Tanknet: Nuclear "Surveillance Round" - Tanknet

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Nuclear "Surveillance Round" What is it?

#1 User is offline   Anixtu 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 664
  • Joined: 02-July 01
  • Location:Glasgow, Scotland

Posted 29 October 2007 - 1356 PM

I've been reading a bit about the carriage of nuclear weapons by British ships in the Falklands War, and there are mentions of surveillance rounds and training rounds as well as live nuclear depth charges. What is a "surveillance round" and what is its purpose?

The only references I can find online are derived from the MoD document issued about the subject of nuclear weapons in the Falklands: http://www.rna-10-ar...ate-nuclear.pdf
0

#2 User is offline   Mote 

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 569
  • Joined: 08-February 07

Posted 29 October 2007 - 1507 PM

The mother of all illumination rounds?
0

#3 User is offline   DB 

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,189
  • Joined: 21-March 04
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 29 October 2007 - 1607 PM

From: http://www.century20...o.uk/page5.html

Quote

The WE177 family were highly adaptable as regards fusing options and all could operate in various modes, from parachute retarded or balistic trajectory, air burst, ground burst, laydown in water or on land, timed or depth operation. The yield (with the A version) and operation mode would be set by equipment in the ground control unit on the individual bombs, by a key held by the plane captain. Further options were set from a panel on the aircraft, either plane or helicopter as required. The Royal Navy exclusively used WE177A. The RAF in the UK used both the A and B versions. The RAF in Germany used A and later C versions. There were also special surveillance rounds to examine the effects of storage and high speed flight on the bombs, which were complete apart from the fissile materials. Each type also had training rounds.


I particularly liked the bit about the nuclear rounds being described as "600"s - because they were recorded as 600lb HE bombs.

David
0

#4 User is offline   Anixtu 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 664
  • Joined: 02-July 01
  • Location:Glasgow, Scotland

Posted 29 October 2007 - 1636 PM

View PostDB, on Mon 29 Oct 2007 2207, said:

There were also special surveillance rounds to examine the effects of storage and high speed flight on the bombs, which were complete apart from the fissile materials.


Excellent, thanks!

Looking again at the list of warships and what they carried I notice it was only the T42s that carried surveillance rounds. Perhaps they were being surveyed at the time.
0

#5 User is offline   Chris Werb 

  • In Zod We Trust
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16,393
  • Joined: 12-May 00
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:Meeping, gibbering and dancing mindlessly to the insane piping of infernal flutes.

Posted 30 October 2007 - 0302 AM

View PostAnixtu, on Mon 29 Oct 2007 2136, said:

Excellent, thanks!

Looking again at the list of warships and what they carried I notice it was only the T42s that carried surveillance rounds. Perhaps they were being surveyed at the time.


Unless the helo could carry nuclear DCs what other nuclear weapon would a type42 carry?
0

#6 User is offline   Anixtu 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 664
  • Joined: 02-July 01
  • Location:Glasgow, Scotland

Posted 30 October 2007 - 0500 AM

View PostChris Werb, on Tue 30 Oct 2007 0902, said:

Unless the helo could carry nuclear DCs what other nuclear weapon would a type42 carry?


According to the MoD document all nuclear weapons on RN ships present at the Falklands were depth charges.
0

#7 User is offline   Chris Werb 

  • In Zod We Trust
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 16,393
  • Joined: 12-May 00
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orkney, Scotland, UK
  • Interests:Meeping, gibbering and dancing mindlessly to the insane piping of infernal flutes.

Posted 30 October 2007 - 0536 AM

I'm surprised they allowed any nuclear weapons into theatre given the probability of ship losses. Did any of the ships sunk go down with nukes onboard? I'm sure we'd have heard about it if they had.
0

#8 User is offline   Anixtu 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 664
  • Joined: 02-July 01
  • Location:Glasgow, Scotland

Posted 30 October 2007 - 0602 AM

View PostChris Werb, on Tue 30 Oct 2007 1036, said:

I'm surprised they allowed any nuclear weapons into theatre given the probability of ship losses. Did any of the ships sunk go down with nukes onboard? I'm sure we'd have heard about it if they had.


The MoD document explains it all quite well, though it isn't the easiest to read: http://www.rna-10-ar...ate-nuclear.pdf . There was some recent-ish press and news coverage: http://news.bbc.co.u...ews/3295855.stm http://news.bbc.co.u...cas/3297805.stm

There were only four warships carrying live rounds: Hermes, Invincible, Broadsword and Brilliant. These four also all carried inert training rounds. Glamorgan had an inert training round. Sheffield and Coventry were carrying surveillance rounds. All live, training and surveillance rounds were removed from the frigates and destroyers to Hermes, Invincible and RFAs Fort Austin, Regent and Resource where they were shuffled around to avoid breaching the Treaty of Tlatelolco under which we couldn't take nuclear weapons into Falklands territorial waters. All rounds were eventually returned to the UK by Fort Austin and Resource.

One of the reasons for keeping the nuclear weapons with the task force was the possibility of ships being redeployed to NATO missions if the Soviets got frisky.
0

#9 User is offline   DB 

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,189
  • Joined: 21-March 04
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 30 October 2007 - 1455 PM

It's interesting that the RN was instructed to ensure that the ships containing nuclear weapons were to stay outside of the zone. Map Here.

Does this actually explain why Sandy wouldn't bring the aircraft carriers any nearer to extend Harrier loiter time over San Carlos?

David
0

#10 User is offline   Anixtu 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 664
  • Joined: 02-July 01
  • Location:Glasgow, Scotland

Posted 30 October 2007 - 1516 PM

View PostDB, on Tue 30 Oct 2007 1955, said:

It's interesting that the RN was instructed to ensure that the ships containing nuclear weapons were to stay outside of the zone. Map Here.

Does this actually explain why Sandy wouldn't bring the aircraft carriers any nearer to extend Harrier loiter time over San Carlos?

David


The zone as shown in the map was not in force in 1982, it was just the 12 mile territorial waters limit of the Falklands. Something to do with which countries had ratified the treaty at the time. I'm sure the full text of the treaty will explain, if anyone feels like reading it. :)
0

#11 User is offline   RETAC21 

  • A la lealtad y al valor
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,972
  • Joined: 08-April 01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 30 October 2007 - 1528 PM

Victory!

"The WE177 family were highly adaptable as regards fusing options and all could operate in various modes, from parachute retarded or balistic trajectory, air burst, ground burst, laydown in water or on land, timed or depth operation. The yield (with the A version) and operation mode would be set by equipment in the ground control unit on the individual bombs, by a key held by the plane captain. Further options were set from a panel on the aircraft, either plane or helicopter as required. The Royal Navy exclusively used WE177A. The RAF in the UK used both the A and B versions. The RAF in Germany used A and later C versions. There were also special surveillance rounds to examine the effects of storage and high speed flight on the bombs, which were complete apart from the fissile materials. Each type also had training rounds."

http://www.century20...o.uk/page5.html
0

#12 User is offline   DB 

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 6,189
  • Joined: 21-March 04
  • Location:Hertfordshire, England

Posted 30 October 2007 - 1621 PM

View PostRETAC21, on Tue 30 Oct 2007 2028, said:

Victory!

"The WE177 family were highly adaptable as regards fusing options and all could operate in various modes, from parachute retarded or balistic trajectory, air burst, ground burst, laydown in water or on land, timed or depth operation. The yield (with the A version) and operation mode would be set by equipment in the ground control unit on the individual bombs, by a key held by the plane captain. Further options were set from a panel on the aircraft, either plane or helicopter as required. The Royal Navy exclusively used WE177A. The RAF in the UK used both the A and B versions. The RAF in Germany used A and later C versions. There were also special surveillance rounds to examine the effects of storage and high speed flight on the bombs, which were complete apart from the fissile materials. Each type also had training rounds."

http://www.century20...o.uk/page5.html

Ahem.

David
0

#13 User is offline   RETAC21 

  • A la lealtad y al valor
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,972
  • Joined: 08-April 01
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Madrid, Spain
  • Interests:Military history in general

Posted 01 November 2007 - 1307 PM

View PostDB, on Tue 30 Oct 2007 2221, said:

Ahem.

David


Oooooops! :blink:
0

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic