Vulcan to the Sky Trust to return Canberra WK163 to display flight
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They should nickname it "Triggers Broom"
WK163 first flew after modification on the 20th May 1956 and whilst undertaking these trials the aircraft obtained the world record for aircraft altitude at 70,310ft on the 28th August 1957
Whilst at Pershore in April 1966 WK163 was converted to Mk B6 specification being fitted with Canberra MK B6 mainplanes and engines
Then during April 1972 the B2 nose was removed and replaced with a standard B6 nose from Canberra XH568
Martin/English Electric B-57 Canberra Registry - A Warbirds Resource Group Site
WK163 first flew after modification on the 20th May 1956 and whilst undertaking these trials the aircraft obtained the world record for aircraft altitude at 70,310ft on the 28th August 1957
Whilst at Pershore in April 1966 WK163 was converted to Mk B6 specification being fitted with Canberra MK B6 mainplanes and engines
Then during April 1972 the B2 nose was removed and replaced with a standard B6 nose from Canberra XH568
Martin/English Electric B-57 Canberra Registry - A Warbirds Resource Group Site
"Mildly" Eccentric Stardriver
Thanks for those links Archimedes. I'm surprised there was a 15 kt speed margin. I would have thought that the aircraft would have been well beyond coffin corner
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: UK East Anglia
Age: 66
Posts: 678
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happened to the low hrs T4 from RAE Bedford? Would that not be a better candidate to get airborne? I have done a bit on T17s, PR7s, B2s, T4s and the PR9. Even worked on some of the same frames as my Dad 40 years earlier.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The last T.4 that Bedford had was WJ992.
And after a (rumoured) attempt to sell it on to another Canberra user seemed to have failed. I assume it was spares recovered and it now sits looking rather sad for itself on the dump at Bournemouth...
V1
And after a (rumoured) attempt to sell it on to another Canberra user seemed to have failed. I assume it was spares recovered and it now sits looking rather sad for itself on the dump at Bournemouth...
V1
They won't be seeing my hard-earned, that's for sure.
I fear no Canberra is capable of stirring the public into stumping up, worthy though it certainly is.
Now a Lightning ................... !
I fear no Canberra is capable of stirring the public into stumping up, worthy though it certainly is.
Now a Lightning ................... !
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Horsham, England, UK. ---o--O--o---
Posts: 1,185
Received 4 Likes
on
2 Posts
I agree, I think the Canberra project will not generate enough public interest or indeed their money ! 
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 98 Likes
on
69 Posts
A decidedly non scientific consensus from people I know who enjoy air shows, but are not spotters / purists carried out last weekend in passing conversation, was that there was no way they would even think about attending one just because a Canberra was flying....that, and their memory extends back more than three years when the last one flew.
" Interesting to see, but nothing out of the ordinary " was the best summation.
However, as an alternative they would like to see, and pay for, a Shack.
" Interesting to see, but nothing out of the ordinary " was the best summation.
However, as an alternative they would like to see, and pay for, a Shack.
Just had a memory triggered. When 360 formed in 1966 we were short of aircraft and a couple of times they lent RRE a couple of crews for a week - as JP I was top of the list each time. I got authorised for a trip in 163, at least I am sure because it was now a B6, and I was recalled from the marshalling point as the high ups decided I could not fly the B6 on a task sortie until I had done a CT sortie. So never did fly a B6
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: London
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Krystal n Chips and Simplethebeast, completely agree with you. I love Cold War Jets but if I was to chuck some money in the bucket it would be for a Shack before a Canberra. Not taking anything away from the Canberra, I'd be interested to see it flying, but its no Vulcan.
The problem seems to me that the Vulcan is a tough act to follow. What would be as spectacular or make the same impact than a Vulcan or even get close...that could realistically return to the air in UK Airspace? Lightning, yes that would do it, but never going to happen. Replacing a 4 engine heavy like a Vulcan with a much smaller 2 engine machine like the Canberra or Mosquito just wont inspire their existing supporters I don't think.
I think they missed an opportunity - they could have acquired an airworthy VC10 and had it delivered to Robin Hood not so long ago, probably with a stock pile of spares. But realistically there seems little chance of seeing any four engined British heavy fly again: Victor, VC10, Nimrod, Comet (Canopus has been outside for 20 years now). So the next best thing has to be the Shackleton.
I wish them all the best, but doubt I'll be putting any money of my own behind either project.
The problem seems to me that the Vulcan is a tough act to follow. What would be as spectacular or make the same impact than a Vulcan or even get close...that could realistically return to the air in UK Airspace? Lightning, yes that would do it, but never going to happen. Replacing a 4 engine heavy like a Vulcan with a much smaller 2 engine machine like the Canberra or Mosquito just wont inspire their existing supporters I don't think.
I think they missed an opportunity - they could have acquired an airworthy VC10 and had it delivered to Robin Hood not so long ago, probably with a stock pile of spares. But realistically there seems little chance of seeing any four engined British heavy fly again: Victor, VC10, Nimrod, Comet (Canopus has been outside for 20 years now). So the next best thing has to be the Shackleton.
I wish them all the best, but doubt I'll be putting any money of my own behind either project.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,802
Received 133 Likes
on
62 Posts
Oh, poor Canberra ... so nice to look at, a great performer, backbone of BC once upon a pre-V-Force ... and now cast into the dustbin of history.
Have you guys no soul??
Have you guys no soul??
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Temporarily missing from the Joe Louis Arena
Posts: 2,131
Received 27 Likes
on
16 Posts
I'm not really that enamoured by the drive to get a Canberra back into the air.
Now if they were looking to return a Lightning (unlikely) or Buccaneer (less unlikely) to the air I'd be interested.
Indeed, the Bucc is good looking and 'The Last All British Bomber', a good sell for the airshow circuit no?
Now if they were looking to return a Lightning (unlikely) or Buccaneer (less unlikely) to the air I'd be interested.
Indeed, the Bucc is good looking and 'The Last All British Bomber', a good sell for the airshow circuit no?
Originally Posted by SirPeterHardingsLovechild
Then during April 1972 the B2 nose was removed and replaced with a standard B6 nose from Canberra XH568
So, only the mainplanes/engine nacelles etc from an unknown B.6 are not the original WK163.
Originally Posted by MPN11
Oh, poor Canberra ... so nice to look at, a great performer, backbone of BC once upon a pre-V-Force ... and now cast into the dustbin of history.
In many ways the Canberra is way more important and significant in the scheme of things, we haven't sold much to the USA post war after all, as well as numerous sales to other countries. And with the Vulcan no more, there's no other 'large' jet with such a spritely performance....especially in PR.9 form, which again makes the choice of WK163 over the already airworthy XH134 even more confusing.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,802
Received 133 Likes
on
62 Posts
i think this is also a practical decision , canberra is relatively simple a/c to maintain compared with something like a shackleton so should be able to manage airshow commitments without to many problems . Lots of work for the NDT man.......!
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: London
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see the Canberra returned to flight, and I agree, it is more important historically than the Vulcan and much more successful - in roles, export success etc. However the point being made here is that it may not be able to "impress" non enthusiasts in the same way the Vulcan could, or I suspect a Shack would. And by "impress" I mean, part with the money to fund it.
However I'm only speculating, it would be marvellous if both airframes could be restored to flight.
However I'm only speculating, it would be marvellous if both airframes could be restored to flight.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Deepest darkest London
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XH568 was on the display circuit briefly before 163 was. And after some time on the ground at Bruntingthorpe. It was broken up after spares recovery and the nose went to the USA.
Possibly to the mob whose name escapes me that operated the other ex RAE pair. WT327 and XH567 Although they were not the only pair that went out there. a pair of ex FRADU TT.18s went before them or followed them
Not sure of the status of any of them (except 1 of the TT.18s is in a museum) or the Aussie B.20 that went over there either.
Canberra gets my vote as they entered service at my old local
V1
Possibly to the mob whose name escapes me that operated the other ex RAE pair. WT327 and XH567 Although they were not the only pair that went out there. a pair of ex FRADU TT.18s went before them or followed them
Not sure of the status of any of them (except 1 of the TT.18s is in a museum) or the Aussie B.20 that went over there either.
Canberra gets my vote as they entered service at my old local
V1
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: UK
Age: 78
Posts: 389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
163 RAE
I flew 163 at RAE (RRS) It was used for a variety of trials flights and like many of our fleet it was a mixture of types. The earlier Canberra marks, but not the PR9, had transport joints just behind the cockpit that could join bits together. Over time the reshuffled bits seemed to go their separate ways and I am not sure which bits went where. We may be fairly sure the wings and centre fuselage are original .
