Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

The Handley Page Victor.

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

The Handley Page Victor.

Old 23rd Apr 2004, 17:38
  #81 (permalink)  

Free Man, Not a Number
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Well here of course.
Age: 54
Posts: 307
You mean this one?



Credit to Thunder and Lightnings web site.
You want it when? is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2004, 18:14
  #82 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Glorious rural Oxfordshire... never to return Sandside again :-)
Posts: 155
That's the one! Semi-complete fake... job wasn't even done in that airframe! Understand the load was dropped as a 'stick'.
Snakecharmer is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2004, 19:35
  #83 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 182
If a Victor 'lost' 35,000 pounds of AUW in such a short space of time, would it still fly straight and level??
Ray Dahvectac is offline  
Old 23rd Apr 2004, 21:28
  #84 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Unless you worked like a one-armed paper hanger, the Victor never flew straight and level in manual whatever, bless her little crescent wings.
Art Field is offline  
Old 24th Apr 2004, 04:23
  #85 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Canberra Australia
Posts: 1,300
Effects of Releasing Heavy Stuff

Dropped the first dummy10,000 pounder from a Vulcan Mk1 for clearance purposes.

Expected more aircraft reaction. It was only a momentary small g excursion - hardly felt.

Watched that big mother go out of the weapon bay on closed circuit video as it dropped away gently rocking in pitch.

The drop of an extraction 20,000 pound load from a C130 was more of an event but still only transitory as the load rolled down the fuselage and over the ramp.

Then as a fighter jock I once dropped one of two 500 pounders from a Mustang in a 60 degree dive bomb attack on a T34 tank. The recovery from the dive came real close to doing me in. But I got the tank!
Milt is offline  
Old 16th May 2018, 10:25
  #86 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 0
Smile Victor K2 Trip!

Was very fortunate to have had a trip in a Victor K2 XH672 whilst at Marham, went up for 3 hours 10 in a immersion suit over the north sea area 5, near RAF Leuchars as you well know refuelling 4x harriers from RAFG. I how understand how you lot must have felt in these conditions hour after hour!

Glider 90
GLIDER 90 is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 00:32
  #87 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: SW England
Age: 73
Posts: 3,783
Gosh - 14 years after the previous post may not be a record, but it cant be far off.

I see that I didn't contribute to this thread the first time round, but it has been most interesting reading through it. I know it's not normal to reveal PPRuNers names as a rule, but I think I am ok to say that Art Field, who made many contributions, was the late Sqn Ldr Paul Gausden, a real gentleman and a great tanker pilot, with whom I had the pleasure of flying many times on Victor K1s on 214. I particularly liked this post of his:

How about standing in your porch, looking through the letter box, trying to land your house which allegedly lands itself, trying to stop it by opening the back door, which will often fall off and will then have to be put back on from a great height in the pouring rain and never quite fits.

Of course you had to get the darn thing airborne in the first place, if only Fred's Shed had actually put intakes in front of the Sapphires instead of more letter boxes then the multi ton budgie might have been less of of a concrete gobbler, thank goodness for the Mk2.
Concrete gobblers they certainly were, and a later comment of Paul's that the Victor wouldn't fly in a straight line no matter what you did was particularly true of XA 930 which had been at Farnborough for a few years, where it had been subjected to such indignities as being barrel rolled. This had resulted in a "bent" airframe and on a long straight leg you would gradually become aware of the fact the aircraft was proceeding in a very slow corkscrew, something which you sensed through the seat of your pants.

I spent nearly 6 years on the Victor, and while it would be an exaggeration to say I enjoyed every minute (two hours tanker/tanker work on Towline 2 palled after a while), as would 45 minutes in the circuit at the end of a trip (Pontifex please note!). I nevertheless really enjoyed my time on 214 and would do it all over again without hesitation (assuming I was 24 again!)
Tankertrashnav is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 05:21
  #88 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,684
Great to see this thread resurrected. Love the comments about handling, particularly about it landing itself. I still get told this folklore as a point of fact. I gather it may have done once, when it was much lighter and had a longer fin. But after it was shortened to prevent the tail-plane from dropping off, this changed. It was quite challenging to fly, especially in the landing. And once you were on the ground, the next real adventure of stopping the thing began as it had the same brakes as a Morris Minor!

Glad I flew it though. And it's a great talking point when asked what I used to fly on long boring airliner flights. None of my FOs know what it is, so I have to show them a picture. "What the F#ck!" is the usual response.
Dan Winterland is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 07:42
  #89 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 20
Fuel Jettison

I have just read "Victor Boys" by Tony Blackman, which I can heartily recommend. However, it contains several factual errors, largely concerning dates, but another is regarding fuel jettison. The book contains an assertion that the Victor had no fuel jettison capability until the introduction of the K2, which is patently untrue as the SR2 had that facility long before the K2 came into service. As my only Victor experience was on 543, I don't know if the B2 shared that facility. Would any ex-100 or 139ers care to clarify the matter?
stumblefingers is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 08:07
  #90 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK (and now rarely behind enemy lines but still enjoying foreign climes.)
Posts: 1,339
Originally Posted by Dan Winterland View Post
None of my FOs know what it is, so I have to show them a picture. "What the F#ck!" is the usual response.
The youngsters of today, eh Dan? They know so little about the aircraft of the Golden Era of aviation.

The Victor was a grand ol' ship and we had some interesting adventures with her!
MrBernoulli is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 09:58
  #91 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: 51.50N 1W (ish)
Posts: 1,012
A retired ETPS graduate of my bar circle started his career on Valiants (which he said was a much underrated aeroplane), and flew a substatial number of trials in Victor and Vulcan; he is of the opinion that the Victor 2 was by far the best of the 3 Vs.

Also that the Nimrod was easily the best bomber for the Black Buck missions ....
Fitter2 is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 10:44
  #92 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: SW England
Age: 73
Posts: 3,783
K1s and K2s also had the additional fuel jettison facility through the pods, of course, which I used on a couple of occasions. The main jettison position was only used in an emergency as the jettisoned fuel could contaminate electrical equipment in the unpressurised aft compartment. We once had an aircraft fueled to 40k lbs for a transit from Marham to Leuchars, but it went U/S on start up and the only alternative aircraft was fueled up to the max 86k. My flight commander captain was unwilling to wait for this one to be defueled, so we took it as was, and all the way up the North Sea I dumped 40k of fuel through the pods to get us down to landing weight (25k as I recall) at Leuchars. We could also use the pods to "mark" ie jettison a small amount to create a mini contrail to make ourselves more visible and assist the RV with the receiver, Nowadays we would no doubt be accused of creating chemtrails!
Tankertrashnav is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 18:16
  #93 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,646
I recall a Mk 1 with an engine failure on take off at Akrotiri. They started fuel jettison even before clearing the boundary fence and continued streaming thoughout the circuit. A tannoy forbade smoking on the base. The smell of avtur was everywhere. That was around 71-72
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 19:09
  #94 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 155
Few Cloudy - Before anyone could intervene there was a loud bang and strong smell of explosive exhaust in the cockpit. The hatch, which had, as it transpired, not been designed to blow with a pressurised cabin, stayed on. The aircraft did not depressurise.
Having got the by now white faced Radar back to his position and examined the damage (jacks partially torn from the structure - torque mechanism hadn't budged) the Captain returned to his seat.
Was there some sort of interlock to stop the seat firing if the canopy hadn't departed?
topgas is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 19:20
  #95 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 4,683
A different type but the Valiant had a jettison system.

The underwing tanks, each holding 12,500 lbs of fuel were designed to be jettisoned in toto. being a hangover from a project when they were thinking of using them as bomb bays.

There were three mushroom valves in the bottom of each tank which when opened released the fuel. In an emergency one could put combat nitrogen pressure in the tanks and they would unload 25,000lbs in about two minutes.

The checklist was very convenient because it stated that at REP 3, the initial letdown point, the underwings had to be cleared of residual fuel as none was permitted on landing. Depending on the time of day, bar opening hours, rear crews' opinion of circuit bashing a competent co-pilot like me could arrange a that a considerable amount of fuel could be left in the underwings when we arrived at the start of the letdown.

There were some fairly massive contrails over the coast of East Anglia.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 21:07
  #96 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 477
Originally Posted by Pontius Navigator View Post
I recall a Mk 1 with an engine failure on take off at Akrotiri. They started fuel jettison even before clearing the boundary fence and continued streaming thoughout the circuit. A tannoy forbade smoking on the base. The smell of avtur was everywhere. That was around 71-72
Marham, early ‘73, co-pilot being checked by the ‘Standardisation’ pilot (Rod J)
Scheduled to go to a North Sea Towline, immediately after take off the examiner called Practice Engine Failure No 4 and called for flight idle no 4 - we did all that simulated stuff, staggered up to (was it) 1000 feet and did a GCA
AT 180 feet finals he said that he could land, called overshooting and called for full power on 1,2and 3- there was then a bang and the number three fire warning light came on.
This wasn’t looking too good as we were heavy and the Victor 1A wasn’t too good on 4 never mind three or fewer.
We dumped an enormous amount of fuel in the circuit thru’ the HDU and the port pod
We landed successfully and shut down on the runway.
There was a strong smell of aviation fuel in the vicinity.

NRU74 is offline  
Old 17th May 2018, 21:14
  #97 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 20
Sorry, I was just trying to find out if all the Mk 2s were capable of fuel jettison, or just the SR2s and K2s.
stumblefingers is offline  
Old 18th May 2018, 08:10
  #98 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brisbane Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 45
Originally Posted by Snakecharmer View Post
That's the one! Semi-complete fake... job wasn't even done in that airframe! Understand the load was dropped as a 'stick'.
Wrong!!!
I was a member of the bombing up team that loaded the 35x1000lb aboard XH-648 belonging to XV Sqn based at RAFCottesmore. We were on detachment to RAAF Butterworth in early 1964.The bombs were dropped on the Song Song bombing range about 60 mls from Penang. It was only the second time it had ever been done, the first was on acceptance. We had to rehearse the load a couple of times to get them all in after we had removed the long range tank.

The photo was taken from an 81 Sqn Canberra from RAF Tengah flying alongside and I understand that it is a still from a PR camera.To get the bombs that close together the Jettison selection would have been made on the 12/24 way bomb system.This gave a spacing of about 0.1 sec if memory serves.

About 3 days later the Sqn Armament Officer showed us the photo and of course we all wanted one but it had been designated Secret and it was a few years before the photo was published widely.
ozleckie is offline  
Old 18th May 2018, 11:35
  #99 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,085
there's a whole thread on that picture somewhere on here .......................................

Victor as conventional bomber
Heathrow Harry is offline  
Old 18th May 2018, 18:10
  #100 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 4,684
Sorry, I was just trying to find out if all the Mk 2s were capable of fuel jettison, or just the SR2s and K2s
.

B2s were. The fuel jettison point on the K2 was in the tail cone and looked a bit like a bum hole. If the drop tanks were fitted, then they could jettison fuel as well. And on the K2, the pods too - giving that aircraft 5 points to dump from. I have a set of B2 Blue Steel pilot's notes which mentions dumping from the fuselage but I don't know where the exit point was. It was not in the tail cone as this was occupied by the rear aspect radar. The notes it was important to ensure that adjacent electrical equipment was turned off. This obviously refers to the rear radar and ECM.
Dan Winterland is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.