‘Maverick’ was pioneered by the Brits on Red Flag in the 1970’s. Watch the Nationwide episode on why the RAF should fly so low in the UK.if you can find it.
The Buccaneer aircraft deployed in the first gulf war, carried TIALD pods developed by Ferranti, as was the Blue Parrot radar and the INAS. The pods were development prototypes and were supported by civilian engineers. At that time there were only two pods in existence. Eventually the Buccaneers also carried bombs, because of the poor serviceability of the Tornados and that they could not keep up at low level. One benefits of this pod is that it could continue to illuminate the target having passed it, looking over your shoulder. Latter the pod was integrated with the Tornado.
Buccaneer did not cary TIALD. That was Tornado using two prototype pods called 'San' and 'Tray' after Viz magazine characters.
It was the old Pave Spike pod on Buccaneer.
@@dogsnads5634 Indeed, I was on 237 OCU at the time and our war role was to deploy to Germany to use the Pavespike for attacks on bridges and similar targets, so the crews were well prepared. Lossie also sent all but one of the Pavespike capable airframes (12 out of 13 from memory) to the Gulf, not just six as mentioned in the video.
I’m afraid, well, no. The Bucc only used the old Pave Spike. Then A2E2 cleared TIALD onto the GR1s and the Bucc’s future was sealed.
@@dabrab The weird thing is the Pave Spike and Paveway combination on Buccaneer was originally purchased specifically for anti-shipping strikes...used alongside Martel. When Sea Eagle arrived it became moot for that, and was used more overland (plus I think the RAF had realised just how useful LGB's could be in the Falklands with the GR.3's dropping on lased targets and an effort to install Paveway on Vulcan, which was near complete at wars end).
Watch a video of a Buccaneer taking off. All they do is raise the undercarriage, and that's it! Spectacular.
Well not quite. They hooked a sling under the fuselage and tilted the whole aircraft up resting on a rear skid.
The RN Phantoms had an extending nose wheel oleo that lifted the nose 40 inches.
@@1chish The one I saw was taking off from Gibraltar, not a carrier.
@@DrivermanO Ah well then that will be normal flying height achieved then.
@@1chish Indeed!
Imagine if the TSR2 hadn't been dismantled, they were built to fly at an altitude of 50ft.
Would have been slower than the Bucc. Even the F111 was 100 knots slower than the Bucc at low level.
@@Jabber-ig3iwThe Buchaneer was half the speed of the TSR2.
Fantastic aircraft!!!
Buccaneers, a great aircraft. 😊👍
5:15 I think he's trying to see if we're paying attention.
Scimitar?
I feel like he was just being lazy
When he said low level he did mean bloody low level! Those Buccaneers flew between the wave tops they were so low. I'm sure if the airframes had been up to it. They would still be flying in combat today, with the necessary upgrades.
The Buccaneer was according to everything I've read an extremely stable aircraft to fly at ultra low levels and even over water .... The Tornado Pilots,who transitionsed from the Buccaneer, when it took over its anti shipping role said that it bucked all over the place and required constant inputs to keep it at height compared to the Buccaneers
Still so fast on the deck. Pure power