The Victor wasn't suitable for low level work due to fatigue considerations. As a tanker it carried about 59 tonne of fuel, but was hampered by the offload rate of the old Mk20 wing pods. But a useful tanker.
Vulcan B2K only carried 36 tonnes of fuel (98%+24) and was a single point tanker. Much nicer to prod with an F-4 than the Victor though.
VC10K tankers carried 70-81 tonne depending on the mark and were acquired at fire sale rate from Gulf Air, EAAC and ba. So quite a good deal overall. All were 3-point except for the later VC10C1K conversions.
What would have been the point of wasting any money on the Victor? No use as a low level bomber, massive reworking needed to return the K2 to B2 standard and such time could not be afforded until the VC10K was in service, with only the Vulcan B2K available as back-up. TriStar was never developed into its full potential as a tanker; even the 'glass cockpit' upgrade for ZD949 took years to complete - and after 7 years at Arfur Daley Aerospace in Cambridge it was eventually scrapped having never returned to RAF service. An utter fiasco.
Whereas a modernised multi-role Vulcan would certainly have been worth serious consideration. Self-designating with a large LGB payload (not sure how many - but considerably more than the Tornado) would have made Iraqi bridge-plinking a lot simpler... Able to bomb from 100ft to 50000ft, good range, large payload - it just needed proper upgrading.
But really the RAF should have pressed for the B-1B!
Last edited by BEagle; 30th Aug 2018 at 16:14.