Victor as conventional bomber

[Heathrow Harry]

Re reading Gunston's "jet Bombers" over a mince pie he shows a picture of a Victor dropping conventional bombs

http://www.pprune.org/members/326184-heathrow-harry-albums-what-airfield-picture545-victor-s.jpg[

The caption reads

" There's a story behind this photo of a B.1 dropping "35thousand-pounders" but we won't blow the gaff."

What was the story???

[denachtenmai]

there's only 33?;)

[Coochycool]

Don't know but wasn't there once a similar show of force during Confrontation?

[Heathrow Harry]

Clearly 5 sticks each of 7 bombs in the original picture

[JG54]

I believe the picture is 'retouched' (early 'photoshopping' for you young 'uns), although both the reason and source of that information are long forgotten. Hopefully, someone else can flesh that out a little.

The Victor is known to have been able to loft 35 x 1,000 pounders (and close to 70,000 lbs of sea mines, iirc), but perhaps the B.1 was height / payload restricted in some way, making tinkering with the image the easier PR solution?

[BEagle]

From what I've read, there was some concern that when the lowest bomb in the stick of 35 dropped from Victor B1A XH648 by Flt Lt Thomson's crew over Song Song range (to send a clear message to the Indons...) detonated, it might set off the next...and that would continue progressively up the stick. At which point the highest bomb would still be rather close the bomber...:uhoh: This was because the release interval had been set to a short value, making the release photo look impressive whilst ensuring that all 35 bombs remained within the Danger Area!

No-one let slip this piece of gen to those observing the drop...:hmm:

[morton]

I vaguely remember reading that it couldn't release all the bombs as quickly or as closely as the picture shows. I stand to be corrected though. If they were released as shown it would be interesting to know what the G force was after the almost instantaneous release of 35,000 pounds from the Bomb bay!

[Pontius Navigator]

Morton, the PESJ - pilots emergency safe jettison - could literally drop the lot on the Vulcan. I imagine the Victor had a similar system.

The release system was the 90-way. This was used to set the time interval between bombs.

From memory we used a setting of 0.30 seconds. For a stick of 35 bombs as 0.3 seconds the time between 1 and 35 was 10.2 seconds. The vertical distance between first and last would be about 1,800 feet.

Again from memory the available shorter intervals were 0.18 and 0.09. Assuming the shortest would give an interval of 3.06 seconds and a vertical separation of 150 feet. This looks pretty close to the setting. I am not sure if there was a shorter time available.

Apart from the rapid weight reduction there was also CofG change but minimised through bomb sequencing stn 3-5-1 in sequence followed by 4-2.

[MPN11]

Aside from the technicalities, that has alway been my favourite V-Force bombing photo. Shame they weren't still available in Iran or 'Stan [OK, I know, collateral etc. etc.] because that's close to a good B-52 delivery.

[morton]

The internet is a wonderful thing and I am now standing corrected!
V-Force: Victors in Malaya » Finest Hour Warbirds (http://www.finesthourwarbirds.co.uk/blog/v-force-victors-in-malaya/)

[denachtenmai]

Clearly 5 sticks each of 7 bombs in the original picture

Whooosh:rolleyes:

[Pontius Navigator]

From Morton's link What the propagandists wanted was a trail of bombs released in sequence, the first bomb exploding on impact with the sea before the last bomb left the aeroplane, the intention being to create a ‘wall of water’ as an impressive spectacle. and my calculations you can see that the vertical stack of bombs would have been about 1,800 feet with standard spacing and assuming a low level drop to achieve the aim the aircraft would have been in the 1% range of frag damage from ONE bomb and well inside the blast range damage zone.

PS, they never let us Vulcans drop HE out there after the odd Victor 'heard but not seen' on both China Rock and S2.

[langleybaston]

QUOTE

it would be interesting to know what the G force was after the almost instantaneous release of 35,000 pounds from the Bomb bay!

I cannot get my head round how a decrease of mass can cause a G Force. Can someone please explain? If my leg drops off, I do not rise in the air even though I am lighter [and disregarding falling over!]. It matters not if I am at rest or at constant velocity ...... the leg drops-off and I soldier on, comparatively legless and certainly 'armless.

I am well aware of the anecdotal evidence of the heave of a Lancaster as a Grand Slam departs, and do not doubt the reality of the effect, but my knowledge of aerodynamics is inadequate to explain. Perhaps the late hour and the red biddy is to blame.

[andytug]

Well, from a purely physics point of view, before you drop any bombs the wings are producing enough lift to hold up the plane+crew plus 35000lbs of bombs. Then you drop them, suddenly(ish) lightening the plane by 35000lbs, so unless something else changes you suddenly have an extra net force of 35000lbs pushing the aircraft upwards, which is quite a lot. Would think in a more modern plane there would be some sort of automatic compensation thing going on?

[Donkey497]

Hey LB, check your PMs

[morton]

LB. My simplistic thinking is as follows. In flight at a constant altitude the Aircraft generated lift (upwards force) equals the Aircraft weight (downward force). Any change to either will, obviously, cause an imbalance and the Aircraft will either rise or fall. The loss of 35,000lb would, I assume, result in a large upward movement and bending of the wings due to this movement and felt as a G force.

You are quite right though, the loss of your legs does indeed cause you to fall to the ground – as I have found on a few lost weekends. However, it was the muscles in your legs that kept you upright and no amount of arm flailing will generate enough lift to compensate for the loss of leg muscle – again as I have found in the past!

[Heathrow Harry]

excellent link Morton - great pictures and all the detail as well!!!

Many thanks!!!

[RetiredBA/BY]

LB. My simplistic thinking is as follows. In flight at a constant altitude the Aircraft generated lift (upwards force) equals the Aircraft weight (downward force). Any change to either will, obviously, cause an imbalance and the Aircraft will either rise or fall. The loss of 35,000lb would, I assume, result in a large upward movement and bending of the wings due to this movement and felt as a G force.

You are quite right though, the loss of your legs does indeed cause you to fall to the ground – as I have found on a few lost weekends. However, it was the muscles in your legs that kept you upright and no amount of arm flailing will generate enough lift to compensate for the loss of leg muscle – again as I have found in the past!

It's a long time since I flew a Victor 1, 49 years in fact, but I wonder how far a Victor 1 could carry 35 1000 pounders at a max tow of 185,000 pounds? Marham to Leuchars?

As for the G loading on release, the increase would be about only . 28g . If the aircraft weighed 160,000 pounds then released 35,000 pounds then it now weighs 125,000 pounds with 160,000 pounds of lift, so 160 divided by 125 equals 1.28, assuming instant release and no pitch control input. Not a lot of G even for an airliner in a steady turn at 25 degrees of bank in light turbulence!

QFI hat off !

[Fareastdriver]

Would think in a more modern plane there would be some sort of automatic compensation thing going on?

The Nav Radar would have done all the flying and ranging through the bombing radar. The NBS bombing computer would have opened the doors and released the bombs IAW the sequence selected.

Any aerodynamic effects from the release would be corrected by the autopilot. There might have been a "Cor" from the pilots.

A Valiant was planned to carry more bombs, One of the projects was to have a bomb carrier with 10 1,000 bombs under each wing, (the underwing fuel tanks had a 12,500lbs each capacity). This with 21 1,000 pounders in the bomb bay would have totalled 41,000 lbs still with full (five hours) internal fuel.

[orionsbelt]

As BE says the picture is fixed as one bomb was out of frame but 35 were droped.
In August 1964, 10/15 Sqdn with Victor B1a, Detached to RAAF Butterworth and 55 /57 Sqdn at RAF Tengha stood Dawn to Dusk QRA, loaded with 21 x 1000lb bombs with Radio fusing (PN (Roy) who came out in Nov 64 in the Vulcans that relieved us, can tell you more about the fusing and he has a paper recording the Vulcan involvement).
The Aeroplanes were fitted with a bomb-bay tank that took the first two bomb positions.
We dispersed 2 Bombers to Gan and 55 Sqdn sent up 2 to Butterworth.
For those don’t know the history see
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesia%E2%80%93Malaysia_confrontation
The Victor detachment from Cottismore and Honington had been ongoing since early 1963,
The Vulcans did not arrive until Nov 1964 when as such it was all over after political changes in Indonesia.
My 15 Sqdn detachment returned to the UK in Nov 64 however we left XA941 behind as it had a centre line closure on one of its stb engines, which were then being fixed by the MU. Meanwhile I was posted to Honington and was promptly returned to Butterworth on New Years day as part of the servicing crew to recover the aeroplane.
Happy days
***

Edited to add comment about the http://www.finesthourwarbirds.co.uk/blog/v-force-victors-in-malaya/
This link is more concerned with the Tengha Operation. It was a Butterworth aeroplane that droped the first 35 bomb load sometime before May 1964. Additionally RAAF Butterworth on the mainland not on the island of Penang.

[Pontius Navigator]

Orion, not quite correct on our dates. We actually deployed in early September, held for a week in Aden, and then came on state at Gan for a week before finally relieving the Butterworth Victors at the beginning of October. Late we again dispersed with aircraft to Gan, Tengah and Butterworth. As you say come November it was 'won'. I would have to dig my log book out for actual dates.

There was one Victor that remained at Butterworth throughout our stay as it had some major fault. I believe the organ bay (sic?) was completely filled with fungus as a result of sitting there all alone. It was eventually recovered and flown back to UK.

[Pontius Navigator]

Incidentally, given a copy of the Victor drop CinC SAC had it displayed at Offutt and then requested a similar photograph from the Vulcan, that too was not without problems as the first drop at Aberporth was dropped by the Nav Rad, as outlined by Orionsbelt, before the chase photographer was ready. Poor briefing as the drop was supposedly to be controlled by the range controller.

After the successful drop of 21x1000 lb inert another drop was organised for El Adem range with HE now that was a sight with a wall of flaming sand. I have the slide somewhere.

Years later further drops were organised and 21x1000HE retards dropped from 300 feet over Epi Bay was a sight to behold, again with a mile long line of water spouts.

[Tankertrashnav]

It's a long time since I flew a Victor 1, 49 years in fact, but I wonder how far a Victor 1 could carry 35 1000 pounders at a max tow of 185,000 pounds? Marham to Leuchars?

A bit further than that. Max fuel uplift on the Victor K1/1a tanker was 86K pounds. Substitute that max bomb load for fuel and that gives you say 50K fuel. We used to reckon 10k fuel used for start up, taxi and climb to TOC. Assuming in an operational situation you might be planning on landing with as little as 10k, that gives you about 3 hours flying using an average 10k an hour. So a radius of action of perhaps 750 miles assuming you were planning to return to your home base.

In the case of the Tengah/Butterworth detachment the main problem with the Victor 1 with its reliable but hardly overpowered Sapphires was that you were never going to get airborne at anything like the max tow because of the high temperatures, so once you have reduced your fuel load we are probably nearly back to your Marham to Leuchars example in terms of usable range with that full load of bombs.

My last sortie in a Victor K1a just over 40 years ago. Where did that go? :(

[pontifex]

Perhaps I am just a little older than the rest of you all; but I remember the Valiant could carry 41,000 of bombs. 21,000 in the bomb bay and 10,000 under each wing. The well known underwing tanks could be replaced by what looked like underwing fuel tanks but they held bombs and even had their own bomb doors. Never saw one but I still have a CofG slide rule that shows they actually existed (perhaps!).

[Pontius Navigator]

TTN, if you have a map you might be able to do some calcs then.

Gan - Medan (target) - Butterworth.

I think that was the Victor plan. Our's, based on the Observer's Book of Aircraft data (the Victor planning cell at FEAF didn't have any real data) was initially Jakarta. This was not viable for several reasons. We would have been right on strategic war minimums for fuel, the PNR was close to Gan, beyond PNR we would have been committed to overflight of enemy territory with either unserviceable kit or worse, engine(s) out.

[Pontius Navigator]

Another Victor Sapphire snippet, the runway at Butterworth was 8,000 feet and the Victor left wheel tracks in the overshoot. In contrast the Vulcan, we used full power (104%) took about 4,500 feet and ATC missed the first take-off.

[ICM]

Orion: 10 Sqn had disbanded as a Victor squadron on 29 February 1964, so any deployment in August must have been 15 Sqn on its own.

Pontifex: Noting your point about underwing pods on the Valiant, C H Barnes' highly detailed "Handley Page Aircraft Since 1907" mentions that underwing bomb pods carrying a further fourteen 1000 lb bombs in each were also considered for the Victor but never manufactured for trials. And, given that WW2 was not in the distant past back then, he lists alternative conventional loads to the thirty-five 1000 pounders: a 22,000 lb Grand Slam, or two 12,000 lb Tallboys, or 3 10,000 lb HC bombs, or even seventeen 2,000 lb Type S mines. But nothing is said about how many of those weapons still existed in stores by the mid-1950s.

[Bucc Man]

What a great thread, at Honington in the 70s, having found a V Bomber soft type helmet in one of the old lockers, this all means a lot somehow.

Thanks

Bucc

[Roadster280]

Years later further drops were organised and 21x1000HE retards dropped from 300 feet over Epi Bay was a sight to behold, again with a mile long line of water spouts.

"Right chaps, listen in, today we will be bombing with retards"

"Blimey Sir, isn't that a war crime?"

[langleybaston]

Thanks to all who replied getting me straight about the heave associated with dropping 35000.

I am ashamed, what with a distinction at A Level Physics. It was 62 years ago, though ......................

[kaitakbowler]

PN, That would have been '71/72ish the Vulcan being the last run of a firepower demo IIRC. Here are two vpoor quality pics of the drop, V impressive.

PM

[ozleckie]

This photo has been the subject of a couple of threads in the past.

I was a member of the bombing up team that loaded these bombs. It was only the second time it had been attempted, the first was on initial trials. Being the RAF we had to have a few practice loads with inert bombs as nobody had loaded bomb carriers on the front 2 bomb stations before.The long range tank usually occupied that position.We were told that the 35 bombs had been in the Butterworth Bomb Dump since WW2 and were approaching their use by date.

The bombs were dropped by XH 648, a B1a belonging to 15 Sqn, on the Song Song Bombing Range off Penang Island. The photo was taken by a PR Canberra from Tengah which flew alongside.As I understand it the photo is a still shot from a film of the drop.The Range Safety Officer, an RAAF Sabre pilot, is reported as saying "I'm outta here " when told what was happening.

A couple of days afterwards the Armament Officer showed us the subject photo but because it had been designated Secret we could not have a copy. It was years before it was released.

XH 648 was one of 4 Victors from RAF Cottesmore which, together with 4 from RAF Honnington,were rushed out to RAF Tengah the week before Christmas 1963.All 8 Victors were lined up on the apron and the press invited to a photo shoot which resulted in front page coverage in the Straits Times together with a warning to Indonesia. In the New Year the Cottesmore contingent, having waved the big stick, was moved to RAAF Butterworth. In March the ground crew were flown back to Cottesmore in a British Eagle Brittania which they had just purchased from BOAC. Having been in the Air Movements bar waiting for it to arrive we all gave it a B/F Insp and were not impressed. 3 weeks later the Brittania crashed, with the loss of all souls, on approach to Innsbruck.

[Pontius Navigator]

ozleckie, interesting that the photo was Secret as I saw it displayed at HQ SAC in 1965 although I guess that was a pretty secret location :)

Kaitakbowler, that's the one, Baz Gowling came down the Cyprus low level route and popped out from below Paramalie West and behind the crowd which was a surprise as all the other aircraft were strictly right-left.

[RetiredBA/BY]

A bit further than that. Max fuel uplift on the Victor K1/1a tanker was 86K pounds. Substitute that max bomb load for fuel and that gives you say 50K fuel. We used to reckon 10k fuel used for start up, taxi and climb to TOC. Assuming in an operational situation you might be pla its reliable but hardly overpowered Sapphires was that you were never going to get airborne at anything like the max tow because of the high temperatures, so once you have reduced your fuel load we are probably nearly back to your Marham to Leuchars example in terms of usable range with that full load of bombs.

My last sortie in a Victor K1a just over 40 years ago. Where did that go? :(
Not sure where my years went either, seem to go even faster now. Was it really 50 years ago since the Victir tanker arrived at Marham.
Well remember the abysmal take off performance of the K 1and it's 8,700 foot ground roll on Marham,s 9000 foot runway, but could she go , clean, at height !

[ian16th]

Pontiflex

Perhaps I am just a little older than the rest of you all; but I remember the Valiant could carry 41,000 of bombs. 21,000 in the bomb bay and 10,000 under each wing. The well known underwing tanks could be replaced by what looked like underwing fuel tanks but they held bombs and even had their own bomb doors. Never saw one but I still have a CofG slide rule that shows they actually existed (perhaps!).

I worked on Valiant's for over 4 years, albeit a tanker squadron, I never heard mention of the underwing tank pylons being capable of of carrying bombs.

[Tankertrashnav]

For those who may not know, XH 648 is one of the very few surviving Victor Mk 1s, now undergoing a major restoration at the IWM Duxford. It would be great if the opportunity was taken to return her to anti-flash white, but I have an idea she will retain the camouflage carried as a K1a tanker. I never quite understood the logic of camouflaging a tanker, an aircraft that never operated at low level, and in fact the early tanker conversions flew in the original white.

but could she go , clean, at height !

Certainly could, Tony Cunnane, who flew 648 on her final flight to Duxford, relates an occasion when she went supersonic (maybe!) over Paris.

http://tonycunnane.uk/page-337.html

I flew in XH 648 a few times, and witnessed her final departure from Marham to Duxford, described here

http://tonycunnane.uk/page-365.html

[Heathrow Harry]

"I never heard mention of the underwing tank pylons being capable of of carrying bombs."

same here - and both Gunston & Mason go into the wing design in some detail and only mention fuel tanks

[Fareastdriver]

The Valiant's wing bomb bays were part of the concept during the design phase. I have seen an illustration where it appeared to be relatively squashed in cross section compared to wing tanks.

The typewritten Pilot's Notes of the early fifties do not mention it; the only early extra service available then was RATOG so it was defunct before it entered service. However, the ability to hang 12,500lbs+ on to a single point of the wing must point at there having to be some reason to make that position so strong.

[teeteringhead]

,were rushed out to RAF Tengah the week before Christmas 1963 So OP DENY CHRISTMAS has a long, illustrious pedigree........

[pontifex]

Gentlemen,

I wish I was clever enough to take a photo of my Valiant CoG slide rule to show you all the u/w bomb loading details. Can do the photos but can't do the complicated stuff to get it on your screens! I think they were also intended to hold photo flashes too as certain positions were annotated as "applicable to P.R aircraft only." The only photo flashes I ever flew with were in a separate compartment behind what would have been the bomb bay in a normal bomber.

RATOG was mounted externally on the fuselage. As a very young copilot I flew a RATOG trial with the BCDU at Wittering. It was very impressive but they then had to be dropped on a subsequent run over the field. Not very successful as the parachutes failed to deploy. If my memory serves a max weight Valiant 184000lbs? got airborne in less than 1000 ft. The captain on one flight was a Sqn Ldr Gibson and on another it was Flt Lt Hogg. The aircraft were ?400 and ?872. Keen historians can probably fill in the details. I also flew on a Water Meth trial but I cannot remember the details.

[ian16th]

?400 and ?872 were probably WZ400 and XD872

WZ390 and XD871 were both 214 Sqdn a/c of my acquaintance.

[Exnomad]

I worked in V bomber flight simulators and weapon carriage equipment and had to visit aircraft to take measurement.
As well as those tiny bombs there was a 22000lb one.
This is back to the jibes about the US army air force in WW2, that they carried lots of guns and a teeny weeny bomb.

[RetiredBA/BY]

Gentlemen,

I wish I was clever enough to take a photo of my Valiant CoG slide rule to show you all the u/w bomb loading details. Can do the photos but can't do the complicated stuff to get it on your screens! I think they were also intended to hold photo flashes too as certain positions were annotated as "applicable to P.R aircraft only." The only photo flashes I ever flew with were in a separate compartment behind what would have been the bomb bay in a normal bomber.

RATOG was mounted externally on the fuselage. As a very young copilot I flew a RATOG trial with the BCDU at Wittering. It was very impressive but they then had to be dropped on a subsequent run over the field. Not very successful as the parachutes failed to deploy. If my memory serves a max weight Valiant 184000lbs? got airborne in less than 1000 ft. The captain on one flight was a Sqn Ldr Gibson and on another it was Flt Lt Hogg. The aircraft were ?400 and ?872. Keen historians can probably fill in the details. I also flew on a Water Meth trial but I cannot remember the details.

Max weight of the Valiant was 175, ooo pounds, IIRC , the Victor 1 185,000 Pounds, the VC10 151953 Kg, Sad isn't it !

[Fareastdriver]

When the Valiants were broken up they wouldn't let me have the CofG slide rule out of XD814. It was on my inventory and the cockpit was subsequently sold to a film company for the film 'Thunderball', It was the first to go and I was told that the information on the slipstick was restricted so I couldn't have it. I kept my manuals but they got lost in various moves over the years.

The cockpit wasn't used in the end, they used a mock up of a Vulcan; too difficult to get the cameras in the right place.

Years later I knocked up a slipstick for the Sikorsky S76A using the Valiant's slipstick principle. Then somebody invented a programme for a Psion and that became the official tool.

[Geriaviator]

From Ken Trent's excellent book Bomb Doors Open, a description of what it was like to deliver his first 22000lb Grand Slam onto a submarine base near Bremen in March 1945:
If the aircraft had leapt when we delivered a Tallboy, it was nothing compared to what it did when we let go of the Grand Slam. Relieved of its 10-ton weight, the souped-up Lanc shot upwards like a rocket, pushing us all into our seats while the engines blared with noise. I felt as though I was being squashed down to just a few inches tall as my head pressed down through my shoulders; my arms felt like lead on the control column. Fortunately there was no other kite above us or it could have been disastrous... all of the 20 kites which had taken off landed safely and later photos showed we had dropped two Grand Slams dead on target and smashed two great holes right through the roof of the submarine base so the Germans had to abandon it after two years of work.

[PersonFromPorlock]

About the internal effects of releasing that much weight that quickly from a bomber: during Linebacker 1 I was on a B-52D that EARed (Emergency Armed Release) about 60,000 pounds of bombs more-or-less instantaneously. There was definitely a lurch upward (the pilot later said around 1000 ft), but the real attention-getter was a loud "bong!" from the airframe as a lot of stresses suddenly rearranged themselves.

When it happens, you know it.

[Royalistflyer]

Lots of stresses suddenly rearranging themselves in an aircraft would worry me a lot, having (as I do) misgivings about engineers ever since university.

[RetiredBA/BY]

I do wonder if Tony Cunnane DID go supersonic over Paris. I saw Mach 1 indicated on my Victor conversion, clean aircraft at TTF on the high speed run. As I recall there was no Handling problem so it was probably just an indicated Mach no. and not true and I doubt if the instrument was correctly calibrated for that Mach no.

In BA we cruised our VC10s at Mach .84 indicated (same as the cruise Mach on a Victor 1 if I recall correctly,
.74 on the Valiant and the Canberra) but which was only .825 TRUE. So the Machmeter may not have been telling the true story ( no pun intended!) on the Victor with pods on it !

But as I said earlier, she certainly could go!

[Royalistflyer]

I was never a Victor driver ..... so ..... Cunnane was flying a B1A/K2P at 41,000 ft. The B1A was capable of 645 mph at 35,000 and had a ceiling of 55,000 ft. What the B1A was capable of at 41,000 I don't know (630?) but he had been cruising at 0.9 - 594 mph. Mach 1 at 41,000 is around 660 mph so maybe 30+ mph in a shallow dive over its presumed level max to get an indicated mach 1? Is that too big a leap?

[Pontius Navigator]

RF, not sure where you got your figures from but the Mk 1 were limited to 50,000 ft and the Mk 2 to 56,000 ft. These were set by the ability of the oxygen system. The Mk 2 might get higher but not that much.

[Top West 50]

I am pretty sure that the photo was on the wall in the corridor of Ops at Marham in 1965.

[Pontius Navigator]

TW, very probably, as you know Marham used to host the SAC Bombing crews and CinCinnati SAC would have visited and either asked for or was given a copy.

[Tankertrashnav]

In fairness to Tony Cunnane, in his account of the incident he states that he "saw the mach meter hovering just over mach 1". You may well be right about inaccuracies in calibration, but all Tony could go on was the evidence of the instrument. What does surprise me is they had been cruising at .90. In general we used to cruise at .84 - maybe they were just in a hurry to get home after the detachment!

Btw I have a shrewd idea I know who the co-pilot was, and if I am right I am not in the least surprised!

[pontifex]

Yes, I once saw the tachometer "hovering just over Mach1". Round about 40K East of Greenland heading West. Paying insufficient attention we found ourselves in mountain wave. Poor old autopilot trying to maintain height in a very strong up flow. Throttles closed, airbrakes out. Then we got into the downside of the wave. It took a little while to get back to straight and level! And this was in a perfectly standard tanker.

[The Oberon]

Excellent thread. I first encountered the Victor as a B2R / Blue Steel combination in 1965. I went back to the same aircraft in 1980 when they were K2s.
Was the B2 ever used in a free fall role or was it Blue Steel only?

[RetiredBA/BY]

Yes, I once saw the tachometer "hovering just over Mach1". Round about 40K East of Greenland heading West. Paying insufficient attention we found ourselves in mountain wave. Poor old autopilot trying to maintain height in a very strong up flow. Throttles closed, airbrakes out. Then we got into the downside of the wave. It took a little while to get back to straight and level! And this was in a perfectly standard tanker.
But what was the MACHMETER reading, sorry, hat, coat!

[Pontius Navigator]

The Oberon, the Mk 2 was limited to Blue Steel only. Interesting to speculate what would have happened had the Valiant remained as a tanker.

I think the Mk 1 would have disbanded in the same way as the Vulcan. Then the Mk 2, post Blue Steel may have disbanded too. Its wing was much more flexible and subject to fatigue. In training it had been limited to 220kt compared with the Vulcan at 240 and a dash of 350.

In its tanker version it was re winged with a shorter span.

[garyscott]

The initial post picture, was taken by an 81SQN PR7 out of Tengah, and was staged over Song Song range, 90-way used, 15-millisecond setting, (100 - 500 being more realistic settings to use). As the stick fell away, the PR7 pilot banked a little too steeply as release was called. The first few were off the bottom of the frame before the last had left the bomb bay.
On return from sortie, the Photo Recce Lab guys said that they could take care of that, and the following day, two frames were joined with no visible indication of the image being a composite of two, and all 35 were seen in all their glory. :ok:

[cliver029]

TTN
Ref your post "36" I had a walk round the "various bits" of XH648 in hanger 5 on Friday.
There is a commitment to restore her and having both flown in and worked on her I was saddend to see what had become of her, looking at the amount of corrosion she carries, some in the most akward of places. I do understand that there is an appeal for funding in place somewhere in excess of £400K, but not sure of the politics of a begging bowl here and in the context of comments elswhere regarding the "VTTS" debacle.

cliver029

[Pontius Navigator]

Cliver, I would guess an appeal would depend wholly on the credibility of the project team.

[Tengah Type]

The incident referred to in #3 and #6 was probably during Exercise Showpiece, on 27 March 1965, a show of force/firepower demo for the Malaysian PM Tunku Abdul Rahmen and other dignitaries. It took place over the South China Sea to the east of Singapore. The viewing parties were on the 4 RN Carriers that were sailing in line astern, with a screen of Destroyers and Frigates to the south between them and Indonesia. This was at the height of the Confrontation. A line of RFAs were the screen to the north. The air assets in the flypast were a total of 75 RAF, RAAF, RNZAF and FAA including Canberras, Hunters, Sabres, Javelins and the FAA.
After the first flypast the firepower demo had pairs of Sabres, Hunters and Canberras attacking smoke floats, laid between the Carriers and the RFAs, with guns and rockets.
Following a second flypast the same attackers used bombs and rockets. The Grand Finale was the Victor B1A dropping 35 x 1000lbs bombs. The bombs were fused with VT (Radar) fuses for air burst, but it appears that the seperation distance was miscalculated, as the bombs were exploding prematurely, each set off by the bomb ahead, each closer to the Victor. The first 21 fell as planned, but then the fourth septuple carrier malfunctioned and the gap in the stick saved the Victor from self destruction. The fifth set of 7 fell OK. The aircraft suffered some minor damage.My info on the Victor was from talking to the crew in the bar after the somewhat hectic flight.

[Tankertrashnav]

cliver029 Thanks for the info on 648 at Duxford. I had heard she was in pretty poor shape which is not surprising after 40 plus years I suppose. I have chipped in with my pitifully small contribution to the £400k required, but I very much doubt if that amount can be raised in this way. I felt better about contributing than I would to the latest VTTS appeal because as far as I am aware I wont be contributing to inflated salaries at Duxford which is a part of IWM. I do, in fact, know a curator at IWM and can say that the salaries paid there are modest in the extreme.

[Tengah Type]

The incident referred to in #26 about a Victor making tyre tracks at Butterworth is true. A 15 Sqn crew were tasked with a heavyweight T/O and were surprised to demolish some approach lights and leave furrows in the grass. As usual it was "Pilot Error" so a Flt Cdr was tasked to show how it should be done. Result - the new lights were demolished again and the furrows reploughed. It was agreed that the ODM was a tad optimistic.
Victor K1/K1A were also seen to kick up rooster tails over the sea after T/O at Gan, as the undercarriage dropped to the free flight position after T/O.
Another example was a 5 aircraft 30 sec stream T/O at AKT. As the formation started to taxi, the windsock, which had been giving a slight easterly component, swung round to give a slight westerly component. The lead crew asked for a change to the westerly runway, which was refused as there was "a VC10 100 miles inbound". After a lot of argy bargy with ATC about T/O with unsafe gaps between Stop and Go speeds the runway change was granted. The lead aircraft took the usual 50 sec ground roll, the No2 several hundred feet more, the No3 even further, and No4 further still. ATC scrambled the Crash Crews to go to the point where No 5 was going to crash. In fact we lifted off on the piano keys and damaged the Safeland Barrier, which was down, with our jet blast as we passed a few feet above it. The reason - each aircraft had heated up the air for the following aircraft.
We landed back a couple of hours later to be met by a very apologetic SATCO and a case of ice cold beer. My captain was the aforementioned Flt Cdr from 15 Sqn.

[Pontius Navigator]

I recall one Victor departure/arrival at AKT about 71/72. I think an engine failure after Go. They hit the dump switches and made a tight visual. The fanboy instructed no smoking on the station with a pervading odour of Avtur.

[Tankertrashnav]

I recall lots of Victor takeoffs at Akrotiri. Looking back through the periscope you got a good view of the Vulcan static display as you climbed away ;)

Admittedly rumour had it that some of them occasionally got airborne.

[Pontius Navigator]

TTN, indeed, they used to mark the start of the weekend with the Thursday night landing and the start with a late Monday or early Tuesday departure. Four or five nights in Kyrenia. Of course interrupted by the odd shopping expedition to UK, bacon run to Malta, fish run to Madeira and chaffing dish and alabaster run to Teheran.

[kaitakbowler]

This was forwarded to me by PN for posting. I'll leave the description to him.

PM

[Pontius Navigator]

Cause and effect. Think also that this is what the Black Buck Bang might have looked like in the pre-dawn darkness.

Thank you KB, live 21x1000 lb drop at El Adem circa 1966/67 from a slide taken, IIRC, by a Daily Telegraph photog.

[BEagle]

Think also that this is what the Black Buck Bang might have looked like in the pre-dawn darkness.

As viewed from the 'Puerto Argentino' runway....:\

[RedhillPhil]

Apologies if I've missed a post. Were the B2s (how many B2s were there?) all delivered as Blue Steel carriers or were they modified later? Were they all Blue Steel carriers or were just some of them done? What about the SRs? Was that a separate build on some Bs that were modified?


I know, questions, questions. I've done the web but different sites produce different numbers and answers.

[ORAC]

Think also that this is what the Black Buck Bang might have looked like in the pre-dawn darkness. With the odd black gap for the ones that didn't go BNAG!! And subsequently floated to the surface - like the one that appeared underneath the fuel farm bladders.....

[Pontius Navigator]

Orac, was that the first stick or second?

[ORAC]

No idea - but it was mid 1980s. Like the miines which migrate out of the minefields they move around and pop-up elsewhere.

I see another popped up in 2003 - albeit one dropped by a Harrier.

Falkland Islands News Network - Financial Information and News (http://www.falklandnews.com/text/public/story.cfm?get=2452&source=3)

[ACW418]

RedhillPhil

I was on IX sqn at Coningsby and Cottesmore when new Vulcan B2's were being delivered from Avro's. All of ours were conventional free fall versions. I imagine those being delivered to Scampton may have been Blue Steel as that was their role. Ours was free fall.

ACW

[Pontius Navigator]

ACW, this being a Victor thread . . .

As far as I know they were only BS. I believe Avro made sets of bomb doors and alternative fuselage skin to replace the BS nose indent.

When the Victor BS was converted by BAE it is possible they may have been able to get similarly manufactured bomb doors from HP, but as HP was long gone and they had some diff manufacturing the wings, may be not.

It would be interesting to know what BAE did when they did the conversions.

[ACW418]

PN

We will have to disagree then. I never saw any conversions from Blue Steel to Free Fall at Coningsby and Cottesmore on newly delivered aircraft. But there again I may be wrong.

Sorry for the senior moment - I thought all B2's were Vulcans. Victor K2's came after the B2.

ACW

[Pontius Navigator]

ACW, indeed the Coningsby Wing received brand new Skybolt aircraft. Scampton had the earlier free fall Mk 2 which were then rebuilt as BS with their bomb door sets put in storage. I forgot the BS was a retrofit itself so post-BS was a 'simple' demodding.

If you can find an ex-BS I think you will find the new BS nose fairing. The other difference is the Red Shrimp mounting plate on the port side as well as the starboard.

[Onceapilot]

ORAC. I love the "double Baldrick" technique in your 1000lb EOD report!:)

OAP

[Pontius Navigator]

ORAC. I love the "double Baldrick" technique in your 1000lb EOD report!:)

OAP
A cunning plan