Did You Fly The Vulcan?? (Merged) [Archive] - Page 8

Tankertrashnav

22nd Nov 2011, 21:46

V Force reunion

Just to let you know the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) website has just been updated. If you haven't had a look yet, go to the site now and have a browse. We can still do with more photos for the gallery, particularly those with named individuals.

If you were serving on the V Force around the time of the Cuban missile crisis and would like to help Aviation Heritage Lincolnshire with a project they are doing on this, go to entry 108 on the guestbook where there are details of who to get in touch with.

We've had a lot of interest already so let us know if you are hoping to come along by completing the enquiry form on the site - you won't be committing yourself, but it just helps us gauge interest.

Tankertrashnav

22nd Dec 2011, 20:50

No, you aren't seeing double - it's just that no-one has posted on this thread since my last one. Anyway we have got a new update on the website V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html). Not a lot new, just a request for people who can man tables to contact us and to let you know that we are having a widows/families table this time, where those whose husbands/fathers etc have passed on can come along and sign in and feel part of the reunion. If you know of anyone in this category who you think would be interested, please help by passing the details of our website to them.

Oh yes and we've changed the nice picture of a Victor for one of some other funny-looking aircraft!

alisoncc

23rd Dec 2011, 05:53

Oh yes and we've changed the nice picture of a Victor for one of some other funny-looking aircraft

Jealousy makes you nasty. I always thought the Vulcan was the V force, and the rest were just cardboard cutouts designed to scare the Soviets into believing we had more nuclear armed airies than we actually had.

Tankertrashnav

23rd Dec 2011, 08:38

Just for balance I saw 558 at Culdrose at last year's air day and once again was reminded what an awesome (in the old sense) aircraft the Vulcan was, and still is.

Mind you I was never jealous of the poor sods stuffed in the hole down the back. And the Victor was prettier too ;)

603DX

23rd Dec 2011, 13:12

A little titbit about the Vulcan, offered as a Christmas period irrelevance.

In 1957 at our annual CCF camp at Waddington, a friend and I crept up the ladder of a gleaming new white painted Vulcan and sat in the two front seats. It was a Sunday, the hangar was empty, and we were wearing cadet uniforms which passed as pukka RAF ones, anyway. We read the Pilots Notes folder resting between the seats, turned to the "Performance Limitations" page, and were astonished to see "Limiting Mach No. 1.01 in a shallow dive". And sure enough, both machmeters had a bug on their dial, set at 1.01!

Despite our colossal cheek in daring to enter a nuclear bomber without a shred of authority, we were both actually very responsible young men, and kept the incredible news that the tin triangle was apparently supersonic entirely to ourselves, for over 50 years.

And then I bought Tony Blackman's excellent book on test flying the Vulcan. Only then did I learn that there was a significant position error with the Vulcan's machmeter sensors, and that the indicated mach figure was an overestimate. It was apparently only ever subsonic, and our shared "secret" was nothing of the kind. What a let-down! :ooh:

Pontius Navigator

23rd Dec 2011, 13:25

IIRC the Mk 1 had a TMN of 0.98 or thereabouts. The Mk 2 was less slippy at I think 0.93 although some said it could be hand-flown with automach trim off at higher speeds.

Got a bit noisy though :)

BEagle

23rd Dec 2011, 16:19

I saw M0.97 after cocking-up the entry to a rapid descent from FL450 and yes, the lower deck did indeed complain about the noise. Quite justifiably!

When entering a max rate descent, you were supposed to close the throttles slowly and extend mid-drag airbrake, which gently pitched the aircraft into a descent after about 7 sec. Once steady, you selected high-drag and allowed the IMN to stabilise at M0.9, converting to 300KIAS.

Normally we would have been at only FL410, but for some reason we were at 450 on that day and had been delayed by ATC from starting our planned descent....

So I thought that if I went to idle thrust, then accelerated against the drag, I'd be able to achieve a higher rate of descent and recover to the planned profile. So - idle thrust, hi-drag airbrake, wait until it was extended, then stuff the nose down and accelerate.... Except that I'd forgotten about the airbrake trim change, which pitched us into an even steeper descent. The IMN rushed up to M0.93 and beyond, the auto mach trim was fully extended giving 75% up elevon just to maintain zero pitch moment - leaving only 25% back stick to reduce the dive angle.... Which took what seemed like ages at the time - but we certainly got back onto the Nav Plotter's desired profile!

Tankertrashnav

23rd Dec 2011, 21:57

Beagle - Ref your 0.97 - raise you Mach 1.0! Interesting tale by Tony Cunnane about nudging through Mach 1.0 in a Victor K1 - overhead Paris!

Paris supersonic - Tony Cunnane's Life and Times (http://www.tonycunnane.co.uk/supersonic.html)

No reason to disbelieve this tale as the Victor was very "slippery" as Tony says. I hasten to add I wasn't on board this aircraft - in any case I never dozed off down the back ;) On air tests we did high speed runs to M0.93 and I dont recall any significant increase in noise.

603DX

31st Dec 2011, 09:33

A further Vulcan titbit. The Pilots Notes folder also had a section giving data on what was rather coyly described as the "Special Weapon". The physical dimensions and weight of this were provided, in feet, inches and pounds.

I can see that the pilots would probably need to know the weight, in connection with loading/fuel management matters, but it puzzled me why they would need to know its length and diameter as well. Any thoughts?

Pontius Navigator

31st Dec 2011, 10:34

603DX, I can't think of any reason except at the time we were told all sorts of trivia. For instance it was not sufficient to know that the 25lb and 28lb practice bombs were painted blue. We were expected to know that one was Duck Egg Blue with a yellow band and the other was French Powder blue with a reddish brown band.

In the late 60s a new training system was introduced called Systems Approach to Training. Initially this was met with stiff resistance from the old hairy instructors but later on it became the norm and as aircraft became increasingly complex it would have been impossible to train aircrew to a similar depth of technical knowledge.

V-force Navs Radar used to undergo a 12 month training course not least so that they could analyse faults and actively assist in the system development. This was later reduced to 4 months and later still a discrete course was abolished and training took place within the OCU syllabus. I have no idea how the most recent trainees compared with those that had undergone the 4 months course.

bigtony

2nd Jan 2012, 13:36

Tks Tankertrashnav for that vote of confidence. Strange though it may seem to some, there are no lies, nor even exaggerations, in any of my stories on my website – there would be plenty of crew members willing to testify if there were. The only increase in noise when I allowed XH648 to reach M1.0 was my voice on the intercom when I gave some advice to the co-pilot! It was all extremely smooth and uneventful until I had to pull the control column fully back into my midriff (and that was a long way I can assure you). If such a thing had to happen, where better than overhead Paris on a clear day and with several Lighnings in tow.

Pontius Navigator

8th Jan 2012, 14:42

Just want to pick newer brains about the ECM aerials.

When I first started we had 3 little bowls of the S-band Red Shrimps, soon after the 3rd (aft) bowl was replaced with a larger L-band aerial.

Then later on we got the X-band jammer with a single rear-facing aerial and later still a second forward facing one.

I notice now that 558 and others do not have the L-band blade aerial. Was it deemed redundant and removed while in service?

The Blue Steel aircraft had a duplicate set of RS aerials on the port side as the missile fin used to disrupt the polar diagram. Dit the L-band aerial affect the X-band jammer polar diagram?

I am doubtful that that was true as the X-band jammer was not supposed to radiate port and starboard.

So, when was the L-band aerial removed?

BEagle

8th Jan 2012, 20:00

Don't forget that any item of avionic equipment carried by XH558 is required to be serviceable. If it cannot be made serviceable, it must be removed before flight.

Pontius Navigator

8th Jan 2012, 20:16

BEagle, that is a possibility but I seem to recall that there are others out in museums without the aerial. Anyway, it is only an aerial. IIRC the other dielectrics are all in place but I bet the electronics are not.

ZH875

8th Jan 2012, 20:27

It was rare to swap the no 3 shrimp cans for a Blue Diver set I think we only did it two or three times between 1980 & 1984 all you had to remember was to duck in the right place when moving around the back of the aircraft otherwise the blade made a nice dent in the top of your head

BEagle

8th Jan 2012, 20:28

ECM antenna fit was quite varied across the fleet in the late 70s/early 80s. Barely 2 aircraft had the same antennae; Waddington had the I-band 'jammer' (or rather the Sparrow home-on-jam missile magnet) and some ex-GV aircraft had special fits in order to be able to react to whichever antique emitter the Americans had managed to wheel out of a museum to which we could actually react.....

The whole V-force EW saga of the late 70s was an utter farce as, apart from chaff and IRDs, the rest of the so-called ECM kit was complete junk which couldn't jam a single contemporary Soviet threat.

Pontius Navigator

8th Jan 2012, 21:53

ZH, the standard fit in the 60s was 2xRS S-band and one L-band. From what you are saying in the 70s and 80s they were usually 3xRS.

What I have seen though is 2xRS and a blanking plate on the 3rd position.

On the X-band jammer, this was a rapidly deployed Mod after the fortuitous recovery of the Skip Skin radar. The RBW was also tuned that radar. One problem was training as the frequency range of the jammer was outside the range of British AI radars, ie no training mode.

We had to train against the F4E. While BEagle has a point, we were not fighting against the F4J etc.

ZH875

9th Jan 2012, 06:40

Iirc the Shrimp cans in position 3 were dummy cans with just the water glycol connections.the 13281 aerials were 2 and a blank or all 3 present.a blank would probably have been fitted after removing the blade antenna instead of refitting the 13281. For the Falkland conflict a dash 10 pod was carried on the starboard underwing pylon. One dash10 pod met an untimely end under a fork lift truck

Pontius Navigator

9th Jan 2012, 08:25

ZH, thanks, that would seem to indicate that the L-band jammer was removed some time in the 70s.

It is worth remembering that the Red Shrimps, Blue Diver, Green Palm and L-band jammer were all penetration aids for high level attacks whereas from the early 60s they were to be used exclusively on exit.

Now a pragmatist might have argued that the number of aircraft surviving and needing an exit aid would be so low, and the threat also significantly reduced, that money could be better spent elsewhere. Money for WE177, TFR, DD72M, HRS etc etc.

I know in the later 70s there was a general trawl on the removal or cessation of servicing or redundant equipments. Maybe the Blue Diver was such and equipment that could be removed without affecting weight and balance.

Anyone else throw light on this?

PS, I see that 655 on the other thread appears to have its L-band aerial in place. As the 301s had been FEAF assigned I wonder if that was a hangover from those days where ECM was still required as a penetration aid although in the late-60s with WE177 a low altitude delivery was still required.

BTW I remember one low level mission had a minimum overflight height of 5000 feet as the target was in a narrow gorge.

anjuna

25th Jan 2012, 10:08

Pontius Navigator

25th Jan 2012, 10:19

"There used to be this funny oil which when used on pink rubber sleeves enabled them to slide down over a soldered contact"

That liquid was (still is?) called Hellerine and it had a wonderful smell!!

There's no accounting for taste. Pink rubber mmmmmmm.

Next someone will say they liked the feel and texture of the black rubber thingies :eek:

scorpion63

25th Jan 2012, 14:48

Hellerine fluid was more commonly known as Monkey Spun*k

Pontius Navigator

25th Jan 2012, 15:23

Scorpion, thank you for tossing that in. I think you make my point rather less eloquently.:\

scorpion63

25th Jan 2012, 16:18

My only deviation is a compass correction card

daved123

26th Jan 2012, 15:29

Anjuna, I used these extensively in the '60s and '70s, the sleeves were available in many colours and were applied by dipping the prong tips of the Hellermann applicator tool in Hellerine, inserting the prongs into the sleeve (you did remember to slide the sleeve on the wire before soldering, didn't you ?? ) squeezing the handle to open the three prongs and sliding the sleeve over the connection. Unsqeeze the handle and remove prongs.
The tool was colloquially known as the "virgin urger", that must have been referring to using a new sleeve each time...
probably too much info but there you are.
DaveD

ChristiaanJ

26th Jan 2012, 16:34

ZH875

27th Jan 2012, 07:44

Hellerine fluid was more commonly known as Monkey Spun*k

'twas Heller Snot in my day :O

alisoncc

27th Jan 2012, 08:47

I always knew it as Hellermann oil not Hellerine.

Any guesses as to what this is? It was issued to us in 1964 at Finningley - 230 OCU.

http://users.on.net/~alisoncc/panduit1.jpg

It was a special tool for tightening Panduit straps and then cutting the end off. Nylon cable ties were invented by Panduit and were just then being introduced into the RAF.

GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU

28th Jan 2012, 12:08

I always knew it as Hellermann oil not Hellerine.

As a lad, I used to hear both descriptions. Aunty Betty's Flying/Sailing Clubs, though, tend to discourage trade names.

As my 30 year old bottle of Hellerine is now too faded to photograph;

http://www.rapidonline.com/catalogueimages/module/M062477P01WL.jpg

Pontius Navigator

29th Jan 2012, 13:54

Wonder if anyone can recall an incident in the late '60s regarding an incident of pitot icing?

IIRC a Vulcan on the low level route was flying up Loch Linnhe when the Nav Rad saw the doppler groundspeed was down near 115 kts but the ASIs read 250. Fortunately the crew assumed the doppler was right and affected a recovery.

It would have been easy to assume that the doppler had simply unlocked and drifted down.

I seem to recall that the pitot heating had been left off. I have a vague memory of the nav team but won't speculate further.

Any ideas?

morton

30th Jan 2012, 01:06

Hellerine, tintalite and trying to write cable idents onto rubber sleeves with sharpened matches! Those were the days! It, and other mentions, brought back some memories of RAF Lincolnshire along with the Rutland annex. Back in the late 60’s I was a Linney at Cottesmore. In 1968 we were told the Vulcans were off to Cyprus in 1969. About that time it seemed to me that all our shiny new ones were then swapped for the cast – offs that Waddington did not want.

Ref post 1666; it was also evident that the Waddington Aircraft had a different fit to the Cottesmore ones. Don’t know the exact difference as I was a fresh faced electrician training to be a weight lifter, contortionist and acrobat by doing TRU, Frequency Changer and Battery changes whilst balancing on top of a set of wobbly steps. There seemed to be permutations of plates fitted between engine pairs with domes or not fitted on them.

Tenuous connection - I also did a spell in the Window bay. The Type 26 was absolutely brilliant for decorating Christmas trees by the way! Many years later, when prepping the Aircraft for the Falklands, I saw we were still using it. Very surprised that War window (tin box, parachute etc) wasn’t used. It wasn’t as if any other Aircraft had the capability to deploy it – the Window boxe containers were enormous! Talking of which, hands up all those who managed to put the dustbin lid under the port boxes orifices whilst watching the bundles drop out of the starboard ones! :ugh:

QRA seemed to come round quite often and was a real bore. One time there was a need to replace the Rover (AAPP) on one of the Aircraft. It was decided that it would be done on the Pan. The guys came over from the Line to do it and I went over to have a look / gain experience / stay awake. I became involved by operating the mini-hoist. The old Rover came out OK but the new one was a bit of a problem. The Sootie had to put a pip pin in to secure the Rover and this was located right on top. It was a case of almost but not quite. So I was asked to wind the mini-hoist until the clutch ‘broke’.

Still not quite high enough. Again I was asked to do it and this time the cable broke! :uhoh: The Rover dropped down, bounced off the rear tyres and rolled 20 feet away. A stunned silence! Luckily for the Sootie all he experienced was ripped overalls. So the ‘lets do the job in QRA to save time’ ended up as an Aircraft swap at stupid o’clock.

Ref post 1684; don’t know about Pitot heads icing up but I did once see a RAT that had become a block of ice. It was a scheduled RAT drop and when he came back we had freezing fog. Don’t know if a couple of circuits were done but, after I marshalled him onto the Pan, I saw that the RAT blades were fused with ice. It would have been no use in an emergency!

Ref 1643; the delights of entering an empty Bomb Bay (seemed to spent a lot of time playing with the Artificial feel units as I recall) knew no bounds compared with squirming passed one fitted with O and / or A tanks. One Chief I knew was very good at diagnosis from afar and excellent at delegation for defects requiring Bomb Bay access. How can I put this? I think it would be fair to say that he would have had trouble entering it without any extra tanks to hinder his progress.

And lastly. One of the strangest things I ever did was wiring up an angle poise light at the 6th seat position. A bed was also laid out over the bomb aimers position. This was for an Air Officer allegedly going to America for a meeting but, we heard, in reality it was a fishing trip. Anyone know if this was true? I reckon it was mid/late ‘68.

Happy days!:)

Pontius Navigator

30th Jan 2012, 06:49

In 1968 we were told the Vulcans were off to Cyprus in 1969. About that time it seemed to me that all our shiny new ones were then swapped for the cast – offs that Waddington did not want.

The Far East role was transferred to the Waddington wing. They were allocated the 301 engined aircraft as they had more powerful engines and better suited to the higher temperatures out there.

the Falklands, I saw we were still using it. Very surprised that War window (tin box, parachute etc) wasn’t used. It wasn’t as if any other Aircraft had the capability to deploy it

Type 150 DAW. The idea was to sow random bundles at random points behind all the aircraft as they exited Russian airspace and confuse picture compliation. With a solitary Vulcan it would simply have pointed the way home.

Ref post 1684; don’t know about Pitot heads icing up but I did once see a RAT that had become a block of ice. It was a scheduled RAT drop and when he came back we had freezing fog. Don’t know if a couple of circuits were done but, after I marshalled him onto the Pan, I saw that the RAT blades were fused with ice. It would have been no use in an emergency!

The RATs job had been done. It was ineffective below 25,000 ft unlike the Victor 2 which worked at low level.
And lastly. One of the strangest things I ever did was wiring up an angle poise light at the 6th seat position. A bed was also laid out over the bomb aimers position. This was for an Air Officer allegedly going to America for a meeting but, we heard, in reality it was a fishing trip. Anyone know if this was true? I reckon it was mid/late ‘68.

Happy days!:)

Yes, the AO was actually CDS - Mountbatten himself for the Eagle River Conference. A liney complained to his wife, who complained to the Currant Bun, who splashed it all over the front page.

Mountbatten was not best pleased and had to cancel his trip to prove the story was false. He let his displeasure be known; it didn't help the stn cdr's career. To be honest, meeting the USA chiefs of staff would have been a god thing even if there was a large element of socialising as they would all be free of the direct pressures of work.

morton

30th Jan 2012, 12:01

Thanks P-N, that has cleared up a few things I have wondered about for all these years! I liked your freudian slip meeting the USA chiefs of staff would have been a god thing. Having read Mountbattens biography you were pretty accurate!

Blacksheep

30th Jan 2012, 12:22

Talking of which, hands up all those who managed to put the dustbin lid under the port boxes orifices whilst watching the bundles drop out of the starboard ones! :ugh:Yup! In my case, the OC Engineering was mooching around and peered up at the sound emanating from the orifice. A packet of window plopped out at his feet, then burst and turned his shoes into something that would have looked nice on a Xmas tree. As my Chiefy (Geordie Wray) said at the time "Whey that was a rotten shot! Yer shoulda got him on the heed" I got two weeks in the Battery Bay for that little mistake.

Talking of Hellerine, we used all sorts of weird processes back then including a connector that used a little insertion tool and special lubricant for inserting contacts. The instructions informed one to "lubricate the tip of the tool prior to insertion", which is fair enough but then went on to say "the tool should continue to be be rotated in a clockwise direction, even when withdrawing from the hole"

I never managed the latter contortion until my first visit to Thailand a few years later. :E

Pontius Navigator

30th Jan 2012, 12:30

I see the Eagle River lodge opened in 1968 Eagle River Trout Lodge - Fly Fishing Labrador, Canada (http://flyfishinglabrador.com/) so I can understand why he was so peed off.

I believe Mountbatten had declined crew drills and a parachute on the grounds that when his time was up . . . I also think he would have had a steward along to serve him which could have meant an 8-man crew if M did not use the 7th seat.

Blacksheep

31st Jan 2012, 09:03

With Mountbatten as CDS, if the trip included an official meeting with the US Chiefs of Staff at an "Eagle River Conference" he could have used one of the VIP Comets at Lyneham. Their movements weren't exactly in the public domain so the trip would have remained both private and justifiable. So, why would he choose to fly in the cramped cabin of a Vulcan? There is more to it than meets the eye.

Pontius Navigator

31st Jan 2012, 09:21

BS, there may be many reasons, I don't know. The Vulcan was just about to finish as our deterrent. It was also flavour of the month for transatlantics. There were Air Officers doing it although they tended to have a window seat. It may not have been in the same class as a VIP Comet but it could knock a good hour off the flight out and a bit more on the way back.

It was military and macho and could have been a case of one-upmanship.

It would certainly have been more covert (in theory) than Lyneham although I would agreen that logic was flawed. At Lyneham it would just have been another VIP flight to out-of-sight, out-of-mind. At cottesmore it was anything but.

Nav Rad

31st Jan 2012, 14:28

Chums,

I just have to get in on this riveting chat ref CDS, between Morton, Pontius etc.

My recollection and log book seem to be at variance with your some of your thoughts. I was at Cottesmore on 35 Sqn Vulcans as Nav Rad Leader on the Sqn. It was quite normal to have a 'VIP Fit' for those 'on high' to travel in the Vulcan. A small light/angle poise was put in the rear of the cockpit around the 6th seat area and the visual bomb aimer's position for the VIP, plus a small table affair for reading and writing and somewhere to lie down. The Air Officer would, dependent on circumstances and his piloting ability on the Vulcan, sit in either the 6th seat or co-pilot's seat for take off and land. During the trip he would also, again how it was felt, sit in the 6th seat, co-pilot's seat or lie in the nose. The single Crew Chief travelled in the 7th seat.

I can't comment on the Mountbatten story. However, Morton is absolutely correct in Cottesmore, the year and the month (not America) for my story as I took the CDS out to RCAF Goose Bay in the middle of1968.

We had a pre-flight meal with the CDS, Sir Charles Elworthy, the Stn Cdr and Wg Cdr Ops in the Cottesmore Aircrew Buffet, consisting of a steak meal and very good red wine! We took off in Vulcan XH562, on 15 July 1968 - 5hrs 5 mins to Goose. On landing Sir Charles was flown up to his meeting and whatever else was planned for him. We flew the BC Can low level routes on the next few days and returned with him on 25 July 1968 - 4hrs 35mins.

As an aside it was normal for us, as all V-Force crews did, to buy frozen salmon from the RAF Goose Detachment and have it stowed in an unheated compartment in the aircraft (not the bomb bay that was heated) to keep it frozen on the trip home and thus get a lovely salmon to use when we wanted. On this particular occasion, when we, as crew, asked to purchase our salmon, we got the brush off from a new regime at Goose who said that we as crew couldn't have any salmon but we were to carry a salmon back for the CDS whether we liked it or not. To say that we were all unhappy is an understatement. However, to get us some sort of satisfaction we asked the groundcrew at Goose, on this occasion, to put the CDS's salmon in the bomb bay. Somehow or other the bomb bay temp accidentally got turned up on the trip home!

Evanelpus

31st Jan 2012, 14:34

As an aside it was normal for us, as all V-Force crews did, to buy frozen salmon from the RAF Goose Detachment and have it stowed in an unheated compartment in the aircraft

It wouldn't have been inside the recuperator bay panels in the MLG bays would it? Could explain the 'orrible stink that eminated from them and corrosion on the front spars! :oh:

Pontius Navigator

31st Jan 2012, 15:29

Nav Rad (DM?), you are undoubtedly correct in what you say. Checking CDS, Mountbatten relinquished that position in Jul '65. Now I made the mistake of assuming that the 1968 date for the Eagle River Lodge miust have been the date for Mountbatten. I should have checked.

I was at Cottesmore then but could not remember for a fact if it was when I was there.

Morton is also clearly referring to your trip.

The Mountbatten incident was also true and given the dates - Cottesmore '65 must have been the event and planned as a swan song to say goodbye too. Your Jul 68 date makes it probable that it was Mountbatten's planned farewell in Jul 65.

Tankertrashnav

1st Feb 2012, 21:37

Just to let you all know how the bookings for the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) are going. So far we have had over 300 indicate their intention to come, which I am pretty sure is more than we had at this stage last time, so it looks like the event is going to be very well attended. We will be updating the website in just over a couple of weeks with the latest info on events at the reunion, and with a list of the guys (and girls) who will be manning the signing in tables. At the same time we will give details on how to book for the evening event, but I must stress it's no good emailing about that yet, we won't be ready to take firm bookings until the website update.

I notice that this time we have had a very good uptake from groundcrew, but a noticeable drop in the number of notifications from aircrew. Of course if you are not intending going to the evening function there is nothing to stop you just turning up on the day, but it would help us judge numbers if you could let us know in advance. So come on pilots, navs and AEOs, get on the website and fill in the Enquiry Form and fire it off to us ASAP.

See you there.

Tankertrashnav

17th Feb 2012, 21:08

V Force reunion website update

Just to let you know that the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) website has just been updated. For those of you who are coming to the reunion the most important new information is on the Saturday evening reception. If you are planning to go to this function please check out the website as soon as you can and you will find instructions on how to book. Dont delay, as the evening function was fully booked on both previous reunions.

For fans of 558, the new photo on the website was taken by reunion organiser and former Vulcan nav Don Chadwick from a lakeland hillside as she flew over Windermere at low level a while back. Even a dyed in the wool Victor fan like me has to admit it's a super pic!

macwood

19th Mar 2012, 09:09

As a hairy armed crewchief and not knowing about these things,we arrived above Oha-u at about 40000 ft due to a curtain of cu-nimbs surrounding the islands.
I was perched on the ladder between the seats -as one did ,-when the boss elected to do one.
The amazing thing was that I was totally unaware of any change of attitude until ,looking straight ahead you could see the island in plan view.
We must have been near vertical...so I thought I'd better get strapped in.
I often wonder about the captain -think it was F B -bound to go far and a diamond geezer.

Tankertrashnav

26th Mar 2012, 16:58

The latest update to the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website has just gone online. The main news is that we are very pleased that Vulcan XH 588, which is is scheduled to fly its first airtest of the year on the 28th April, is planning to overfly the museum at some stage during the flight. No details of timings as yet, but if you want to see her in the air make sure you come along to the reunion. We're also getting a visit from the BBMF Dakota, and there will be scale flying models of all three V's doing a flying demonstration, so there will be plenty to see in the air as well as on the ground.

All you need to know is on the site, including how to book for the evening function, so don't delay, only a month to go now!

macwood

3rd Apr 2012, 10:46

Just picked up this long lead thread about the vip trips to Eagle River.

As a coopted crew chief I was invited to "Flunky" for an AVM "Don't tell him your name P---"

No extra staff....just P---ey in the sixth seat and YT pandering to his every need in what they laughingly called the 7th. Never had an 8th to my knowledge.

Invited to the pre-briefing in the aircrew feeder, I remember the CO going on at great length about what container the strawberries and cream should be served in....cut glass or mess silver. Decisions-decisions..expect he got a gong for that!

joemcg

3rd Apr 2012, 18:36

The Falklands Most Daring Raid .1 of 3.

This gripping film tells the humorous yet heroic story of how a crumbling, Cold War-era Vulcan flew the then-longest-range bombing mission in history and how a Second World War vintage bomb changed the outcome of the Falklands War. Yet astonishingly, this story of one of the RAF's greatest modern feats has been downplayed into near obscurity by history. On 30 April 1982, the RAF launched a secret mission: to bomb Port Stanley's runway, putting it out of action for Argentine fighter jets. The safety of the British Task Force depended on its success. However, the RAF could only get a single Vulcan 8000 miles south to the Falklands, because just one bomber needed an aerial fleet of 13 Victor tanker planes to refuel it throughout the 16-hour round-trip. From start to finish, the seemingly impossible mission was a comedy of errors, held together by pluck and ingenuity.

LiveLeak.com - The Falklands Most Daring Raid .1 of 3.

LiveLeak.com - The Falklands Most Daring Raid.2 of 3.

LiveLeak.com - The Falklands Most daring Raid.3 of 3.

joemcg

3rd Apr 2012, 18:39

I see there's already another thread on this programme at:

http://www.pprune.org/military-aircrew/479504-falklands-most-daring-raid.html

Tankertrashnav

4th Apr 2012, 16:08

Cuban Missile Crisis 1962

This year marks the 50th anniversary of the Cuban Missile Crisis. The BBC regional programme 'Inside Out' are making a film to mark the anniversary, and with a view to talking to anyone who was involved at the time, Lucy Smickersgill of BBC Leeds will be attending the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) at Newark Aircraft Museum on April 28th. She would particularly like to talk to those who were on QRA at the time, as well as ground crews. If this is you and you are going to be at the reunion, send me a message via my link on the website, and I will forward your name to her if you would like to get involved.

Midland 331

11th Apr 2012, 18:01

An interesting clip of the last days of Scampton's Vulcans..

MACE The Media Archive for Central England | Media clip617: The Last Days of a Vulcan Squadron (http://www.macearchive.org/Archive/Title/617-the-last-days-of-a-vulcan-squadron/MediaEntry/329.html)

Barksdale Boy

16th Apr 2012, 07:14

Was anyone else struck by the extraordinary similarity between Alex Cassie ("Great Escape" forger, portrayed in the film by Donald Pleasence - and whose photograph appears in a recent Telegraph online obituary) and distinguished PPruner FJJP, aka Sid (acting O/C 617 Sqn for about half an hour sometime in 1981)?

Tankertrashnav

16th Apr 2012, 15:46

Just to let you all know that the last update to the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website has just gone online. Just one or two final details, one of which is to let you know we still have tickets left for the evening buffet, so act now if you'd like to come to what should be a very good evening.

The homepage features a very nice picture of a 29 Squadron Lightning and a 57 Squadron Victor K1a over the Alps taken by our very own Lightning Mate - thanks for that LM.

Tankertrashnav

20th Apr 2012, 14:35

Further to the post about the BBC team talking to guys involved in the Cuban Missile crisis, Lucy James from BBC4 is involved in making a programme called The Golden Age of Flying 1945-65 and is also coming along to Newark and is hoping to speak to anyone who ever flew 558, which is scheduled to make an appearance during the day, and 594 which is the static Vulcan exhibit at the museum. In addition she'd also like to speak to crew chiefs, and indeed anyone who worked on either of these aircraft when they were in service.

I'm not sure about the practice of giving contact details on here, but she has supplied them to me to pass on to anyone who can help, so if you would like to speak to her at Newark on the day could you please give her a call in advance on 0121 567 7135.

Lightning Mate

20th Apr 2012, 16:09

Here's wishing you all a high fuel transfer rate.......

http://i636.photobucket.com/albums/uu82/Lightning_29/SmileyDrunk-1.gif

edit: ttn please check PM.

Tankertrashnav

21st Apr 2012, 08:53

Cheers LM - great picture on the PM :ok:

BEagle

23rd Apr 2012, 20:05

A couple of queries:

What time does it start on Saturday?

How much is the entrance fee - and does that include parking?

Tankertrashnav

24th Apr 2012, 16:31

Starts at 1000 and goes on till about 5. Expected visits from BBMF Dakota and Vulcan 558 some time after 1400 - but no hard and fast time as yet. Entrance fee to the museum is £5.50 (includes parking) and you'll need £1.50 (right money please) for your reunion name badge, or else no-one will know who you are!

All the gen you'll need is on the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) webite.

Looking forward to seeing you there.

BEagle

27th Apr 2012, 06:57

Thanks for the gen; I must be getting dimwitted, because I couldn't find any reference to the start time on your website, so thanks for the information.

Incidentally, I sent off an Enquiry Form, but didn't receive any reply or confirmation of receipt.

YoWindow is predicting a wet morning, but a dry afternoon. Let's hope that second part proves correct!

558 flew twice yesterday, so hopefully we'll see an appearance on Saturday!

Vulcan_baby

28th Apr 2012, 07:22

Hi all,
Been a while since I jumped on and posted. If anyone catches this before they leave for the reunion I thought I would say that my father, Adrian 'Taff' Traylor is over from France for it and myself and my son will be accompanying him to the reunion. We'll probably be there from around 11am if there is anyone who happened to want to catch up.

Looking forward to seeing any of you there (in a not knowing what anyone looks like kind of way). Let's hope the weather holds off.

MAN777

28th Apr 2012, 19:55

Great BBC short news item, includes some great stills of vintage RAF jets crowding Ascension

BBC News - Vulcan Falklands bombing raid remembered (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17878657)

BEagle

29th Apr 2012, 07:22

Excellent afternoon yesterday at the Newark Air Museum, Tankerstrashnav! Thanks for arranging such an enjoyable day - the bonus of the vile weather easing off for just long enough for 558 to fly past a few times was the icing on the cake!

NAM Newark Air Museum Aircraft List (http://www.newarkairmuseum.org/aircraft_list.html) is an excellent museum with many rare exhibits ( I seem to have flown, or flown in, variants of about 14 of the types they have there...:uhoh:). They also have a complete ex-Coningsby F4 simulator; would love to have a play in that!

The new A46 from Newark to Leicester made the journey a breeze - sad that it runs over the old Officers' Mess at Syerston though. Way back when I was first in the RAF, the drive from Cranwell to the Fosse Way south west of Leicester was a nightmare of single track roads and the infamous Leicester 'ring road' - nowadays its dual carriageway all the way to the A5!

I hope the evening went well and that there aren't too many headaches today!

Looking forward to the next one - thanks again!

ZH875

29th Apr 2012, 16:30

Last time I was surveying in that area, the old Officers Mess building was falling apart, but was not under the new road, the back road from Flintham was diverted behind the mess.

The road by the airfield was moved nearer the airfield and widened, thus the mess building was to the right of the road as you drive from Nottingham and not under it

Tankertrashnav

5th May 2012, 09:51

Can I make a request for all who attended the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) and who took photographs to submit some of them to the website for inclusion in a reunion gallery. The website manager's email address is at the foot of the gallery page. Obviously a lot of you will have taken shots of the Vulcan flypast, but we are just as interested in pictures of people at the event, either at the museum or at the evening do at Newark Golf Club. If you have any of individuals or groups we'd like those, but if at all possible could you identify people by name, as it makes the pictures that much more interesting. Thanks a lot.

Vick Van Guard

9th May 2012, 11:25

An all too brief air to air video of 558 can be found here:

| PlanesTV (http://www.planestv.com/video)

Well worth a look. :ok:

SteveMRobson

23rd May 2012, 19:41

Bournemouth Aviation Museum is holding a 'Vulcan Day' on 14th July where we hope we can assemble some Vulcan and Victor aircrew. Why Victor - because I want to create a 'Black Buck' cabin which would not be complete without a Victor presence. The museum has an HDU and a pod, as well as its Vulcan nose. See Bournemouth Aviation Museum - A hands-on aviation experience (http://www.aviation-museum.co.uk)
The cockpit is not usually open but we hope to open it to those who are agile enough and to hopefully have a Vulcan man present - agility permitting.

ACW418

31st May 2012, 20:50

Steve,

Check your PM's.

ACW

SpringHeeledJack

9th Jun 2012, 13:53

I got talking to a chap yesterday and somehow the conversation ended up about his grandfather who was aircrew on Vulcans/Victors during the cold war years. So....The aircraft had been on QRA/standby with live atomic weapons onboard, when at nearly the end of the duty time a Mickey Finn was called and they departed eastwards. Somewhere over the North Sea a single engine had a problem/compressor stall and thence started a tense period of where to land (RAF Germany) was mentioned, though not where (rejected) and the aircraft finally recovered on 3 engines back to the UK direct. I would put the time frame as more 1960's to 1970's than later. Anyone remember such an incident ?

SHJ

Yellow Sun

9th Jun 2012, 14:00

SpringHeeledJack

9th Jun 2012, 16:06

Plausible except that he did not get airborne with a nuclear weapon on board; shape maybe, weapon no.

Would that mean, in general terms that nuclear weapons were never flown by the RAF ? Surely in times of heightened tension such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, the QRA aircraft would've been pre-loaded and ready to go awaiting 'go, no-go' confirmation once airborne and then armed ?

SHJ

Yellow Sun

9th Jun 2012, 16:24

Would that mean, in general terms that nuclear weapons were never flown by the RAF ?

I felt that my post was unambiguous, but just to make it quite clear, we did not fly with nuclear weapons loaded; i.e no fissile material was carried. If you wish to understand QRA and associated procedures then you may wish to read this thread on another forum (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?t=74152&highlight=exmpa).

YS

SpringHeeledJack

9th Jun 2012, 17:58

Thanks for the informative thread steer YS, as always so much to read and take in and learn :) The chap with whom I spoke to related that his grandfather was very stressed with the whole nursing the aircraft back home scenario, moreso due to the ordnance aboard. Might they have been carrying other non-nuclear devices, but stuff that could go off if a crash landing had taken place ? He mentioned that the grandfather started sweating as he recounted the episode many years later, and as an ex-WW2 pilot was not inclined to exaggerate and only recounted the tale when prompted by other family members. As to whether he was Vulcan or Victor I do not know.

SHJ

Pontius Navigator

9th Jun 2012, 20:31

SHJ, the answer is still no.

As for sweating with a single engine failure, the answer would be 'no sweat'. We frequently shut engines down as a precaution. In the mid-60s the MTBF (Mean time between failures) was around 300 hours; this was a lot better than some other types where it was 25 hrs. A good reason why the RAF hung on to twin-engines when the USAF was happy with single-engine fast-jets.

Then a quick glance at the map would have shown that landing in Germany would have been a nonsense - his home base would have been nearer for much of the time with Denmark or Norway being more sensible on many routes.

Now he might have sweated had one engine blown up and its adjacent one been shut down as a precaution.

SpringHeeledJack

10th Jun 2012, 00:07

Now he might have sweated had one engine blown up and its adjacent one been shut down as a precaution

I believe that that might well have been the case on reflection. The chap recounting the tale seemed to indicate that because of the ordnance being carried the only choice(s) were RAF bases within Germany or back to the UK. As I said he seemed genuine and not trying to impress me with a tall tale, but as ever who really knows ?

SHJ

Tankertrashnav

13th Jun 2012, 16:03

SHJ - the answer to your question "who really knows?" is - any of the many ex V Force aircrew and groundcrew who are members of this forum. As Yellow Sun and P-N have stated quite unequivocally, "bombed-up" aircraft on QRA would only ever have got airborne in the event of an actual scramble - ie in the event of nuclear war. They would never had done this as part of an exercise - there would be no training value in so doing. I think I may be right in saying that the only time that V aircraft ever carried nuclear weapons in the air was during Operation Grapple when Valiants dropped live weapons after taking off from Christmas Island.

The situation was of course quite different with the US B52 force who routinely flew with weapons on board. The risks of this practice were brought home when a B52 carrying four nuclear bombs crashed in the vicinity of Palomares in Spain after a mid-air collision during refuelling (story here 1966 Palomares B-52 crash - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1966_Palomares_B-52_crash))

Treble one

14th Jun 2012, 00:04

TTN, YS, Beagle and PN, and any other V Bomber crew watching in.

I am extremely interested in the operations of the V force during the Cold War, and have a specific question regarding the response of the V force to heightened international tensions, for want of a better description.

My understanding (from many fine tomes including Wynn and Hennesey) is that at Alert Condition 2, the V force would disperse to their dispersal bases ARMED with their weapon (be it Blue Steel, Yellow Sun. or perhaps post 1969 WE177?) I remember reading/hearing somewhere that MacMillan REFUSED to order Alert Condition 2 during the Cuban Crisis, because he thought that would give an unequivocal sign to the Russians that the UK/NATO were primed to attack, thus escalating the already heightened tensions maybe to the point of no return and potentially illiciting a Soviet first strike.

In that case, I was wondering if Alert Condition 2 was either seen as or even briefed as 'the point of no return' in the V-force, and in effect, was just a re-posioning prelude to the inevitable Alert Condition 3 (i.e. to attack your pre-prepared targets in Eastern Europe), to prevent the V force being wiped out by a first strike at their home bases?

I would appreciate your thoughts and comments, if I'm not asking and questions that you feel you can't answer.

Best regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

14th Jun 2012, 06:41

Alert Condition 3 was indeed a main base generation with all aircraft armed and fully fuelled. Alert Condition 2 was the point of great weakness in the process.

Aircraft were loaded but the weapons were unarmed and aircraft was only fuelled for transit to dispersal. The exception would be the additional main base aircraft. On the Vulcan bases this would make 4 total and and other 4 at Finningley. Vulcan-wise available aircraft would increase from 9 to 16.

When Alert Condition 1 was declared then aircraft would disperse with the first aircraft having to get airborne in 15 minutes. On one exercise at Waddo we got about 17 off in 33 minutes. One had not even been declared loaded, it simply finished loading and departed. A Hastings also had to get airborne as he was in the way.

Operationally, en route to dispersal aircraft would be RT silent and land on a green. We were briefed not to switch ON any radios in case we received any confusing messages.

It wasn't stated but it was clearly in case we heard a scramble message; we would have been wholly impotent so the period between Alert Condition 1 and coming on state at dispersal was a critical time.

The other weak points were with a Scramble Cancellation with the whole force possibly airborne and having to return and turnround.

So Alert Condition 3 was seen as less provocative than Alert Condition 1 and the force was more vulnerable to missile strike. OTOH is was on state and inside the ring of steel and avoided that vital vulnerability period between generation and Alert Condition 1.

Pontius Navigator

14th Jun 2012, 08:14

Alert Condition One was signalled with the codeword Prometheus.

Now I had read the book The Penetrators Set in the corridors of power of the USAF's Strategic Air Command, the 1965 novel The Penetrators is the story of a maverick Royal Air Force exchange officer who leads a mock Avro Vulcan bomber attack on the USA. Replete with quotes from Curtis LeMay, Robert S McNamara and other key figures of the Cold War era, The Penetrators foreshadowed the kind of richly detailed, political-military thriller . . . The book also strongly argued the case for the US's manned long-range bomber force, which was then in danger of being phased out in favour of ICBMs.

And Gray used the same codeword. Later in the book he used Apocalypse.

Now although Prometheus as the Alert Condition 1 codeword was an open Secret the codewords for Scramble and Positive Release were not. Was Apocalypse one of these codewords?

I reported this 'breach' and it was investigated. It turns out that Bomber Command had only picked Prometheus after Gray had written his book. It was a complete coincidence.

Treble one

14th Jun 2012, 20:02

Pontius Navigator

14th Jun 2012, 21:40

PN thanks for your posts and the information.

I was mistakenly under the impression that dispersal of the V force under Alert condition 2 took place with loaded and ARMED weapons, so that after arrival at the dispersal sites, only re-fuelling would be required before the aircraft could be scrambled on AC3 to bomb their targets.

There was no point in doing a transit with live armed weapons as there would be insufficient fuel. The aircraft indeed carried live weapons and were armed but the weapons carried in a safe configuration.

Aircraft on dispersal carried only sufficient fuel so that they would be below normal landing weight at dispersal.

The Yellow Sun would have been flown fully armed as it had no on-weapon safety devices. The WE177 would be flown with a safety pin in the carrier and the strike/enable facility would be set at Safe. To set it live and remove the pin would take only a minute and be insignificant compared with the turn-round servicing and refuelling.

This seems like a weak point in the deterrent? The weapon would have to be armed at the dispersal base which would leave the force open to Soviet attack during this arming phase.

Spot on but as I say the vulnerability period would extend from the time the aircraft were generated on main base until turned around at the dispersal.

I mean, what would have happened if there had been a Russian first strike during transit to the dispersal bases? You would have a lot of smoking holes in the ground, and a lot of unarmed bombers with few places to land. Again excuse my ignorance, unless it was possible to arm a weapon in transit? (you may not be able to answer that PN).

To reduce the risk factor the force would have to be generated and dispersed sufficiently early to avoid being caught unarmed. One would expect, as happened in the Cuban crisis, for nuclear arming to take place well ahead of hostilities.

That MacMillan chose to hold the force at Alert Condition 3 - main base generation - would exchange the dispersal vulnerability phase for the concentration of all the assets on the 7 or 8 main bases.

I accept that there is a significantly greater risk of transiting with armed aircraft, (and the potential for catastrophic accident.

The weapons would not detonate in the event of an accident although there could be a radio active spill.

Treble one

14th Jun 2012, 23:04

Many thanks for a full and extremely detailed reply PN. Very grateful to you.

Treble one

15th Jun 2012, 20:07

PN-another question from me, again if you can't feel you can answer this one I will understand.

Reading Hennesey, he gives an example of a Scramble order for the V Force giving the Scramble command, a 'bomb list' and a Zulu time (presumably the execution time). I had the pleasure of volunteering at a well known aviation museum with an ex V bomber (Victor) pilot, and we discussed at some length his previous operations on the V force.

I was under the impression that each individual crew had their own target which didn't change (unless the target no longer became worth of a strike of course), in fact I understood that this was one of the pillars of V force operations. As this was the case, I asked him about the QRA aircraft, as it would seem that the Q targets would have to vary depending on which crews were manning QRA, which seemed a bit odd. Of course, he explained that the QRA targets were fixed so all V Bomber crews had detailed flight plans/routes to these as well.

However, I am slightly confused as if there MAY be apparently different 'bomb lists' on the scramble order, how did this fit in with the one target for each crew scenario? Or was this bomb list merely an order of strike, which may change depending on the individual targeting priorites?

Once again, apologies if I'm asking too much or being a bit naive, but this is a very interesting subject to me, and who better to ask than someone who actually was on the V force?

Best regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

15th Jun 2012, 20:49

Bomb List was short for Bomber List not target list.

IIRC Bomb List Delta referred to all aircraft at main bases and dispersals. I think Bomb List Charlie was main bases but that is a guess.

Zulu was not the execution time that was E-Hour. E-Hour was a time in Zulu ie GMT near the scramble time and the basis on which crews would calculate TOT or time on target.

The targets themselves were allocated a number - ALN - which simply meant Accounting Line Number. All crews on one Sqn studied the two QRA targets, one for Plan Alpha and one for Plan Bravo. Each crew also studied two other Plan Alpha targets and one Plan Bravo. Plan Alpha targets were updated annually. How they were allocated was up to the targetting officer. One, as you suggest, was to issue the same target to the same crews at each change. The alternative, which I used, was to allocate the same dispersal to crews rather than the target. If a target, say Kiev, was a Manston dispersal and in the next plan it became a Leconfield dispersal target then it would be allocated to a different crew. No crew knew which targets any other crews covered.

I recall one target pair. ALN 224 was allocated to the first aircraft and ALN 214, 10 minutes later, to a second. The routes were identical. I allocated the same crews to 214 and 224. If they noticed I allowed one hour's study to count for both targets; some crews never spotted this which suggests they didn't study the target properly.

The lower the ALN the higher the target priority. In the case outlined above the first aircraft might have been an effective decoy.

Treble one

15th Jun 2012, 22:12

PN, once again, thanks again this is very interesting and educational.

The V force, as I understand it, although the UK's independent nuclear deterrent, was very much part of an integrated operations plan (SIOP?) alongside SAC and SACEUR (I believe at one stage some of our Valiants carried US weapons, and were under SACEUR control?).

Reading in Wynn, this was obviously an extremely detailed targeting plan, with attacks on targets being highly co-ordinated to prevent, for example, one crew flying through the blast of another crews weapon.

Presumably in the event of an attack, there would have been (substantial?) losses in the V-force and SAC prior to weapons release due to Eastern Bloc air defences etc. In this case, was their any flexibility in the targeting plan to cover for these losses? Or was it simply a case of if a bomber was shot down or failed to reach its target, it just meant that no strike took place (I understand that some of the more valuable targets were often assigned several bombs).

And whilst I am asking about targeting, may I also ask if the V-force switching to low level had any impact on their targets, as presumably low level operations meant reduced range?

Many thanks
TO

Pontius Navigator

16th Jun 2012, 06:56

obviously an extremely detailed targeting plan, with attacks on targets being highly co-ordinated to prevent, for example, one crew flying through the blast of another crews weapon.

We hoped. We were given a TOT +/- 3 minutes but it would not have been impossible for another aircraft en route to its target being fragged as it did not know, but might guess, if it was near a target.

In this case, was their any flexibility in the targeting plan to cover for these losses? Or was it simply a case of if a bomber was shot down or failed to reach its target, it just meant that no strike took place (I understand that some of the more valuable targets were often assigned several bombs).

Correct. Attritional losses would be made up from redundancy. As I indicated ALN 214/224 were not just the same target but the same route too. Given a TOT of 1000 the latest TOT for ALN 224 would have been 1003 and the earliest TOT for ALN 214 (10 minutes later) would have been 1007.

In many targets we were warned that an earlier missile strike had been programmed. Missiles would have had TOT up to around E-hour plus 75 and then there would have been a window for the first bomber wave up to around E-hour plus 240 then more missiles, then the SAC wave etc.

And whilst I am asking about targeting, may I also ask if the V-force switching to low level had any impact on their targets, as presumably low level operations meant reduced range?

Yes. Mark 1 Vulcans could cover Moscow at High Level once the force went low, and the defences improved, that became a Blue Steel target and other targets had to be dropped. A short while later, bomb bay drum tanks allowed an additional 16000lbs of fuel (over 20%) when armed with WE177 although the tank fitted had both fuel penalties and an overhead in peacetime.

The penetration routes also had to be switched from the French/Swiss corridor to Norway/Sweden. I am not sure but that may also have affected southern target sets. I do know one target was close to the Czech border and presumably would have been a much earlier strike on the old plans.

Treble one

17th Jun 2012, 06:37

Once again, thanks for a very full answer PN. You have certainly helped to fill some blanks in my understanding of V-Force operations. I am most grateful.

Best regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

17th Jun 2012, 11:17

Just to put the V-Force in to context in the early '60s. There were 9 Vulcan sqns plus the OCU and 6 Victor Sqns plus OCU. In addtion there was the tactical bomber force of Valiants.

Assuming an 8 UE and 4 UE respectively that would give around 128 bombers. The USAF had in the region of 1600 B47 and approaching 600 B52.

While the B47/B52 would be able to engage target across the breadth of the Soviet Union and recover to treaty airfields in NATO, CENTO and SEATO the bulk of the high value targets were west of the Urals. The small, in comparison, UK Bomber Force would have been right behind the first missile strikes in the main target areas with the SAC Bombers digging more holes where there were bunkers or second tier targets.

The SIOP was fine tuned at SAC HQ with active participation by the Brisish and the French. When France withdrew from the NATO integrated command structure and went it alone under de Gaulle not a lot actually changed. The FAF staffs at Offutt were merely reassigned as liasion officers and I assume that the target allocation remained unchanged.

Treble one

17th Jun 2012, 17:23

Interesting numbers for the V-force there PN. Just shows what a small force it was in comparison to the US strategic force. However, it seems fairly certain from your post that the V-force would have been in the first wave after initial missile strikes, right at the sharp end.

I see you mention the OCU's in your post. Did the OCU's have a war role, or were they just used as extra airframes for the V-force to maintain serviceable airframe strength?

Many thanks
TO

Pontius Navigator

17th Jun 2012, 18:13

In theory the OCUs did not have a war role but certainly 230 at Finningley would generate 4 aircraft and OCU crews would do the combat ready checks pre-load and the arrival of the operational crews by road from Waddington.

Although Waddington had the same AE as Scampton and Coningsby ie 24 aircraft they still only had 24 targets. The OCU aircraft however gave an additional 4 airframes.

On a good day therefore Waddington could generate more weapons systems than it had targets. One possibilty was for an airframe to be transfered to Coningsby/Cottesmore to make up for aircraft that could not be generated in time.

Also the OCU crew members could be used to back fill in the case of sickness. The 3 Sqn Wings had 33 crews or whom only 6 were allowed on leave at anyone time and in theory that left 3 spare crews.

On one occasion Waddington generated 27 aircraft with a further 4 at Finningley. This led to the interesting swap of crews as the OCU had to raise scratch crews to back fill the additional aircraft at Waddington. We also went through the procedure of getting additional ALN and putting the OCU crews through the mandatory 6 hours target study. They loved it :)

We were so short of aircrew that I was manning the Ops Desk while on QRA. If the exercise scramble had been called I would have broadcast the scramble. If a QRA practice had been called I would have broadcast that and then legged it.

Treble one

17th Jun 2012, 18:52

Thanks again for the info PN.

Its particularly interesting that you talk about the OCU crews 'back filling' in case of sickness in combat ready crews. Whilst the OCU staff were obviously experienced Vulcan crew, I find it slightly odd that they would be 'parachuted' into a crew, given the crew ethos in the V-force.

I was under the impression as well, correct me if I am wrong, that whole crews were declared 'combat ready'? Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick, but I'm not sure how I'd feel in a V-bomber hurtling towards an eastern Bloc target to deliver a megaton range weapon, sitting next to a chap who I might not know, or have worked with before?

I am not wishing to denegrate any members of the V-force in saying that. Having met a couple of V bomber pilots in my capacity as a volunteer at an aviation museum, I can tell you I have nothing but the highest regard for them and by association, their colleagues.

Having said all that, was this 'back filling' just a question of being able to fulfill the V force targeting plans, by having the maximum number of airframes and hence full crews?

Apologies for being a bit thick if I've got the wrong end of the stick here.

Best regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

17th Jun 2012, 19:25

What would you prefer? A fully fuelled and serviceable aircraft, a bucket of sunshine in the bomb bay and the crew ineffective as the nav rad was ill, or a guest artiste from the OCU?

The OCU aircrew would be well known to most of the crews and well respected. While I agree the Bomber Command ethic was constituted crews with the whole crew (except the copilot) essentially together to train, operationally if needs must you would backfill.

One more than one occasion a QRA crew has dragged the crew chief onboard if the AEO didn't make it. The crew would not gave been able to receive or transmit on HF and possibly a bit limited using the ECM but the more airframes heading east the more chance of one getting through.

Having said all that, was this 'back filling' just a question of being able to fulfill the V force targeting plans, by having the maximum number of airframes and hence full crews?

So, yes. On the Falklands mission the designated Black Buck aircraft aborted with a pressurisation issue. In nuclear war it would have pressed on, maybe flown at a lower altitude in the cruise and unable to fly very high post strike but fly it would have done. Crews were trained to attack the target even if the nav kit was U/S. We had 'limited procedures' for everything.

Treble one

17th Jun 2012, 19:49

Yep, of course PN, as simple as you say. I guess at that stage of the game, the more airframes the merrier.

Thanks again.
TO

alisoncc

20th Jun 2012, 04:49

One more than one occasion a QRA crew has dragged the crew chief onboard if the AEO didn't make it. The crew would not gave been able to receive or transmit on HF and possibly a bit limited using the ECM but the more airframes heading east the more chance of one getting through.

As a 230 OCU B Sqdn radio liney at the time would have been only too happy to help out with the STR18B and the Eckmmm. Anything to get away from the caravans at the end of the runway. Damp, mouldy and bloody cold.

Blacksheep

20th Jun 2012, 09:35

Damp, mouldy and bloody cold. Had the QRA aircraft needed to go flying, they wouldn't have stayed that way for long. About four minutes was the general forecast. ;)

I always enjoyed my one month QRA stints. One became very good at snooker and table tennis and if the caravan was too cold, you could always kip on a sofa in the TV "lounge". :}

Treble one

8th Jul 2012, 13:45

PN, on the way back from RAF Fairford after yesterday's RIAT, I was chatting about our V-Force discussions on here with my father, a former ADO at RAF Boulmer. Much to my surprise, he told me that he was considered a bit of an expert in pinpointing the decoy ECM aircraft during simulated mass bombing attacks (you learn something new every day). Presumably, this would have been a Russian tactic in the event of war? I believe the USAF may have had a similar tactic as well.

I know that the Vulcan had a state of the art ECM system (for want of a better word) and am aware of its successful use (Operation Skyshield in 1960-61?) on exercise, but was the plan in the event of war to send V- bombers just as ECM aircraft (and no weapons) to disrupt Soviet Warsaw Pact AD?

Thanks in advance
Treble One.

BEagle

8th Jul 2012, 14:06

I know that the Vulcan had a state of the art ECM system...

By the time I came to the V-force in 1977, the Vulcan's ECM was woefully inadequate and years out of date. It hadn't been updated for years and crew training was pretty minimal. For example, no-one had a clue about the vulnerability of the aircraft to head-sector or beam look-up threats and no-one knew much about semi-active AAMs. Neither did many people know that the I-band jammer was a Sparrow magnet (or Sovietski equivalent).

The underfunding of the Vulcan ECM suite was as a direct result of the "We'll never really use it in anger" mindset of the MoD. Come 1982, Buccaneer ECM was needed to give it even half a chance against effective Argentinean GBAD systems.

Was the plan in the event of war to send V- bombers just as ECM aircraft (and no weapons) to disrupt Soviet Warsaw Pact AD?

Not in 1977 and thereafter. By then, Vulcan ECM was little more than a bad joke - and totally ineffective against most contemporary WP systems. On our GIANT VOICE competition, the US had to find something from a museum for our AEO to react against.....

Yellow Sun

8th Jul 2012, 14:09

but was the plan in the event of war to send V- bombers just as ECM aircraft (and no weapons) to disrupt Soviet Warsaw Pact AD?

In a word, no. I once discussed offensive ECM with a SAC pilot, he opined that the best form of ECM was measured in Kilotons.

YS

NRU74

8th Jul 2012, 14:55

I know that the Vulcan had a state of the art ECM It wasn't very secret though, Chief Tech Nick Prager who worked in the ECM Bay at Scampton around 1959-61 took all the manuals home and, together with his wife Jana, photographed them and passed them on to the Czech Intelligence Service [STB?]
He received a sentence of 12 years when he was found out.

Treble one

8th Jul 2012, 15:45

Thanks for your reply Beagle. Interesting to know that we wouldn't have had specific jamming aircraft, as other sides in any exchange may have had.

Its an interesting thought that the politicians of the day underfunded upgrades to the Vulcan, because we'd never use it in anger (heaven forbid). I read somewhere that this was one of the major reasons that the AEO and Navs never got the Martin Baker option afforded to the pilots. I understand that a system for rear crew ejection was developed, but never implimented because of cost/life of the airframes?

Interestingly enough, the proposed Vulcan B3 DID have the ejection option for the rear crew. Now that would have been some aircraft, from what I've seen and read.

As you say, YS, ECM in kilotons would have been a very effective supressor of AD. Thanks for your reply too.

NRU74-I wasn't aware of that story-many thanks for passing it on.

Best regards
TO

Wander00

8th Jul 2012, 18:08

Never heard of the Vulcan B3 - anyone have any more info on the proposal?

Treble one

8th Jul 2012, 18:40

Wander

The Vulcan B3 (Vulcan Phase 6 I believe) was designed as a Skybolt carrying Airborne Alert ('Patrol Missile Carrier') development of the Vulcan B2.

It was designed to carry either 2, 4 or 6 Skybolts on underwing pylons (as the B2 was intended to ) and its time on station was dependent on the numbers of Skybolts it carried.

The following succinct description is from Wiki.

In 1960, the Air Staff approached Avro with a request into a study for a Patrol Missile Carrier armed with up to six Skybolt missiles (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skybolt_missile) capable of a mission length of 12 hours. Avro's submission in May 1960 was the Phase 6 Vulcan, which if built would have been the Vulcan B.3. The aircraft was fitted with an enlarged wing of 121 ft (37 m) span with increased fuel capacity; additional fuel tanks in a dorsal spine; a new main undercarriage to carry an all-up-weight of 339,000 lb (154,000 kg); and reheated Olympus 301s of 30,000 lbf (130 kN) thrust. An amended proposal of October 1960 inserted a 10 ft 9 in (3.28 m) plug into the forward fuselage with capacity for six crew members including a relief pilot, all facing forwards on ejection seats, and aft-fan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan#Aft-fan_turbofan) versions of the Olympus 301

Further details can be found in Chris Gibsons book 'Vulcan's Hammer-V-Force Projects and Weapons since 1945', in Chapter 6 'Pofflers;The V-Force and Skybolt', p109.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Avvulcan_2_9.png (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7e/Avvulcan_2_9.png)

Hope that helps
TO

Pontius Navigator

17th Jul 2012, 11:57

111, BEagle and YS are correct as far as they go and for the dates that they mention. I shall reply by PM as much of what I shall say is informed speculation but there was a dedicated ECM sqn.

sisemen

18th Jul 2012, 13:15

We had 'limited procedures' for everything.

That seemed to me to be the majority of the work on the GSU - throwing in spanners and seeing how good the crews were at 'limited procedures'.

It generally went off OK except for the time that a certain nav plotter was being checked and eventually the procedures became so limited that the nav radar banged the desk, cancelled his part of the bombing run and threatened to pan the checker once they were on the ground!

Pontius Navigator

18th Jul 2012, 13:32

Siseman, true true. One particular trapper, bet you know who it was, had me doing a shiftless basic. I had anticipated this and chosen Dunkeswell and a planned track over Start Point. Bl**dy plotter was so far off track that we missed the peninsular completely. But the RBSU staff were always so pleased to get trade that they always gave good scores, especially on GSU runs. (I wonder how they knew :)).

We then did a PD to St Mawgan and the plotter went into sleep mode - most unusually as he was a very conscientious sqn ldr. He missed all the height checks so as a good nav rad (being checked) I backed him up and we didn't miss one. I got slatted in MY report.

Same trapper, a few years earlier, checking my colleague on a Mark 1 check ride "If you hadn't been as experienced as you are you wouldn't have seen that offset." Doh!:ugh:

Wander00

18th Jul 2012, 14:58

TO - many thanks for that. One learns something new every day. Much appreciated

W

Pontius Navigator

18th Jul 2012, 15:11

six crew members including a relief pilot

Isn't it interesting that 50 years ago we considered the need for 3 pilots whereas 30 years ago we made do with two. How many pilots in a B2?

Pontius Navigator

18th Jul 2012, 15:30

was the plan in the event of war to send V- bombers just as ECM aircraft (and no weapons) to disrupt Soviet Warsaw Pact AD?

To correct an error in a PM and to answer the question about dedicated ECM aircraft.

In 1957 No 199 Sqn was a dedicated ECM sqn at Honington. The sqn relocated to Finningley the following year and was renumbered No 18 Sqn still in the ECM role before disbanding in 1963.

A dedicated ECM sqn was obviously necessary in the late 50s and early 60s as main force Victors and Valiants did not have an ECM fit. 83, 101 and 617 sqns also formed in 1957/58 with the Vulcan Mk 1 without ECM.

The later 44, 50 and 101 Sqns from the early 60s fielded a mix of Mk 1 and Mk 1a Vulcan Mk 1s of 44, 50 and 101 Sqns. Similarly 10, 15, 55 and 57 sqn Victors were Mk 1 aircraft with 55 and 57 later receiving Mk 1a.

As 199/18 had only 6 aircraft they might have been used on a broad front covering the ingress of the main force. Later as the number of Mk 1a aircraft increased the number of ECM aircraft in the main force would augment the dedicated sqn until the majority of the main force was equipped with self-protection ECM and 18 Sqn was disbanded.

I know the Mk 1 Vulcans were not included in the war plans from 1964.

Treble one

18th Jul 2012, 23:14

Wander-no problem, glad this was of some interest.

Likewise, many thanks for that PN, some more very interesting information from you.

Cheers
TO

Pontius Navigator

19th Jul 2012, 10:06

the decoy ECM aircraft during simulated mass bombing attacks

I have remembered an Exercise King Pin in June 1965. It was the last mass raid against the UK ADR that I am aware of.

The raid was in two parts. We were on a broad front from Newcastle to the Wash and the V-bombers approached in two parallel lines at flt lvls above FL400. In between the two V flights there were two or three Canberra waves at levels around the high 300. The force numbered around 300 bombers and the waves were just 20 minutes from front to rear. We were in the top stack at Fl 550. Before flight our H2S freqs were measured and the accurate freqs passed to the ADOC for some sophisticated analysis. We ran in with radars at standby so that blew that plan :) I don't recall whether we used ECM but I think we did thus giving cover to the Canberras.

Just to spice up the day, the 3rd AF followed through with a further mass raid from Great Yarmouth to the Humber with a further 200 aircraft.

I don't know if there were any USAFE fighters involved but I recall that the combined strength of Fighter Command and the FAA, which was deployed forward, was just 199 - Hunters, Sea Vixen, Javelin and Lightning.

I watched part of the fight through the sextant and could see lots of contrails executing stern conversions on the non-evading bombers. At FL 550 we were never engaged.

Treble one

19th Jul 2012, 17:32

Thanks again for that PN.

I can only assume that you were detailed to a Javelin rather than a Lightning for interception, otherwise FL550 would have been no defence.

Best regards
TO

Treble one

21st Jul 2012, 16:31

PN

Whilst you have described this exercise as an air defence exercise, presumably this would have been a good training opportunity for the bomber crews too?

Would you have, for example, practiced a simulated bomb run or other procedures on an exercise such as this?

Best regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

23rd Jul 2012, 17:13

TO, by 1965 the force was a low level strike force so a fighter rules exercise simulating enemy bombers was unrealistic. We did one PPI attack on Norway which was a trick as we were heading east and inside the range where we were not permitted to radiate H2S into Russia. In UK we did on RBS attack but I can't recall whether it was post-exercise of part of it.

Regarding Lightning/Javelin, don't forget the Sea Vixen was a formidable interceptor too and the Hunters were no slouch at high level either. You never know but we might have been allocated SAM. On the other hand with 500 attackers and only 200 defenders and only 2 kills per Sea Vixen/Javelin and 1 kill per Lightning the bomber (or some) would always get through.

Post-flight analysis was fascinating.

A bomber deemed to have been shot down twice meant that the second kill was scrubbed and that 'wasted' missile shot could then be reassigned to that fighter should it have made an additional intercept.

The other trick was calculating what damage a bomber that was not intercepted would have caused and when. If an early attack was deemed successful on a SAM site then all subsequent kills attributed to that SAM site were also annulled. Similarly fighters 'destroyed' before take-off had their kills annulled.

On later exercises I recall one of the first bombers through wiped out North Coates. Of course the problem here is that a target allocated to SAM and then destroyed would not have been allocate to SAM in for real.

On another very early (AM) attack on a Danish airfield at low level we followed a Hunter down the runway. Our attack was complete before the rest got airborne and our Hunter would have been destroyed by our bomb blasts.

valfire

3rd Aug 2012, 20:31

NRU74, I seem to remember that Nick Prager was a Sergeant with BCDU at Finningley when he sold the ECM secrets. As a leader of the 18 Squadron ECM servicing team we shared the same bay with the BCDU team.

Barksdale Boy

30th Aug 2012, 07:27

Happy 60th birthday, Queen of the skies!

In commemoration of the maiden flight of the first full-scale Avro Vulcan prototype Type 698, VX 770, piloted solo by Roly Falk on 30th August 1952.

Pontius Navigator

2nd Sep 2012, 11:43

Reminded by the Vickers Funbus thread.

In the US we were forbidden from telling the US controllers if we were flying above FL 450; strangely no such limitation applied in UK.

As we entered US airspace from Canada we were instructed to descend and maintain FL 310. Now we never really flew that low and had no idea of the fuel burn down there. (In fact it was probably better) So the skipper, worried we would be low on fuel at destination requested higher.

"Roger Sir, you are cleared FL 510."

Mmmm, what now? Only one answer really.

"Roger, climbing" I think we still declined to confirm we were at a level above 450 :)

Another occasion, I am told, Socttish was warning aircraft that Benbecula was active to 50,000ft. Rather bored Shack crew acknowledge and revised their ETA Kinloss by a couple of hours. Next Scottish warned a homebound Vulcan en route from Goose. "Roger, climbing."

sisemen

3rd Sep 2012, 15:57

Rummaging through some old slides today and converting them to digital:

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00168.jpghttp://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00165.jpg

Taken outside 1 Hangar at Scampton

Treble one

3rd Sep 2012, 23:35

PN, (or any other Vulcan crew on this thread), did you take part in Operation Skyshield I or II , as I'd be interested in any details (routes, evasion strategies, ECM) that would be allowable in the public domain.

Many thanks
TO

Pontius Navigator

4th Sep 2012, 08:42

Treble One, before my time. However there was something on here a little while back.

I believe they departed Goose, went high level which was probably below FL500, then broad front due south through the radar defence line. The earlier chat named the probable line, I had thought it was the Dew Line but I was corrected and told it was the Pine Tree IIRC.

The tactics at the time would have been for high, fast, and minimal dog-leg evasion, say a track change every 150-200 miles (pure guess). I would guess horizontal separation of 20-30 miles and all permitted jammers on.

If they then attacked the RBSU and Nike sites they may have executed the 2A evasive bomb runs about 45 miles out from the targets.

For high level routing Bomber Command would have planned all the routes, timing and deconfliction. Based on the Malta Adexes just a few years later (no ECM) they were pretty sneaky with cross-over tracks to disrupt track correlation, turn-back race tracks to draw fighters out and burn off the fighter fuel etc.

That was a known tactic. To quote a US DoD report on the Mig 21 - one 360 orbit, thrown sufficiently far out, will be enough to abort the average Mig 21 intercept.

Treble one

4th Sep 2012, 17:32

Thank you PN for your insight.

I believe that Vulcans were launched from both Scotland and Bermuda for at least one Skyshield. I bet that those who got the Bermuda detatchment were the happier at that.

It is kind of hard to think that the,admittedly sophisticated at the time, Vulcan ECM suite, plus evasion and other tactics was capable of defeating the entire North American ADS. It must have been a hell of a ride for the crews involved as well. Just casually creeping in, dropping their simulated weapons, and then casually calling in and asking for permission to land.

The Vulcan was really some piece of kit in its day-its a pity it wasn't upgraded to B3 as originally planned, as that would have been some aircraft. May be still going now?

As a matter of interest PN, how do you think the V Force would have taken to flying Airborne Alert as their cousins in SAC did? Was their a different mentality required for AA compared to QRA or would the absolute professionalism of the crews just meant that they would have adapted whatever the scenario?

Regards
TO

Pontius Navigator

4th Sep 2012, 17:46

As a matter of interest PN, how do you think the V Force would have taken to flying Airborne Alert as their cousins in SAC did? Was their a different mentality required for AA compared to QRA or would the absolute professionalism of the crews just meant that they would have adapted whatever the scenario?

Stoically.

It was trials at Waddington around '63-'64 IIRC. The effort required to maintain one aircraft on orbit over the North Sea was unaffordable. We simply did not have the tanker assets for a start. The aircraft would have been about one hour out from UK therefore it would have had about 5 hours fuel at the start. To reach its QRA target and recover would take about 3 hours (rough ball parks) so it would have had 2 hours fuel in hand thus needing to be refuelled at that point with 3 hours worth of fuel.

After a further 3 hours it would have been airborne for 6 hours. One more refuel and recover would take it to around 10 hours so crew fatigue would have been a factor at that point so one bracket was probably all that could be assumed realistically. Then there is the tanker effort too.

Rather than the SAC continuous airborne alert it was trialled as a war time measure but again still too expensive.

Treble one

4th Sep 2012, 18:10

Thats very interesting PN, I was not aware that there were any AA trials even. I must look and read harder in future.

Interesting that both expense and unsurprisingly crew fatigue were major factors in this never happening.

AA Vulcans were meant to be Skybolt carriers. I know Skybolt and other stand off weapons had their programmes cancelled-would the benefit of Skybolt over Blue Steel and Yellow Sun (massive increased stand off capability) have made any difference to this equation, do you think?

With this sort of stand off range, at least some Q targets could have been destroyed without the need to penetrate Soviet/WP Air Defence, meaning less attrition in airframes and more targets destroyed? Or was the lack of tanker assets the rate limiting step anyway?

Cheers
TO

NRU74

13th Sep 2012, 20:14

valfire
Only just saw your post re Prager (not paying attention to the posts I'm afraid)
I'm sure you're correct - c 50 years on the memory is not what it was
Regards NRU

sisemen

19th Sep 2012, 01:05

A few more.....

http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00037_zps86b55ac6.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00033_zps8e837799.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00032_zps2cb934dc.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00029_zps5a1fa6da.jpg
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c92/allan907/DSC00028_zps0b4dcf92.jpg

Treble one

19th Sep 2012, 16:11

Nice photos sisemen. Thanks for sharing.

Treble one

16th Oct 2012, 11:49

I watched the insert in this programme last night, commemorating the 50th Anniversary of the Cuban Crisis.

Much to my surprise, there was talk of AC3 being reached. I thought AC3 was essentially a launch to bomb your targets, save for a positive control message at the start line somewhere to the West of Norway? I obviously stand corrected.

Having discussed the AC states with PN and others earlier in the thread, and from reading about the subject, I understood that MacMillan didn't disperse the V Force at AC2 as it would have sent out a bad political signal to Kruschev (i.e attack imminent) which may have meant a pre-emptive Soviet first strike.

So whilst I see the point of having aircraft loaded with live weapons, on a very high state of alert (I have read accounts of RS5 and less, some bombers were crewed and with engines running), the lack of disperal made the force incredibly vulnerable.

I guess the PM was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Follow procedures by the book (disperse) and risk a pre-emptive first strike, or leave the V-Force loaded and ready to go at a high readiness state (although massively vulnerable to the said first strike).

I guess the chosen option was the lesser of the two evils, and would have allowed, with the Thor squadrons, a degree of retaliation if a launch had been detected (I understand a 4 bomber Q scramble would take less than 2 minutes from engines on to final wheels off).

If anyone is interested, Inside out is being repeated next Monday on another local BBC1 channel (if you consult your sky guide I believe the regional channels are in the 960's).

Pontius Navigator

1st Nov 2012, 19:53

Alcon 3 and Alcon 2 were not in a strict interpretation progressions between 4 and 1.

The standing alert was alcon 4 - one aircraft per sqn loaded, fuelled and at RS15 on main base.

When a recall was sounded one had no idea on whether it would be for alcon 3 or alcon 2. The reason was that alcon 3 had aircraft fully fuelled and thus overweight for landing at disperal airfields; weapons were also armed. On the other hand alcon 2 had aircraft fuelled to a lower level for landing at dispersals and weapons were not armed.

Now the Vulcan (I don't know about the Victor) was cleared to land at maximum all up weight. If a heavyweight landing, over 140,000lbs, then additional heavy landing checks would be required. The Victor could dump fuel whereas the Vulcan could not.

However, with 20-20 hindsight it would have been possible to bring the aircraft to alcon 3 and then order alcon 1 - with aircraft dispersing and landing overweight and ignoring any overweight landing checks. This was never, to my knowledge, considered as an option.

You should also remember that all the bomber main bases were inside the Bloodhound kill box and thus less vulnerable to a bomber threat than if they were dispersed.

ZH875

2nd Nov 2012, 14:54

Some good shots there sisemen.

These are probably the last photographs of XL444. taken on the scrapping area at Waddington.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v604/ZH875/ASIXL444_Scrap1X.jpg

The proud merchants of death pose in front of XL444
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v604/ZH875/ASIXL444_ScrapX.jpg

Blacksheep

2nd Nov 2012, 18:10

The proper colour scheme. Thats how I'll always remember them, Sisemen.

Including the most unwieldy towing arm ever contrived by man. :rolleyes:

ICM

5th Nov 2012, 10:42

A little more on the Cuban Crisis alert details - from the F540 for 10 Sqn, then flying the Victor B1 from Cottesmore. Alert Condition 3 was ordered for Bomber Command on Saturday 27 October 1962. Preparations for the possibility of increased Alert states were made on the Sunday and on Monday, 29 October, a second aircraft and crew were brought to 15 minutes readiness, with other aircraft and crews held at 2, 3, 4, 5 and 12 hours readiness - and that state was held until Monday 5 November, exactly 50 years ago today, when the Command reverted to Alert Condition 4.

The entry with this detail (written by a Flt Lt E J A Hughes) is cool, precise and entirely devoid of drama - and it appears that "the normal flying programme continued uninterrupted where crew and aircraft availability allowed."

Pontius Navigator

5th Nov 2012, 11:36

I believe that would be Eric Hughes who was later a nav rad instructor at Lindholme. We used to undergo an annual refresher at BCBS and Eric gave us a briefing on the TSR2 possibly just after its unfortunate demise and the week of that dining-in night at Waddo.

Treble one

5th Nov 2012, 11:44

ICM and PN, thanks for taking the time out to share your views and knowledge. I am most grateful for your time and efforts.

Best regards
TO

macwood

11th Feb 2013, 09:37

Yessir.....XM657 was my bird -Crew chief 65-70.
Allocated to Waddo wing -centralised servicing -Squadrons were 44-50 and-"wunderful 101" . Can't remember where 35 crept in..

Pontius Navigator

11th Feb 2013, 09:56

Yessir.....XM657 was my bird -Crew chief 65-70
Allocated to Waddo wing -centralised servicing -Squadrons were 44-50 and-"wunderful 101" . Can't remember where 35 crept in..

Mac, you got her second hand. She was delivered to 35 Sqn in Dec 1964 after they moved to Cottesmore. I first flew in her in April '65 on 12, again in Aug '65. In 1966 we started to get a rag bag of old jets out of CWP.

In 1968 Waddington gained all the Cottesmore 301s and took over the FEAF role. The Malta Sunspot then dropped when 9/35 moved to Cyprus.

Tankertrashnav

17th Feb 2013, 17:23

Here we go again! We are now planning another reunion at Newark Air Museum for May of NEXT year (2014) The form will be pretty much as before, the reunion is for all who served on the V Force in any capacity in the air or on the ground. Also welcome are wives, families and next of kin of deceased members. All the details are here on the reunion website V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html).

There is nothing for you to do at the moment but bookmark the website and look out for further info which I will also announce on here. We are all getting long in the tooth and this may well be the last reunion we organise in its current format, so let's make it a good one.

TheVulcan

13th Mar 2013, 21:28

Have just finished book Victor Boys and would like to do another one called Vulcan Boys relatng a lot of personal stories by ground crews and aircrews. Reading pprune there shouldn't be a shortage of contributors. If you think you can help please contact me as soon as you like. Want to get inputs before we all forget or are forgotten. Please pass the word on.

Jackw106

30th Mar 2013, 08:00

Found this RAF Waddington, Vulcan Bomber 1960 - YouTube

Tankertrashnav

3rd Apr 2013, 21:26

Just to let you know that the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/index.html) website has been updated. We now have firm dates for the reunion which are 17th/18th May 2014 (next year!)

Check out the website and if you think you may want to attend (no commitment) then fill in and send an enquiry form (link on the homepage). Once you've done that - start spreading the word!

Tankertrashnav

14th May 2013, 09:45

The V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website has been updated. Not a lot new, but a nice new pic, and info on forthcoming attractions at Newark Aircraft Museum. It's still a long way off but don't forget to let us know if you are hoping to come. It doesnt commit you, but some idea of likely numbers helps the museum with forward planning.

macwood

30th May 2013, 10:29

The crew chief had been whisked away to the BX as per usual on arrival to Goose. The handling team refuelled without ensuring front tanks filled first.Hence unusual attitude.
The ply bulkhead was painted by Jack Fisher -A very tasteful Red Steer!

Tankertrashnav

11th Jun 2013, 16:27

Another update on the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website has just gone on - if you fancy a nice souvenir V Force mug have a look on the site, where there are details of how you can get one.

I'm getting quite a few emails returned as undeliverable for various reasons, perhaps I have got outdated addresses. If you think you should be on my email address list but aren't receiving email notifications of updates, or if you would like to get them, send me an email (my address is at the bottom of the homepage) and I'll add you to my address list so that you get updates as they occur.

Tankertrashnav

25th Oct 2013, 14:29

Seems like I have the sole job of keeping this thread going, if only to notify you all of updates to the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website, which has just been made. If when clicking on the link you get the previous update (with a Victor K1 picture at the top) then hold down Control and press F5 and your computer will refresh to the new version

I'm still getting quite a few emails returned as undeliverable for various reasons, perhaps I have got outdated addresses, whilst some accounts are obviously dormant as mail is returned with the comment "mailbox full". If you think you should be on my email address list but aren't receiving email notifications of updates, or if you would like to get them, send me an email (my address is at the bottom of the homepage) and I'll add you to my address list so that you get updates as they occur.

Treble one

2nd Nov 2013, 22:09

I'm currently reading Jim Wilson's book 'Britain on the Brink' on the Cuban crisis, and am learning lots of interesting snippets, I didn't already know.

One of the most shocking was that the USAF carried out a Titan ICBM missile test at Vandenburg AFB (no warhead of course) which seemed a bit badly timed to be honest. Apparently (and fortunately) the Soviets didn't detect the launch...

AM Sir Kenneth Cross (C in C Bomber Command) ordered AC3 on his own authority (within his authority to do so) on 'Black Saturday'.

There is also a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest that Cross was pushing for AC2 and dispersal-of course Macmillan forbade this as he didn't want to increase the tension any further.

In fact it seems that AM Cross became increasingly frustrated by the lack of political direction during the crisis, and he also lost contact with SAC (who were at a higher alert state than Bomber Command).

I didn't realise that he had then ordered everything to full readiness in the Command on his own authority either.

Interesting read.

alisoncc

18th Nov 2013, 07:02

Seems like I have the sole job of keeping this thread goingHere you go TTN, a whole new photo of one of our favourite aeroplanes, taken at the RAF Finningley Battle of Britain display in 1965 by me. Or so it says so on the back.

Don't know anything about the American thing behind.

http://users.on.net/~alisoncc/1965BoB.jpg

BEagle

18th Nov 2013, 19:19

Don't know anything about the American thing behind.

F-101 Voodoo

alisoncc

18th Nov 2013, 21:34

F****, Who Doo. Sounds rude. :}

cac_sabre

19th Nov 2013, 10:03

Did you fly a Vulcan to RAAF Base Pearce circa 1972 - 73. I was an ATCO then when 2 Vulcan's visited and stayed a night or two.
I am interested in knowing which squadron and if possible which airframes were involved for a modelling project. Alas I have no pictures as I was on duty at the time photos were allowed, by the time I got there the SP s wouldnt let me take a pic.

Tankertrashnav

14th Jan 2014, 23:18

Once again I have updated the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website. The main point which requires action from you is we are now taking bookings for our evening function on the Saturday night - see the site for full details. We are also still looking for volunteers to man the signing-in tables.

Thanks, TTN

Tankertrashnav

3rd Mar 2014, 15:47

Once again the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website has been updated. We've got a nice picture of Hastings T5 TG517 as a change. Might bring back some memories of bumpy landings for ex V Force nav radars who trained on her at Lindholme!

We are well on with bookings for the evening do, but there are still plenty of tickets available - act now to avoid disappointment!

WH904

28th Mar 2014, 10:19

I'm currently putting together a new "bookzine" on the Vulcan, which will be in newsagents in May. Any of you former Vulcan chaps fancy penning a few lines on your exploits? I've written the usual potted history but it would obviously be nice to have something fresh to add if possible.

Likewise I have loads of photos to choose from but I guess most will have been seen many times before, so if anyone has anything tucked away...

I've tried to find pictures of the more unusual markings and colour schemes but obviously there's a finite amount of material out there - or so it seems. Sadly I can't find any more pictures of XM607 in its Red Flag "desert" scheme, so I'll have to rely on Steve Oddy's famous shots (Roger Brookes has a good photo but I don't think he's keen on having it published). B1 XH478 is unusual in that it carried fluorescent orange stripes on the nose, tail and wing tips (for refuelling trials it would seem) and I've got two fairly decent photos of that machine, but I guess there must be better shots out there - somewhere!

Perhaps the most exotic topic is a very early Vulcan B1 that was assigned to the A&AEE. I've found two pretty poor b&w shots of the aircraft and in addition to the standard overall silver paint scheme, it has large white patches applied to the outer wings and forward tail fin (it looks like there may be more on the underside too). Thing is, one assumes it is actually fluorescent orange but does anyone know for sure?

The other issue I have is sourcing useful drawings. I'm preparing some scale drawings based on existing plans (Bentley's being the best) and drawings from various manuals. The real problem is the B1 as there seems to be very little information on the wing layout. I have one manual drawing of the main wing but even this doesn't show the flap/aileron structure, not does it describe the wing tip area. If anyone has any material that would help me draw-up some good (accurate) drawings, that would certainly be a big help.

Anyway, whining plea is over!

Tankertrashnav

27th Apr 2014, 21:02

Just under three weeks to go until the V Force Reunion on 17th/18th May at Newark Air Museum, so this will be my last reminder. If you are planning to attend the evening buffet at Newark Golf Club act now or you may be disappointed, as I need to close bookings on Monday, 5th May. We already have around 400+ notifications of attendance for the day event and approaching 90 bookings for the evening, so it should be good.

More info and details of how to book for the evening function on the V-Force Reunion (http://www.vforcereunion.co.uk/) website, which will be getting its final update shortly.

Poimier

17th Sep 2014, 20:31

Howzit Pontius,

I haven’t got 657 in my logbook, but others with close numbers are there : eg 645 – 656.

I just rediscovered this thread (ie the archives) which was lost in the bowels of my computer and I must say I have been interested and amused by so many posts. You are defo the technical boffin, must have been a navrad, almost certainly sqn weapons leader I’d say.

Some very good guys on 35, defo (excluding the boss) and some interesting characters. Do you remmber that nice Ted Gent ? AEO ? Always ready to fix your dodgy TV, confidently feeling round the back of the set (live) with his nimble fingers, while looking at the screen … Once he came to ours, diagnosed the fault in a trice and produced a duplicate valve out of his pocket in a flash. He taught his equally nice wife how to weld. Always wore No. 1s.

Do you recall Mad Jack - "I'm bored and I'm going to leave this bl**dy aircraft" (round about F450) ? The big boss who wanted to eject from Barry ???????’s aircraft near to Singapore, only prevented because the very alert navrad nipped up the ladder and judiciously inserted his safety pin. ? “Well you can’t Sir” said Barry” “ I’m station commander and I can do what I like”. “Try”. “ I’ll have your guts for this”. “Oh No you won’t”. He didn’t and was sent back to base and a trip to a quiet place. He also lost it completely one New Year’s Eve Ball, but I don’t really want to go there as it was somewhat unedifying, even for an RAF officer.

There’s more but I have severe memory overload.

Thanks for all your great and well-informed postings. What a memory ! :ok:

Wander00

17th Sep 2014, 21:33

I have just got back in touch (after 35 yrs +) with a Vulcan pilot who was my Best Man first time round - he was on 35 -David D.....e, wife Lorna. Both still well.

Pontius Navigator

18th Sep 2014, 19:42

Just genuflecting that all the aircraft I have flown in, with the exception of the Shackleton, were under 25 years old, and some were brand new, when I flew in them as either crew or pax - that includes Anson, Lancaster, Hastings, VC10, Dominie etc. The Shack was only 27 when I left it.

Now the Lancaster is 70, the VC10 would have been over 40, the Dominie was nearer 50. The Tonka is 30 or so.

sooty655

21st Sep 2014, 15:56

XM655 Maintenance and Preservation Society are planning to celebrate the aircraft's 50th birthday, and would like to contact members of the crew who made the delivery flight from Woodford to Cottesmore in November 1964.

If anyone out there knows the present contact details for Flt.Lt. C. Williamson, Flt.Lt. P Bouch, Fg.Off. R Betts, Fg.Off. R. Hollett or Fg.Off. T Howat, please contact me by pm.

Many thanks.

Pontius Navigator

21st Sep 2014, 16:41

Tankertrashnav should have the email addresses of at least some of that crew.

I thought I had flown 655 early on but actually didn't until Sep 65. Looking for a trip I thought I had done in 655 it turned out to be 606 in May 65 which was one I always remember.

Drifting slightly, the flight in 606 was an air test, usually these are flown by day but this was a night air test, I don't know why. It was memorable as I can remember the climb to height records for the air test. From airborne to 2000 feet was one minute, every minute thereafter we climbed a further 5000 feet. We reached 550 in 12 minutes, pressed on at that height towards Glasgow when we turned for home. The flight time was 45 minutes.

Pontius Navigator

22nd Sep 2014, 21:37

Wg Cdr Philip Goodall has a new book coming out on in Amazon in November My Target was Leningrad.

His first tour was on Valiants when he took part in the Suez operations. Later he served with Strategic Air Command. Next was a tour at Bomber Command when he was responsible for the war plans before taking up an appointment at Scampton as a sqn cdr.

Note the link is to the American site.

Http://www.amazon.com/Target-was-Leningrad-Preserving-Democracy/dp/1781551812/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1411421348&sr=8-1&keywords=philip+goodall

TomJackUk

23rd Sep 2014, 11:51

Will check out the book - thanks for the link.

My old man flew XM 650,651,652,653,654,656,657.... just not 655.

macwood

15th Jun 2015, 20:38

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: winchester
Age: 81
Posts: 5
Eagle river jollies.
Just picked up this long lead thread about the vip trips to Eagle River.

As a coopted crew chief I was invited to "Flunky" for an AVM "Don't tell him your name P---"

No extra staff....just P---ey in the sixth seat and YT pandering to his every need in what they laughingly called the 7th. Never had an 8th to my knowledge.

Invited to the pre-briefing in the aircrew feeder, I remember the CO going on at great length about what container the strawberries and cream should be served in....cut glass or mess silver. Decisions-decisions..expect he got a gong for that!
macwood is online now Report Post

Pontius Navigator

15th Jun 2015, 20:54

Macwood, you may well remember the fuss when a wifey told the Sun that Mountbatten was going on a jolly - Eagle River. I guess your AVM would have been bag carrier and general dogs body.

I know a bed was to be rigged for Mountbatten down the nose and he spurned the idea of a parachute. If he went below for the flight there would have been room for 8.

Do you remember Taff Skuse?

Pontius Navigator

15th Jun 2015, 21:02

I see Philip Goodall's 'My Target was Leningrad' is apparently out on 11th June and only 2 left - big print run.

It is also shown as Abridged. I am guessing that he could not get copyright permissions for the photos or possible censorship (but I can't comment ).

However I see the American release is to be 19th August and no mention of its being abridged.

Ps, and now, the following day, only 3 left. Someone return one?

Treble one

19th Jun 2015, 23:10

Sorry to harp on about this gents, but I was watching a documentary on this and something suddenly dawned on me.

Since just about every V bomber we had with serviceable engines and wings on them was loaded with a weapon, Im presuming that these weapons were 'live' as if the order to scramble had taken place, it was head directly East with probably no place to come back to? McMillan didn't want to disperse the force to their dispersal fields where the weapons would have been armed ordinarily?

Or was it just the aircraft at the higher RS?

Obviously if this is a question too far, please feel free to ignore.

Thanks
TO

Pontius Navigator

20th Jun 2015, 07:47

TO, just before my time, but that was SOP the following year.

The force generation during the Cuban crisis would have been to Alert Condition 3. Aircraft would have been fully fuelled, loaded with a Yellow Sun, and at readiness 15 ready to scramble from main base to their targets. Recover was planned to numerous "recovery" bases in UK, Norway and Denmark. Unlike in later years the target scramble time for the first aircraft was 15 minutes. Much later 15 minutes was the target time for the last aircraft, an impossible target from the 'relaxed' 15 minute posture.

Spilsby and East Kirkby, amongst others, were so designated though Spilsby was earmarked for B47s. East Kirkby had been resurfaced (certainly in 1964) and remained, with Halfpenny Green, one of two RAF emergency airfields well in to the 1960s.

Higher than Alert Condition 3 was Alert Condition 2. Paradoxically this was a moment of greater vulnerability for the V-Force. All aircraft were armed but those destined for dispersal would have weapons safed and only ferry fuel. The number of ready aircraft at main bases however would have been increased from about 13 Vulcan and Victor to 24. The step that MacMillan wanted to avoid was Alert Condition 1 where the remaining force would disperse. Once turned round and brought to readiness the force level would have been around 120 or more.

During Mickey Finn, the annual dispersal exercise, we could expect to have a large proportion of the free fall force generated and dispersed within 8 hours.

Treble one

21st Jun 2015, 15:38

Many Thanks PN

I had my AC's the wrong way round (3, 2 and 1).

As a relatively young man born after the Cuban Crisis I found it strange that all this happened in almost total secrecy in terms of what the public knew about it. No 24h news channels of course.

Effectively we were minutes away from oblivion that weekend and the only people who knew about it were a select few politicians and the V force themselves.

Wander00

21st Jun 2015, 17:30

During the Cuban Missile Crisis I was on an ATC gliding course at Swanton Morley - "crisis" - what crisis? People mentioned something of what was going on but I suspect few there knew what was really going on or I guess we would have been sent home.

FantomZorbin

22nd Jun 2015, 08:12

At the time of the Cuban Crisis I was in the Royal Observer Corps (ROC). We were required to provide updated contact details for 24/7 to our Chief Observers for cascade call out procedures. We were also required to inform work bosses of the requirement.
The response from my Housemaster/Headmaster when I told them of what they were required to do should I get called was that I was to get a note from parents and expect a wait of at least 3 days to consider a response!!! :ugh:
They were equally underwhelmed when I said that lack of notes not withstanding I'd be out of that College like a rat up a drainpipe!!

alisoncc

23rd Jun 2015, 07:43

There was no way the Cuban Crisis was going to escalate beyond some posturing. I was an essential part of the western response and in October 1962 I was still completing my third year of training at RAF Locking. There was a tacit agreement between both sides that they wouldn't start without me. :ok:

Pontius Navigator

23rd Jun 2015, 08:34

I recall staff at the ANS, but I can't confirm it was Cuba related, preparing go-bags for their role as SRMP in the Varsity. They would have trawled around the North Sea looking for ships and submarines. With a useful endurance of 8-9 hours they could have given good visual coverage and kept submarines down for the 'killers' in Shacks.

Their patrol box would have been small, say 60x60, but there were a lot of them :)

ICM

23rd Jun 2015, 09:28

Treble One: I was 21 at the time, not then in the RAF, and whilst, perhaps thankfully, there was no 24 Hr coverage as we now know it, there was enough comment during broadcasts to keep one pretty concerned, especially over what might transpire should a Russian vessel refuse to accede to the US blockade. It was not hard to assume that the nuclear-armed RAF Bomber Command would be at a high state of readiness.

As for that, 10 Squadron was a Victor B1 unit at the time, and its F540 for October 1962 noted that the Command was brought to Alert Condition 3 (see PN, above) on Saturday 27 October - some 5 days after President Kennedy's TV broadcast and the imposition of the blockade, so not a snap reaction. On the Monday, a second aircraft was brought to 15 mins readiness, so there had been only one initially, with 5 others held at readiness from 2 - 12 hours - and "the normal flying programme continued uninterrupted where crew and aircraft availability allowed." Things reverted to normal on Monday 5 November. As I see it, most of this UK reaction occurred as the worst was past for, on 28 October, Premier Khruschev accepted a proposed US solution and confirmed that the missiles on Cuba would be withdrawn in exchange for a non-invasion pledge from the US. But I do recall feeling a bit jumpy in the aftermath of Kennedy's TV broadcast!

ian16th

23rd Jun 2015, 14:18

This is an extract:

During the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 I spent a week in the operations room bunker at Bomber Command headquarters, High Wycombe. Macmillan played down the British involvement in the affair, but what people didn’t realise was that we had the entire force of 100 V-bombers standing at 15 minutes’ readiness, bombs loaded and with the crews kitted up and ready to go, to drop nuclear bombs on Russia.
The whole thing seemed unreal. I remember on the Saturday of the critical weekend, when the crisis was at its worst, I went above ground for about 10 minutes to get some air, and the whole nation only seemed interested in some bloody football match.
from this:

The men of bomber command: The pilot, Sir Michael Beetham - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/raf-bomber-command/3254769/The-men-of-bomber-command-The-pilot-Sir-Michael-Beetham.html)

Pontius Navigator

23rd Jun 2015, 14:57

I know CinC Bomber Command had the authority to launch if contact was lost with the Government.

I also know that the Command exercised full force generation with live weapons twice per year.

I also know that the CinC, during a NATO wide PCX ordered full force generation 3 days in advance of SACEUR bringing NATO assigned nuclear forces to full readiness.

What I do not know is if the CinC was authorised on his own authority to bring the force to Alert Condition 3 as he did twice per year. If that authority was so delegated then it is possible that he had brought the force to readiness before MacMillan so ordered.

ROC man

24th Jun 2015, 11:08

Picking up on the thread in the military aviation section on WW 2 bombing and weather, if crews are at 5 and 15 mins readiness how often were they updated with the weather?

I appreciate that at FL500 or thereabouts you are above the weather but presumably wind adjustments are entered into a bombing computer and the jet streams will affect aircraft at different altitudes thus potentially affecting any coordination at time over target and deconfliction?

kind regards
chris

27Musiicman

2nd Jul 2015, 13:40

Does anyone recall Exercise "HIGH MARS"?
I recall reading an article by the late Chapman Pincher (of Daily Express fame) taking part in the exercise to test NORAD's air defences in the early 1960s I think.

Pontius Navigator

2nd Jul 2015, 18:11

27M, not directly or by that name but 'The Penetrators' by Anthony Gray was a novel loosely based on that exercise.

The exercise was, I think, based on Goose Bay and involved a broad front high level penetration at high level of one of the radar defence lines.

Rumour had it that the US radars lacked certain ECCM features and was vulnerable to the relatively unsophisticated hammers on the Vulcans. I heard they achieved hard kills on some of the systems and the height and speed did the rest.

As I say though, this was only what I picked up as rumours a few years later.

BEagle

2nd Jul 2015, 18:44

Pontius Navigator wrote: 'The Penetrators' by Anthony Gray was a novel loosely based on that exercise.

I have a copy of that book - it really is complete and utter garbage! The climax of a Vulcan exceeding M1.0 at low level over Washington being mistaken for a US Navy F4D-1 / F-6A Skyray was just laughable.

Pontius Navigator

2nd Jul 2015, 18:52

I wasn't recommending the book but citing it as based on the exercise.

alisoncc

3rd Jul 2015, 01:39

Rumour had it that the US radars lacked certain ECCM features and was vulnerable to the relatively unsophisticated hammers on the Vulcans. I heard they achieved hard kills on some of the systems and the height and speed did the rest.

Widely reported and spoken about in the crew room of 230 OCU B Sqdn circa '63-65. Especially amongst those who looked after the ECM.

Treble one

3rd Jul 2015, 17:08

I think this is the exercise(s) under discussion?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Skyshield

Pontius Navigator

3rd Jul 2015, 17:23

Trembler,that's the ones.

BEagle

3rd Jul 2015, 22:01

'63-'65 was probably the last time the Vulcan ECM kit was of any great use.... By the time I did the Vulcan OCU, the senior AEOs reckoned that there were but a handful of Soviet radars against which it might have been of any use....and were rightly scathing about the RAF's reluctance to upgrade it.

In 1979, the US had to find something from a museum against which we could react in the EW phase of GIANT VOICE.

Although the Vulcan was given an ECM update for OP CORPORATE, of course. But the 'I band jammer' fitted to the Waddington fleet was a real Sparrow magnet for HOJ or RSOJ attacks - and I'm pretty sure that the Sovs had a similar capability by then.

Pontius Navigator

4th Jul 2015, 13:11

Once the force went low level the Shrimps and Divers were relegated to recovery phase. They were obviously not prepared to put money into recovery aids and with the future of the V-Force in doubt after 1968 . . .

Given its roles pre-FI, both in low level conventional attack and high level nuclear strike which still applied in some theatres, it would seem funds were going to the MRCA.

Now if they had fitted an AWG 9 and a battery of Phoenix on a rotary launcher in the bomb bay you could have had a long range interceptor that could destroy a Badger raid, hack the Shad, and cause the Backfire to evade and go supersonic much earlier. Properly managed it could also have pushed the Flanker range back too.

ricardian

4th Jul 2015, 23:00

27musiicman - HIGH MARS film (https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/F02721/)

Pontius Navigator

5th Jul 2015, 11:42

Ricardian, thank you.

One aspect of that exercise is still extremely sensitive, suffice to say every effort was made to analyse the defences and create an effective ECM and penetration plan. It was determined that we had insufficient jamming power to defeat all the AD radars so all Shrimps were tuned to defeat the height finders.

Interceptors were scrambled and given successfully guidance into the Vulcans' 6 o'clock but of the Vulcans, no sign.

We were accused of all sorts of skulldugery and black magic. Simply however the Vulcans were up to 30k higher than the interceptors who were simply looking in the wrong place.

As an air defence exercise it was really unrealistic and as a bomber exercise very satisfying but again of limited value.

suzib76

20th Sep 2015, 13:07

What a thoroughly enjoyable thread. Almost 12 years since it was started and it took me as many days to read it in full.

Pontius Navigator

2nd Nov 2016, 19:56

Does anyone remember a Flt Lt Donald Siviter, nav trained in 1953-4, served on Javelins and Vulcans and retired in 1968?

Interested to know in which sqns he served and possibly Lindholme.

Barksdale Boy

3rd Nov 2016, 00:16

I think he was an instructor on Refresher Flight at BCBS in 1967.

Pontius Navigator

3rd Nov 2016, 07:52

Thanks, had a feeling I knew him.

Looks like he had returned home, b1931 in Doncaster, retired 1969, took up teaching there.

zulu56

10th Nov 2016, 17:32

Thanks gents for an excellent thread.
the mighty Vulcan has grabbed my imagination & awe since i first saw it in a formation when i was sailing down the river trent , what an awesome sight!
Thanks to you all for an amazing insight to your vulcan careers & thank god you never had to do the deed

ricardian

2nd Jan 2017, 11:04

An interesting newspaper article (http://www.brasilwire.com/when-the-raf-dropped-in-to-rio/) on the Vulcan landing at Rio de Janeiro’s Galeao International Airport during the Falklands "conflict"

Pontius Navigator

2nd Jan 2017, 11:41

Ricardian, fascinating. In my time at ASI we caused a C130 aeromed to go to Rio rather than UK, 5 hours rather than 20.

The plan was to drop off the patiently. The crew plan was to night stop. Next day the Brazilians would not allow them toitoi depart without the patient. HMG would not permit the patient to embark until the Polish Government paid the bill for the airfare which they refused to do.

I think they eventually paid and the patient was flown back to his ship.

Petet

12th Aug 2017, 18:43

The answer to my question may be hidden amongst the many posts in here so apologies if this has already been discussed .... but when the Vulcan was being flown on training runs and exercises what "bomb loads" were carried?

I know there was a 28lb bomb, a 1000lb and some form of inert bomb (terminology?) to enable "all up weight" to be achieved, but was there a rule of thumb about which bombs were carried on training runs and exercises (other than live bombing).

Was there always some form of bomb on board or were training runs and exercises done predominantly without a bomb load? What was the bomb load situation on Rangers?

On live bombing, how many 1000lb bombs were carried and were there other weights in existence?

Sorry for all the questions, but I am just working my way through the 1962 - 1965 ORB for No. 35 Squadron and trying to understand how the aircraft was armed for the various training runs and exercises.

One other question on the same vein, are the training run routes documented anywhere or are they subject to Official Secrets Act

Any help would be much appreciated

Regards

Pete

BEagle

12th Aug 2017, 19:03

On 35 in the late 1970s, a 'weapon response simulator' and a 28 lb bomb was about the maximum ever carried in the UK.

One squadron conversion trip was supposed to be with 4 x 28 lb on a UK range; I never had that trip because I'd dropped bombs at TWU on the Hunter and on the Bucc OCU.

A 'shape' (simulated WE177B) might be carried occasionally to Strike Force Dispersal, but never routinely. A pain it was too, as the unlucky crew had to 'accept' the thing and adopt the full 2-man principle throughout and were usually the last to be sprung at Endex, due to having to return the thing to the special weapons custodians back at Scampton.

We didn't have anything to do with 1000lb HE from 1977-1980. Primary role was nuclear strike, secondary role was boat-spotting (MRR).

Training routes were hardly secret - usually just a bimble around the UK on a hi-lo-hi profile, with a little fighter affiliation after the low level element. The V-force was mostly restricted to the 'main route' around the UK to avoid conflict with other low level area users, until the low flying system changed at the end of the 1970s. For exercises from the UK, we might fly down to the south of France or up to Norway / Denmark. On a Goose or Offutt Ranger, we just flew the usual STCAN or OB (later 'IR') routes in Canada / USA.

All simulated weapon drops were scored by either RBSU or release point photographs analysed after flight by the Wing Weapons staff.

LOMCEVAK

13th Aug 2017, 09:01

BEagle,

I think that you meant to say that a 'shape' was a simulated WE177 (B?).

Rgds

L

Petet

13th Aug 2017, 09:36

Thank you for the feedback; it is always much appreciated.

I will have a dig around to see if I can find any photographs of the various bombs used and photographs of them loaded in the bomb bay.

I am still intrigued about the 28lb bomb (eg in what way did it mimic its larger counterparts) but I know that it was used during the inter-war period as well so it must have been highly successful.

I haven't really started any detailed research on the nuclear weapons (dummy / live etc) carried by No. 35 Squadron, but hopefully I will get round to this subject later this week.

My project covers No. 35 Squadron's time at Coningsby, Cottesmore, Akrotiri and Scampton so I don't know whether bomb loadings / types changed during this period, but I am sure my enquiring mind will find it.

Thanks again for feedback to date

Regards

Pete

LOMCEVAK

13th Aug 2017, 11:34

Petet,

I have no knowledge regarding Vulcan ops but the 28lb bomb was used as a practise bomb on many aircraft types (I dropped them from Hunter and Buccaneer). It aimed to simulate the ballistic characteristics of a 1000 lb bomb fitted with a 114 tail (free fall delivery/low drag). There were variants that produced 'smoke and flash' to aid spotting on ranges and there were inert variants that were dropped on some ranges if a potential fire or EOD hazard existed.

Pontius Navigator

13th Aug 2017, 13:08

BEagle

13th Aug 2017, 13:38

Thanks, LOMCEVAK, I did indeed mean the all-electric bucket of sun WE177B!

I don't recall have ever dropped anything from a Vulcan during my time - apart from almost dropping a boom on Bawtry having cocked up a max rate descent!

kaitakbowler

13th Aug 2017, 14:08

Before the 28lb the load was either 25lb for low level and 100lb for high.

Loads were either 8 of each or 16 of one. For T4 bombsight calibration it was 16x100.

At the time we never carried 21x1000 just for weight. There was a requirement for 2x1000 every 6 months but rarely achieved.

The only heavy weight load was the YS2 at 7000lb.

In Cyprus, to clear out timex stock we used to drop 7 or 14 1000 HE usually from a 2J popup.

21x1000 retarded dropped at the end of a firepower demo in Epi bay, I think
in '72.

If memory serves, and it was a long time ago, they were delay fuzed, but the resultant ripple thumps still stick in the memory.

PM

Pontius Navigator

13th Aug 2017, 14:39

KB, Baz Gowling was the skipper. The delay was in the order of milliseconds.

On heavy weights, the heaviest load for FF was double drum fit plus 7x1000. Now that would have been a better load out for FI except the probability of a hit on the runway would have been vanishingly small.

A surprise low level attack would have worked except retards on a runway would have been ineffective.

Petet

14th Aug 2017, 17:22

Petet

14th Aug 2017, 21:53

I am struggling to find an answer to this on other forums, so wondered if you could help me out with this one too:

Can anyone advise on when Bomber Command / Strike Command crew classifications changed to Non-Operational, Operational, Combat, Senior, Command?

I have a note which says 1966 but I don't know if that is correct. Also, was there a particular reason for the change from Non-Combat, Combat, Combat Star, Select, Select Star?

Any help would be most appreciated

Regards

Pete

Harry Wayfarers

23rd Aug 2017, 12:32

Oh, back in the day:

https://scontent.fmnl4-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t34.0-12/21040679_1960083784235014_952441711_n.jpg?_nc_eui2=v1%3AAeGc DSfGc1DciTCMjO7pDKOlPOkuFF2fPLQZsw5Iff0eU4T6qxeC8oAr9gu_e01s tqp6uSoniuto3Ezu9H4gTlcunKwpm9E9kk8UOO-PI_dOLw&oh=9919c3f2eec15c8d3082ef47dd03b4ed&oe=599FFF65

falcon12

23rd Aug 2017, 12:49

Okay, I will ask the questions

Where ? When? and Why?

and, as an after thought, did the skipper get to have tea and biscuits with the boss later?

Harry Wayfarers

23rd Aug 2017, 12:58

Okay, I will ask the questions

Where ? When? and Why?

and, as an after thought, did the skipper get to have tea and biscuits with the boss later?

RAF Swinderby School of Recruit Training Passing Out Parades, Waddington was a stone's throw away so the Vulcans were regulars.

If you ever want to see the Air Force, that was when UK had an Air Force, do a proper display then see them at an RAF base rather than at a 'health and Safety' civvy airport!

Barksdale Boy

23rd Aug 2017, 13:28

Magnificent! Cheered me up after a day indoors here courtesy of Typhoon Hato.

Petet

23rd Aug 2017, 13:45

oh ... I had hoped it was at the last parade of the No 35 Squadron standard in February 1982!

Pontius Navigator

23rd Aug 2017, 17:06

Can anyone advise on when Bomber Command / Strike Command crew classifications changed to Non-Operational, Operational, Combat, Senior, Command?

I have a note which says 1966 but I don't know if that is correct. Also, was there a particular reason for the change from Non-Combat, Combat, Combat Star, Select, Select Star?

Why? IMHO it was because the standards for the earlier scheme were virtually time dependent and the new scheme supposedly set higher standards.

Virtually everyone could achieve Combat in 6 months, then CS, then Senior after 18 months and Select Star after 2 years and potentially the final period in that tour. The new scheme made it far harder to achieve Command status and involved examination by the Group Standards Unit. The main criteria for both was bombing accuracy with achievement of the numbers stats by the rest of the crew.

When? I would need to check my log book. I know we made CS in Jul 65, Select in Jan 66, and Select Star in Jul 66. I was certainly Senior in Jan 67.

Pontius Navigator

23rd Aug 2017, 17:12

Thanks again for the feedback.

Having done further research, I note that No. 35 Squadron "Kinsman" exercises were flown to Yeovilton, Pershore, Ballykelly and Llanbedr. Is anyone able to confirm whether these were the only dispersal airfields utilised by the squadron (1962 - 1965)?

You would need to contact several sqn members for that period. Dispersals followed target allocation and were not necessarily earmarked for any particular sqn.

To tie this in with previous posts regarding the bomb load, what loads would have been used for Mick, Kinsman and Mickey Finn exercises?

For Mick the load would have been live rounds of either YS2 or later WE177.
For Mickey Finn it would have been training rounds of YS2 though I don't think there were enough to go around. I seem to think live YS2 were loaded when they ran our of drill rounds. Once loaded they would be downloaded and either returned to store or wheeled to the next aircraft for loading practice. From 1966 there were sufficient WE177 training round for one each.
For Kinsman you may or may not have had a shape loaded. The main role of Kinsman was to exercise the dispersal, not necessarily the crew. I know we went to Pershore (12(B) Sqn) when it was not on our target list.

Pontius Navigator

23rd Aug 2017, 17:17

Okay, I will ask the questions

Where ? When? and Why?

and, as an after thought, did the skipper get to have tea and biscuits with the boss later?

Mark 2 I notice it had the Skybolt mounting points which suggests more likely Cottesmore, Certainly not Coningsby therefore after 1964.. In about '68 there was a swap between Waddington or Cottesmore so it could have been Waddington later on.

Petet

23rd Aug 2017, 22:05

Thanks again for the feedback to my queries; your ongoing help is much appreciated.

I am trying to get hold of the squadron's 1966 / 1967 record books from TNA but they are out on loan at the moment. Once they are available hopefully they will provide the dates for the change in classification. I will keep you posted on that matter.

I am just working through the 1981 / 1982 records and learning about IR Routes (such as 498 and 499), the various operations and exercises (such as Red Flag) and the sad demise of the squadron.

I am still struggling to find photographs from the Scampton era, so any help on that front would be useful. I have e-mailed the Scampton Heritage Centre to see if it can help

Regards (and thanks again)

Pete

Petet

25th Aug 2017, 16:19

Apologies, once again, for my lack of knowledge but I had assumed the "shape" was an inert training version of Yellow Sun or WE117.

However, both "shape" and "training rounds" are mentioned in post 1959 suggesting that there is a difference.

Could someone explain the difference to an inquisitive novice and are there photographs anywhere which show the various "live" and "training" versions.

Regards

Pete

Yellow Sun

25th Aug 2017, 17:53

Pete,

Start by going through Brian Burnell's site. (http://nuclear-weapons.info/) When you have completed that you can move on to the RAF Historical Society Journals. (https://www.raf.mod.uk/history/rafhistoricalsocietyjournals.cfm) I recommend that you read Journals 14, 17A, 26 and 28.

YS

Petet

26th Aug 2017, 09:24

Yellow Sun

Thanks for the leads .... I will read through them and hopefully find the answers to my questions.

Regards (and thanks again)

Pete

Pontius Navigator

26th Aug 2017, 10:22

I am not certain of the difference between shape and training. They might have been the same thing OTOH a Shape might not have had a practice package - barastats, weapons responses etc. I have a friend who is can retired armourer. I won't see him four 2-3 weeks, I will try and remember to ask him.

Timelord

26th Aug 2017, 14:12

I think "shape" was a shorthand / slang term for any form of simulated / training weapon carried that was more properly called a training round. You used to hear of people dropping "shapes" and in later years I myself talked of dropping a "shape" from a Tornado which the boffins called a "proof vehicle".

Yellow Sun

26th Aug 2017, 17:26

The problem is that the nomenclature is a bit loosely used. Strictly speaking, a "shape" would be just that, a weapon casing filled with inert material so that it was of similar mass and C of G to the real thing and would thus have the same ballistic and aerodynamic characteristics. It's fine if all you want to do is load and unload it, carry it and (possibly) release it.

If you want to do a bit more then you need to develop a "training" or "drill" round. In addition to looking and weighing the same it may enable you to make pre-flight settings and may include a weapon response simulator (WRS) that provides the crew with the appropriate indications. The Vulcan used to carry a separate WRS (WRS 105) that could be used independently of a Shape and or in conjunction with the 28lb practice bomb. The WRS could be pre-programmed with a limit range of faults. All of these rounds were usually referred to as "shapes" although official documents may have used a different nomenclature.

You can then take things a stage further. Nuclear weapons are complex beasts with possibly multiple release modes. You not only need to test the ancillary systems in the design and testing phase but ensure they maintain serviceability when released to the front line. To achieve this you produce a number of rounds that are technically identical in all respects to the operational round except that they contain no fissile material. You would handle and store it in exactly the same way as the real thing and then return it to the manufacturing facility for strip inspection. You may even elect to drop a few for "proof" testing. In the UK these were described as "surveillance rounds". I never actually saw a surveillance round; they were quite rare; and I believe that most were issued to the RN as this was judged the most demanding environment. I suspect that these too would have sometimes been referred to as a "shape".

Then you get to the US weapons"..........er let's not go there, life is confusing enough!

YS

Petet

27th Aug 2017, 18:40

Thanks, as always, for the feedback.

Even though this is a minor subject in the overall scheme of my History of No 35 Squadron 1916 - 1982 project, I am finding it fascinating, albeit frustrating that I can't get the facts straight in my head .... but that is the joy of research.

Working on the basis that 35 Squadron aircraft carried either 28lb, 1000lb or nuclear (or nothing), I guess I need to establish if there was an inert (shape), training round and live round of each of these and (if feasible) work out when each would have been carried.

I will get there .... slowly but surely.

Regards (and thanks again)

Pete

Pontius Navigator

27th Aug 2017, 18:54

28lb was a training round in its own right.
1000lb bomb came is HE, HES or Inert. The latter was blue and was a 'shape' with an operational tail. HE(S) was a rare and perhaps mythical beast, I never saw one but it was in the stats. The requirement to drop two single 1000lb HES in each training period.
Up to 1966 the nuke was YS2. A number may have been dropped inert at West Freugh - I was at Waddo when a lot were dropped to prove the 2H attack profile.

I believe HE(S) was with only a small charge of 50lb HE also known as HE (Sand) or (Substitute) but that is rumour in confidence as I never saw one from 1964.

HE was either Mk 11 or Mk 12 (at that time) identical profile except one was of cast iron for airburst and frag and the other was forged for penetration and cratering. On 35 we certainly dropped a fair number in Cyprus either single or in sticks of up to 14. The earlier picture of Baz Gowling dropping 21x1000 117 tails was for a fire power demo. Our drops were usually pop up to 2,500 ft with 107 tails basically to get rid of stores approaching life expiry. That was 1971-73.

Petet

30th Aug 2017, 15:32

I have just obtained a copy of the No. 35 Squadron Record Book, which I now need to work through so that I can put all the bits of the jigsaw together.

A very quick look through shows that the 1000lb bomb was referred to as either "Retarded", "Ballistic" or "Short Look Attack"

I have currently identified the following types being utilised for exercises:

- No. 2 MKIII 25lb
- No 1 MKI and MKII 28lb
- MKII Tail Unit Type 117 1000lb
- MK6 Tail Unit 1000lb
- Type 107 (Short Look Attack) 1000lb

Hopefully, now that I have the ORB, your feedback and the various cross references that you have supplied, I will be able to make sense of it all.

Regards

Pete

Petet

1st Sep 2017, 13:43

Petet

1st Sep 2017, 14:18

Does anyone have copies of the RAF Akrotiri Flamingo Magazines as I note that at least one contains information and photographs of No 35 Squadron whilst it was based there, so I would love a copy (of the copy) for my archives.

Regards

Pete

Timelord

1st Sep 2017, 14:21

As mentioned, I am now working through the ORBs (1966 - 1972) and recording some of the information on the History of No 35 squadron website.

One thing which is quite predominant in the record books is the regular bombing competitions and I wondered how these were viewed.

Were they seen by individuals as "just another thing that had to be done" or were they seen as a really important way of demonstrating the quality of crews on your squadron

...... just curious really
Well, to one sort of officer success in a bomb comp was a good career move, to another sort success meant a jolly to the USA for Giant Voice. That plus professional and crew pride meant that most crews took them pretty seriously.

Pontius Navigator

1st Sep 2017, 14:50

It also depended on the competition. For one, around 1967, I was at Waddington and had a good overview. The competition low level route was embargoed. Canberra were tasked with target recce and boxes of imagery duly arrived on the station. Sqn Ldr Wpns decreed that the Waddo sqns would work as a wing. I don't know what Cottesmore did.

From the imagery target offsets were selected and offset values calculated by several crews to get the most accurate values. I don't recall results.

A year or so earlier 3 crews, sqn unk, took part in the SAC bomb comp. Results were displayed on huge blackboard in Cottesmore Ops.

Later, in Cyprus, on 35, one of our nav rads went for a touring holiday around targets and offsets. On the day he parked his Volvo on a target.

Petet

1st Sep 2017, 15:38

No. 35 Squadron's ORB contains a few photographs from a Radar Reflective Dinghy Trial that was carried out in 1971.

Again, my curiosity got the better of me, so I had to ask if the trial was successful and, if so, was the dinghy introduced into service?

Regards

Pete

SpazSinbad

28th Sep 2017, 06:05

Still have my Vulcan pilot's handbook somewhere....!!
Avro Vulcan B Mk-2 Aircrew Manual http://aviationarchives.********.com.au/2017/09/avro-vulcan-b-mk-2-aircrew-manual.html [add b l o g s p o t]

https://www.filefactory.com/file/58wfectz45tn/Vulcan%20B%20Mk-2%20Aircrew-Manual.pdf (40Mb) [that is very funny wording for blagspat] :}

Pontius Navigator

28th Sep 2017, 07:11

Petet, I remember the trial and AKAIK it involved a single seat dinghy and space blanket. I think it was detectable on the H2S but really needed a proper trial with ASV.

As with many ideas I don't think it progressed.

Pontius Navigator

28th Sep 2017, 07:27

A quick browse of the manual is very informative. I learnt things about the swivel seat of which I have no recollection.

I don't recall the Mk46 chute in use after the swivel seat mod.

I was surprised to see full coverage of the Mk21 regulator and pressure clothing some 5 years after all the aircraft had Mk 17F retrofit.

Now what I would like to see is an ODM that covered the Combat Power settings for the 301.

Petet

1st Oct 2017, 13:44

I am just trying to gain a bit more understanding about No. 35 Squadron during the period 1962 - 1969 and just wanted to double-check to see if it provided QRA throughout that period and whether there are any charts which show if and when there were any heightened alerts (other than for training purpose).

I am also unclear about whether the squadron provided QRA whilst based at Akrotiri (1969 - 1975) or was the role different within NEAF.

Finally, would the squadron have provided QRA at Scampton (1975 - 1982) or had the QRA role ceased by then?

Your usual words of wisdom would be much appreciated

Regards

Pete

Timelord

1st Oct 2017, 15:49

Bill Macgillivray

1st Oct 2017, 20:52

35 at Akrotiri did not provide QRA as was known in UK. Yes, we had stand-by crews etc. but not in the same manner as in UK nuclear days.

Bill

Pontius Navigator

1st Oct 2017, 21:14

The V-Force ceased QRA midnight on 30 Jun 1968.

During the QRA period squadrons had 11 crews. Once QRA ceased the squadron UE was reduced to 10 crews. In Cyprus both sqns had 10 crews. From 1971 to May 73 I know we never held alert. We used to have Exercise Hetti with aircraft loaded with training weapons and a fly off.

Once, under Air Cdre Stacey, probably 1971, after NEAF terminated Hetti he ordered all aircraft unloaded, 're-roled for conventional and loaded with 1000 lb HE.

I cannot recall whether it was 21x1000. We certainly flew with fewer and dud live drops but whether it was after Hetti I can't recall. I rather think weapons were not flown on this occasion. Stacey also insisted that everyone was issued with weapons and live ammunition. For aircrew this was 9mm Browning SLP and 10 rounds.

Blacksheep

2nd Oct 2017, 12:39

I recall that when doing "Combats" during a Mick or Mickey Finn, we would load an inert YS2 (or later, the WE177) weapon that had crew feedback responses. After they had gone through all the motions of setting the aircraft up for combat, the weapon would be removed and used on the next aircraft to reach generation status. Once we'd done the last one the wing was declared "Ready". On one occasion we had anticipated the "Mick" and generated our wing very quickly. Bomber Command HQ challenged us to fly them all off - which we did to their surprise.

Wander00

2nd Oct 2017, 13:10

PN - do you recall a guy called David Dinmore on 35 in Cyprus. Was my Best Man first time round

megan

2nd Oct 2017, 18:17

Could one ask what was/constituted "generation status"?

Pontius Navigator

2nd Oct 2017, 20:14

Wander, not when I was there, Nov 70-May 73

Pontius Navigator

2nd Oct 2017, 20:20

Could one ask what was/constituted "generation status"?

An aircraft was generated when it had been given the appropriate before flight servicing, combat checked by a crew, is pre-start checks completed, I don't think we started engines, declared serviceable, closed down power off, handed to the armourers, bomb loaded and checked by the armament supervisor, accepted by the crew and signed for by the captain.

Barksdale Boy

3rd Oct 2017, 00:07

Wander 00

He was a captain on 44 at Waddo in, I think, the early 70s.

Wander00

3rd Oct 2017, 10:53

PN/BB - thanks.

tourman68

21st Oct 2017, 12:15

This might be of interst to those of you who flew the Vulcan. I think it was shot in 1984. Any further info gratefully received.

PWUBSAqls6s&feature=youtu.be

Petet

23rd Oct 2017, 17:14

Thanks for your ongoing feedback and apologies for the late response but other elements of my project (plus a house renovation project) have taken centre stage.

I am back in the Vulcan era for a while and wondered if anyone knows if there is a book or document which accurately lists the serials and timescales that each aircraft was allocated to the various Wings.

The reason I ask is that I am sure that the No. 35 Squadron's Record Book has some incorrect serials, which I would like to sort out if I can.

If there is not a book, has anyone accessed the Movement Cards and, if so, do they show the Wing allocations?

Regards

Pete

Innominate

23rd Oct 2017, 18:01

Petet

Long time since I saw the movement cards, but ISTR they record at least the station to which an aircraft was alloted. I suggest you contact [email protected] and ask for a sample; you can then decide whether it's worth booking an appointment to see the microfilm.

Bear in mind that - like all records - they are only as accurate as the clerk who compiled the entries!

Timelord

23rd Oct 2017, 18:37

Pretty unlikely that a F540 ( if that is what you are referring to) has incorrect aircraft serials I would have thought. Aircraft did move around pretty often though.

Petet

24th Oct 2017, 07:56

Timelord; how I wish your comment were true, as it would make my research a lot easier. Sadly, the compilers were not always provided with the latest information, but they did the best job they could with what they were given.

I use the F540 as a very good start point, but try to validate against movement cards, accident cards, log books etc wherever I can.

Barksdale Boy

24th Oct 2017, 09:58

You may find the following three books helpful in your research: VULCAN Photo Album by Alan Todd ( a Control Column publication printed by Brayford Press Ltd., 56 Coulson Road , Lincoln); The Vulcan B Mk 2 from a Different Angle by Craig Bulman (published by Pentland Books); and VULCAN Last of the V-Bombers by Duncan Cubitt with Ken Ellis (published by Osprey Aerospace).

Pontius Navigator

25th Oct 2017, 11:25

I have one that lists first date, units, disposal. Can't remember the name and am sitting in the Sun in Madeira right now.

While an airframe may have been take on charge by a sqn in 1963 it would show as 9/12/35 in 1964 onwards.

Pontius Navigator

5th Nov 2017, 15:51

Tourman, thanks for the link. Question for those that know, when was the L-band aerial removed?

Pontius Navigator

5th Nov 2017, 15:57

I am back in the Vulcan era for a while and wondered if anyone knows if there is a book or document which accurately lists the serials and timescales that each aircraft was allocated to the various Wings.

The reason I ask is that I am sure that the No. 35 Squadron's Record Book has some incorrect serials, which I would like to sort out if I can.

As mentioned above,

Avro Vulcan Robert Jackson, Patrick Stephens Ltd, 1984 Cambridge lists the basic information on each aircraft. ISBN 0-85059-630-0

First one shown is 536 16 Dec 59, then 538, 557, 562, 783 (NEAF), 823, 824 (NEAF), 825, 321, 359 - 361, 392, 443, - 446, 569, 595, 597, 599, 600, 603 - 612, 645 - 657

Several aircraft were shown belonging to the Scampton Wing and would also have been available to 35 Sqn but not necessarily flown by any 35 Sqn crew.