Did You Fly The Vulcan?? (Merged)
Thread Starter
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!
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!
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
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.
Paris supersonic - Tony Cunnane's Life and Times
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.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Garden of England
Age: 85
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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?
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?
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
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.
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.
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Wakefield
Age: 88
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ref Paris supersonic over Paris
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.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
ECM Aerials
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?
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?
Thread Starter
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.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
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.
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
Thread Starter
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.
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.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
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.
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.
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
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
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.
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.
Last edited by Pontius Navigator; 9th Jan 2012 at 11:37.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: reading
Age: 77
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"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!!
That liquid was (still is?) called Hellerine and it had a wonderful smell!!
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Next someone will say they liked the feel and texture of the black rubber thingies
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Scorpion, thank you for tossing that in. I think you make my point rather less eloquently.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: France
Age: 80
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hellerine
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
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
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: France
Posts: 2,315
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
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
"you did remember to slide the sleeve on the wire before soldering, didn't you ?? " Nope, not always....
CJ