English Electric Lightning and Genie

[Dawes]

According to Wikipedia, the RAF briefly considered the AIR-2A Genie unguided nuclear air-to-air rocket for use on the Lightning. This was one of (probably for the best) history's "never was" configurations, but it's interesting to speculate nonetheless. At around 822 pounds, would the Genie have been accommodated on a wing station? Presumably it was too bulky for a belly-mounted arrangement.

[Stuart Galbraith]

I'd love to see it accommodated over the wing...

The RAF  flirted with fitting Bloodhound with nuclear warheads, but that didn't happen either.

[lucklucky]

400kg . I am not sure pylons under the wind for export version got such weight clearance. I only saw them with SNEB rockets, bombs were an option but i think only a 500lb could be taken so would need to be reinforced if possible  The over the wing pylons could take the weight but they were for fuel and rockets. Using 60's missile there will be risky.

[Stuart Galbraith]

The red top racks would probably be adequate  anyway.

They were reputedly cooking up lots of variants of this aircraft, all cancelled. A British defence disease in the 1960's.

[lucklucky]

Red Top (340lb) racks were too light for the propose also being far from the COG point will make it even more problematic even if reinforced. I don't know if the under wing pylon could have taken it without reinforcing the wing. So in theory the only weight viable position is the top wing ones but that depends if the rocket engine can start while in pylon and there is no drop.

[Miner]

On of the slanderous comments on one of the Genie loadings was that it was dropped attached to a piece of string. at the end of the string the pull ignited the motor and it headed off in hopefully the right direction, Detonation was on a time fuse

Discussion on one forum (rec.aviation.military?) suggested the concept was somewhat rushed

[sunday]

51 minutes ago, Miner said:

On of the slanderous comments on one of the Genie loadings was that it was dropped attached to a piece of string. at the end of the string the pull ignited the motor and it headed off in hopefully the right direction, Detonation was on a time fuse

Discussion on one forum (rec.aviation.military?) suggested the concept was somewhat rushed

Seems a similar method was used with the WWII-era Tiny Tim rocket

Quote

A drop launcher has been perfected for firing the 11.75-inch Tiny Tim. This installation consists of a Mark 51 bomb rack, and a lanyard and lanyard-operated switches. The rocket is suspended from the bomb rack, and falls away from the plane when released. As it falls the rocket pulls out the 8-foot lanyard, which unreels until two micro switches are actuated and current flows through the lanyard to ignite the rocket propellant. Use of the lanyard makes it possible to delay firing of the rocket motor until the plane is safely out of the potential zone of rocket blast.

Source

[shep854]

1 hour ago, Miner said:

On of the slanderous comments on one of the Genie loadings was that it was dropped attached to a piece of string. at the end of the string the pull ignited the motor and it headed off in hopefully the right direction, Detonation was on a time fuse

Discussion on one forum (rec.aviation.military?) suggested the concept was somewhat rushed

On a tangent, this reminds me of Dr Alex Clarke's claim that Swordfish had a wire connected to the nose of its torpedo to help the fish stay level when it was released.  I have never seen this mentioned elsewhere.  Does anyone have other sources about this?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Ive never heard that, which doesnt mean its not true of course. I have heard that the Japanese studied the Battle of Tarranto, to study tactics which they could then apply to the Battle of Pearl Harbor. There was something ive read about a British device that was attached to the tail of torpedo's, so that when they entered the war, they wouldnt go deep and embed in the mud, but run shallow. It was a piece of wood or something that broke off when it hit the water, after altering the trajectory of the torpedo. The Japanese saw that and supposedly copied it for their air launched torpedo's. Or so the story goes anyway.

[shep854]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Ive never heard that, which doesnt mean its not true of course. I have heard that the Japanese studied the Battle of Tarranto, to study tactics which they could then apply to the Battle of Pearl Harbor. There was something ive read about a British device that was attached to the tail of torpedo's, so that when they entered the war, they wouldnt go deep and embed in the mud, but run shallow. It was a piece of wood or something that broke off when it hit the water, after altering the trajectory of the torpedo. The Japanese saw that and supposedly copied it for their air launched torpedo's. Or so the story goes anyway.

I've heard about a shallow-running attachment for Pearl as well.  There was even a question on a recent 'Drydock' where Drach was asked about a report of similar devices being seen on Japanese torpedoes that were dropped against Force Z.  I do know that the USN used similar devices later in the war.

[Dawes]

Genie was conceived at a time when attacks by massed bomber formations were still seen as a likely possibility. It would probably have been effective against that type of target.

[shep854]

3 hours ago, Dawes said:

Genie was conceived at a time when attacks by massed bomber formations were still seen as a likely possibility. It would probably have been effective against that type of target.

 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Imagine what would have happened to those silly sods if the rocket motor didn't light off....

[Mike1158]

The only thing I know of attached to Japanese torpedo's for shallow water use, was the wooden attachemts to the control surfaces which prevented sinking beyone a certain depth.

Edited February 20, 2023 by Mike1158

[BJE]

On 2/19/2023 at 5:19 PM, shep854 said:

On a tangent, this reminds me of Dr Alex Clarke's claim that Swordfish had a wire connected to the nose of its torpedo to help the fish stay level when it was released.  I have never seen this mentioned elsewhere.  Does anyone have other sources about this?

It is mentioned here. The linked instructional film also covers it, except that there is two wires and they are connected to the tail of the torpedo.

[bojan]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Imagine what would have happened to those silly sods if the rocket motor didn't light off....

Nothing, nuke could not fire unless rocket motor did.

[shep854]

6 hours ago, BJE said:

It is mentioned here. The linked instructional film also covers it, except that there is two wires and they are connected to the tail of the torpedo.

Thank you!

[Stuart Galbraith]

10 hours ago, bojan said:

Nothing, nuke could not fire unless rocket motor did.

Having read Eric Strosslers 'Command and Control' and the general crapness of safety's on nuclear weapons of that period, its not something I would personally trust my life upon.

[rmgill]

19 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Imagine what would have happened to those silly sods if the rocket motor didn't light off....

The rocket would have sat on the launch rail? 

[bojan]

IIRC Genie was "drop then ignite".

[Stuart Galbraith]

'But it didnt work according to the guarantee! I want my money back!'

 

[DB]

Later model Lightning (F.53) apparently had 1000lb underwing hardpoints. Whether you could put a Genie and it's pylon and ejector in that mass is a question.

However, the modular pack that gave you two ADEN or two Firestreak or 48 2" rockets integrated into the fuselage and perhaps a single Genie option might have been possible there. (It gets more complicated with later versions, but the 2 optional ADENS was available for most)

An ADEN with 200 rounds apparently weighed 196kg, so about 430lbs. Two of those is getting quite near the weight allowance.