Talk:BL755

The bomblet is not contained within its SAFU, the SAFU is contained within the tail of the bomblet, three steel wire catches hold the bomblet closed until released by being dispensed, the bomblet then springs open. Once open tail is open to airflow and the wind turbine in the tail rotates the SAFU mechanism and arms the piezo electric fusetrain. The two major revisions of the bomblet are the original coronet tail and the later parachute tail. The center is not extruded, the individual bay manifolds are investment castings which are stacked together to form the core. BL755 remains dangerous for very long periods because it has no timer, battery or capacitor. It will detonate on the slightest disturbance. If dropped too low it will arm after coming to rest, thus leaving a highly dangerous and delicate anti personnel minefield. Chann94501 (talk) 18:53, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Correct: The bomblet contains it's own SAFU - not contained IN one.

But: On expansion after ejection, a pin is pulled out at the rear. This releases 2 things. A clockwork shutter and an air arming vane (small aero turbine) in that order. The vane is locked by the pin until after the shutter is released and must complete sufficient rotations before the shutter disables the denonator. This provides height/speed/aircraft separation minimums and actually prevents the bomblet arming after landing on the ground.

It is unlikely that an unexploded bomblet would detonate if disturbed. Not only for the above reason but also the inertial anvil that causes the piezo crystal device to fire the detonator requires significant energy imparted to it. It is not impossible due to other potential mechanical jamming/failure modes, but highly unlikely. Though often confused with other cluster type munitions, the BL755 device is not and is not intended for use for this purpose. It is an active offensive weapon specifically launched at primary hard and secondary soft targets, not a passive area denial device.

Correct: The original bomblet had the "coronet" fin tail. This was a very expensive steel tube with "splits" that sprung outwards towards the tips. When deployed it looked like a tall Disney cartoon king or queen's crown - hence the name. The "paracup" upgrade was for several reasons. It is not a parachute per se. It is a small rigid slotted plastic cup like device, rigged like a parachute. It was intially deemed a failure, because though much cheaper, it was too stable. The bomblets did not fill in the center of the pattern after being ejected outwards. This was solved. But achieving a smaller, tighter pattern was very effective for dive bomb attack modes and higher altitude releases. The Dutch Air Force was the first customer for this dive attack purpose. In the trials, the bomblets from a single BL755 took out 3 tanks and the dumb carcass of the main bomb disabled a fourth by destroying it's running gear.

Incorrect: The main chassis/central tube/bay structure was not an investment casting. It may have been fassembled from a tube and separate "fins" creating the radial bays (I frankly forget now - it is a long time ago) but it was composed of the largest aluminum extruded section ever made at that time. The central tube was definitely one piece and had to be completely gas tight. My recollection is that the entire thing was one piece with only additional flat bulkheads separating the longitudinal bays. No investment casting - especially at that time - could have been big and accurate enough for this purpose. Surface finish and mass balance accuracy alone would have been prohibitive (no NC machining in the early 1970's either). I would not even entertain an investment casting for this today.

There is a lot more inormation about the weapon that I am not willing to divulge at this time. However I am confident the above is unclassified and effectively public knowledge.

[ref]Source - first hand project design team experience.[/ref]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Crossroads1949 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

I was in UL3S and we had one of the ejection manifolds. It certainly wasn't extruded, but I'm not going to describe it in detail. It wasn't machined either. We also had the thing that actually pushes the submunitions out. I'm sure you meant enables, not disables. The figure I was given for the detonator, together with some clever design, and information that suggests the second generation were more sensitive, leads me to believe that the warheads group probably didn't mislead me. Chann94501 (talk) 04:40, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Total Submunitions

"A central extruded aluminum skeleton provides seven bays long by seven bays around, each containing 21 submunitions (147 total)." - Seven bays long by seven bays around by 21 submunitions equals 1029 submunitions. Does the article mean to say that the aluminum skeleton contains seven bays, period? -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:21, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on BL755. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070621052259/http://www.raf.mod.uk:80/equipment/clusterbombs.cfm to http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/clusterbombs.cfm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090411183042/http://www.bharat-rakshak.com:80/IAF/Images/Special/Features/FPD07/ to http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/IAF/Images/Special/Features/FPD07/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070621052259/http://www.raf.mod.uk:80/equipment/clusterbombs.cfm to http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/clusterbombs.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:55, 25 May 2016 (UTC)