Victor Airborne (Merged)

[TheChitterneFlyer]

Quote:
A Mk2 Victor rolled over once at RAF Wyton with the expected outcome...

I dont quite see what that has got to do with this case. The aircraft in question as I recall was attempting a practice assymetric landing and the accident was caused by a gross imbalance of power when full throttle was applied on the two "live" engines at touchdown. Entirely irrelevant here.

I think what 'Victor Owner' was trying to say was simply that had the wingtip struck the ground that the outcome might well have been very similar to the Wyton incident; which I remember only too well!

[saracenman]

regarding any potential 'Victor to the Sky' - as Bubbles says - NO!

the ONLY reason that Vulcan 558 (not any Vulcan but that one in particular) was able to return to flight, was due to the foresight of David Walton who bought her from the RAF - along with over 600 tons of spares, including eight zero-time (effectively brand new) engines.

a strict servicing/care/maintenance shedule was carried out, with all relevant paperwork, just in case the CAA ever said "yes" without those quantities of spares and the stringent regime for the airframe and spares, there wouldn't have been a hope in hell's chance of 558 flying again.

no such stock of spares exist for the Victors - the chaps at Brunty and Elvington do a remarkable job with what little they have at their disposal.

even if a 558-story were to exist in the case of Victor, and spares were available off the shelf, the airframe construction is wholly different to the mighty Avro's. whereas the Vulcan is built in the more traditional manner, with ribs and stringers etc with a skin riveted on top, the Victor uses what was very advanced construction in its day - lots of honeycomb structures and bonded surfaces etc.

the actual engineering task involved with any 're-lifing' of a Victor airframe would be many times the complexity and cost of the same with 558

also, as Bubbles says, the Victor's FI (fatigue index) is well and truly spent. prior to GW1, and i forget the precise figures, the Victor K2 fleet had their FI extended beyond what had originally been determined as officially 'knackered' to cater for the extra tanking demands on the UK tanker fleet - not all current VC10 Ks were in service at that time. effectively, whilst 558 originally retired from the RAF with very little FI left, the Victors ended up surpassing their projected life span by some margin.

personally, i'd LOVE to see a Victor up and about in the same way as 558 - but it just ain't ever gonna happen sadly

we do have second best, with the EXCELLENT work done at Brunty and Elvington - long may it continue!

sm

[coldair]

Great photo to be found here ;

Bruntingthorpe Cold War Jets Open Day 3rd May - Page 10 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums

Just scroll down a bit.

[coldplayer]

Something just jumped into my head regd. the gust that probably pushed it over Vmu - when she eventually got back on the deck - completely p1ssed BTW -she was past the trees that helped drop the relative windspeed at that point, and reduced weathercocking force too

May I just point out that all this talk about a strong x-wind is a red herring. It was windy, but not that windy. May I also point out that if the wind WAS outside the x-wind limits of an aircraft the size of a Victor, then we all witnessed 2 light aircraft take off within minutes of this cock-up illegally being, by definition, way outside their x-wind limits.

Which is it to be? It can't be both....

[BOAC73]

RAF pilots....

....were they not enlisted as chaps who could offer a certain amount of "Derring Do"
Also, how do we know that the recovery was NOT the act of a skilled Pilot, but just pure luck?
Far to many drama queens posting here heh Coldplayer?
B73

[Michael Birbeck]

Victor not to fly again.

Saracenman

Thanks for the detailed update. Reading this it is clear that we are most unlikley to see the Victor in the air again but all power (but not too much though ) to the two teams keeping their aircraft running and at least rolling.

[F14]

Same thing happened with Southend's Vulcan many years ago.

Light fuel load, highspeed taxi run followed by aerodynamic braking.

Unfortunately the Vulcan got airborne. Then sank back on damaging some wheels!

Not sure if there are any pics, but I remember a TV crew was there

[bubblesuk]

also, as Bubbles says, the Victor's FI (fatigue index) is well and truly spent. prior to GW1, and i forget the precise figures, the Victor K2 fleet had their FI extended beyond what had originally been determined as officially 'knackered' to cater for the extra tanking demands on the UK tanker fleet - not all current VC10 Ks were in service at that time. effectively, whilst 558 originally retired from the RAF with very little FI left, the Victors ended up surpassing their projected life span by some margin.

Off the top of my head i believe the figure was 125fi or there abouts.


Oh and trust you to mention VC10s

[Amos Keeto]

Has anyone suggested that Cosford might amend the history of their Victor XH672, which was the last of the type to fly 'officially' Here is their record of the last flight:

30 Nov 93 Flown from Marham to RAF Shawbury, Salop by the ‘Victor Disposal Flight’ - the last ever flight by a Victor (although two privately preserved examples are maintained in taxiable condition at Bruntingthorpe and Elvington) The 3,700 foot Cosford runway was too short, with no over-runs available, to safely land a Mk.2 Victor. Pilots for the last flight, call sign again ‘Spartan 1’ were Sqn Ldr. Steve Jenkins and F/Lt. Tony Inglebrecht, who both kept their hands on the controls so that they could both claim to have made the last Victor landing. Also on board was former Handley Page test pilot Johnny Allam, who carried out test and development flights on most Victor variants-this was his first and only Victor passenger flight. Delivery flight made minus the underwing fuel tanks. Total flying hours 8196.

94 Dismantled and moved by road to RAF Cosford, Salop by February 1994 to join the Aerospace Museum there, where it remains on outside display

[JW411]

I could have sworn that the Victor was inside the new Cold War building last time I visited.

[andyy]

Got this from another web site discussing the same incident. How true it is, I don't know but it appears to be a statement from someone with significant insider knowledge:

"the victor was being commanded by an ex pilot of that type but the throttle man was just a helper under instruction from the pilot when instructed to shut down the throttles he only reduced it a bit the pilot then told him all the way at witch point he panicked and went to full power instead the rest is history."

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

Originally Posted by BEagle

People want to see the jet set off at max chat down the RW - but there is absolutely no point in accelerating to high speeds. No-one will be able to see, in any case.

The only point I can see in achieving a high speed is to be able to raise the nose, which undoubtedly makes for a more interesting spectacle and a more compelling still photo (since an aircraft taxiing at speed doesn't look much different with changing speed until the nose lifts).

The problem, of course, is that the same high speed required to be able to lift the nose introduces two additional risks of (a) inadvertent flight as seen here (which lifting the nose obviously exacerbates) or (b) runway overrun (whether or not the a/c gets airborne).

I can certainly conceive of a situation - as seems to be the case here, based on the actual event - where minimum Vr and Vmu for an aircraft are dangerously close, such that rotation virtually automatically brings the risk of liftoff. Es[ecially if the cg is relatively aft - and with no explicit flight release, how do you reallu know where the cg is, I wonder?

It certainly seems to me that the benefit in going over, say, 70-80 knots is outweighed by the risk to the airframe and those on board incurred by doing so.

[norodnik]

out of pure idle interest.... had the pilot considered it unsafe to put the Victor back down (due to over-running etc), would the aircraft have been able to do a circuit ? Do the fast taxi runs include enough fuel for the just in case scenario ? Would the pilot have had sufficient skills to complete the task assuming the aircraft held together and all the necessary moving parts did what they were supposed to?

Chances of sucess ?? on a scale of 1 -10 with 1 being C&B.

[Alber Ratman]

Victor Owner, you state that your aircraft is maintained to FULL Servicability. When was the last time it had a service to Primary, Minor or Major Maintenance levels as it would have required to be classed as servicable?? At Marham would have been the last time.

The ANO is specific on aircraft without a C of A or permit.

[BEagle]

May I also point out that if the wind WAS outside the x-wind limits of an aircraft the size of a Victor, then we all witnessed 2 light aircraft take off within minutes of this cock-up illegally being, by definition, way outside their x-wind limits.

Not so. A swept wing aircraft will often have a lower crosswind limit than a straight wing aeroplane.

Raising the nosewheel 'to make a more compelling still photo' is just asking for trouble.

The Victor is not, and never has been, on the civil register. So all this tosh about the ANO is wholly irrelevant.

And if the 'throttle man' really did react as described, that smacks of a wholly inadequate briefing before the run.

[TheChitterneFlyer]

I think this subject has been 'done to death'... we all agree that we want to keep these old ladies in a 'pseudo' flying condition; so, let's revisit our philosophies and come to terms with what we ought not to, or might have to, change, in order to keep the 'Status Quo'... and then get on with it!

[chevvron]

Considering the Victor was our first supersonic bomber (it only required the nose to be dropped below level flight at high M no/high level according to a Farnborough test pilot) and the type successfully 'attacked' the USA in the late 50s, every effort should be made to keep it in the best possible condition; pity it could never be made flyable though.

[MichaelJP59]

I think this subject has been 'done to death'...

Probably not 'done to death' until (a) we see video of the incident, and (b) get a proper report from the flight deck. Then loads more discussion can and will ensue

[Whiskey Papa]

Teasin' Tina - more photos

There's some high definition photos here, scroll down about threequarters. Also look at last photo at very bottom :-)

Sunny Brunty! 3-5-09 more pics added 6-5-09

WP

[Tankertrashnav]

Considering the Victor was our first supersonic bomber (it only required the nose to be dropped below level flight at high M no/high level

Quite right Chevron. There's an interesting account of a K1A going supersonic (just) over Paris on Tony Cunnane's excellent website here Paris supersonic