Bomber role - why was Vulcan picked over Victor?
The Victors of 55 & 57 used to take up almost all of Honington's runway with just a 10 k inert on board. I watched a tanker version take off at Tengah once, never again.
At the last moment there was a bit of a lurch , and there was flight - of sorts. The tanker seemed to follow the curvature of the earth until, a long way out, it climbed away. It struck me that a Victor K1 with full fuel load was not a place to be if there were an engine failure on take off - but perhaps an ex K1 aircrew could advise on that. I guess a fully-loaded B1 would have been in the same situation. Fortunately by that time the Sapphire was pretty reliable.
A couple of points. In six years of flying in the back of K1s I never once experienced an engine failure, or even a precautionary shutdown. After a rather shaky start in life, the Sapphire settled down to be a thoroughly reliable engine, although admittedly a little short on thrust and on occasions 101.5% power was used on takeoff. We used to practise assymetric circuits where the fuel dump facility referred to by P-N was only simulated, as the Norfolk farmers might have objected to their crops being sprayed with Avtur.
Second point - the "bit of a lurch" you talk about was when all three rearcrew simultaneously reached down, grabbed their seats, and pulled upwards - worked every time
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Wander, probably not. In numbers maybe but if you factor in numbers of each type and flying hours in service then it was probably pretty steady. The exception would be the tankers.
Once the tankers were removed from the stress of low level flying and a reduced predeliction for trying to penetrate CuGr the losses would have been very low indeed.
TTN mentioned the reliability of the Sapphire. During my time in the Vulcan about 300 hours mtbf was good although many shut downs were precautionary. Unlike passenger jet useage the military engines were rarely run at a constant setting for many hours. They were also amongst the most powerful unreheated engines in service anywhere at the time.
Once the tankers were removed from the stress of low level flying and a reduced predeliction for trying to penetrate CuGr the losses would have been very low indeed.
TTN mentioned the reliability of the Sapphire. During my time in the Vulcan about 300 hours mtbf was good although many shut downs were precautionary. Unlike passenger jet useage the military engines were rarely run at a constant setting for many hours. They were also amongst the most powerful unreheated engines in service anywhere at the time.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Witney UK
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tankertrashnav. Not as good as Pontifex but a Valiant co and Victor 1 and 2 QFI. There were hairy moments on Valiants because we, on occasions, did not have the protection of having a stop speed that was above a go speed and still had to go. There was rather a short amount of knowledge on performance all round. They fitted WaterMeth inject on the Tankers which gave us another 1000lbs thrust per engine and boy was that welcome but even so I can remember waiting at take-off for fuel to burn off before launching.
The VictorK1 was only maginally better but fortunately there was, by the time it became a Tanker, a much better understanding of performance. Even so you could get caught out by the difference between met temperature and runway surface temperature which was often quite a bit higher. I have vivid memories of lifting off on the sand at the end of Masirah. According to the performance graphs you would be able to fly a circuit, having lost an engine, if you were below the T/O weight the graph gave you but I sometimes had my doubt. When we got the K2, well!!
The VictorK1 was only maginally better but fortunately there was, by the time it became a Tanker, a much better understanding of performance. Even so you could get caught out by the difference between met temperature and runway surface temperature which was often quite a bit higher. I have vivid memories of lifting off on the sand at the end of Masirah. According to the performance graphs you would be able to fly a circuit, having lost an engine, if you were below the T/O weight the graph gave you but I sometimes had my doubt. When we got the K2, well!!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AF,
When 214 tanked for the Javelins to the far east, the take off's from Gan were done before the sun came up and with water meth.
The locals all complained that we woke them up!
When 214 tanked for the Javelins to the far east, the take off's from Gan were done before the sun came up and with water meth.
The locals all complained that we woke them up!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7,072
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slightly off topic but there's photo of Victor dropping a shed load of (conventioanl) bombs in one of Bill Gunston's books - but he rather enigmatically says that there is something odd about it but not what - any ideas???
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Looking at the photo, if we number the septupal carriers from the front the drop sequence would appear to have been the lower 3 bombs from carrier 3, then 5 then 1. They were followed by the top 4 from carrier 5, then 3 then 1 in pairs thus giving the sequence 5-3-1-5-3-1.
From that you can see the sequence went from 3-5-1 to 5-3-1. Then followed 3 each from 4-2 and then 4 each from 4-2.
The oddity would appear to be the drop of the initial 3 from carrier 3 rather than 5.
The bombs on carrier 5 also show an uneveness in attitude possibly due to turbulence.
Will that do?
From that you can see the sequence went from 3-5-1 to 5-3-1. Then followed 3 each from 4-2 and then 4 each from 4-2.
The oddity would appear to be the drop of the initial 3 from carrier 3 rather than 5.
The bombs on carrier 5 also show an uneveness in attitude possibly due to turbulence.
Will that do?
Take offs in a Valiant from Eastleigh, Nairobi were always doubles. The water meth tanks held 1410 lbs of stuff and it lasted 90 seconds. That was precisly the point at which the mainwheels left the runway;...... you lost 4,000lbs of thrust and the mainwheels left the runway again some time later.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: 58-33N. 00-18W. Peterborough UK
Posts: 3,040
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There's a photograph of 1 Victor + 35/1,000lbs at Song Song. Page 19.
http://www.raf-butterworth-penang-as...istmas2009.pdf
http://www.raf-butterworth-penang-as...istmas2009.pdf
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
Harry, it wasn't.
A copy was presented to Strategic Air Command at Offutt. They were so impressed they requested a similar one of a Vulcan dropping 21.
Unlike the Victor drop the Vulcan drop showed a simple stack of 21 bombs as their drop pattern was sequential from all the carriers rather than in blocks as I described the Victor drop.
The first Vulcan camera drop ended in farce. The drop was at Aberporth and a chase was to photograph the drop. The crew duly ran in on the target. At the appropriate point the bomb doors opened and 7 seconds after that the bombs cleared the aircraft.
Before the crew could even call bombs gone they heard:
"Stand-by to drop, in 5 -4 -3 -2 -1"
Too late she cried and of course the chase did not have its camera running. No one had told the crew that the ground control would call the drop. The second went without a hitch. A third drop was then arranged at El Adem, this time with HE. I have a photograph from that drop arriving. It was taken by a Daily Telegraph photographer and I have a copy of the original slide somewhere. The picture was in pure black and orange.
A copy was presented to Strategic Air Command at Offutt. They were so impressed they requested a similar one of a Vulcan dropping 21.
Unlike the Victor drop the Vulcan drop showed a simple stack of 21 bombs as their drop pattern was sequential from all the carriers rather than in blocks as I described the Victor drop.
The first Vulcan camera drop ended in farce. The drop was at Aberporth and a chase was to photograph the drop. The crew duly ran in on the target. At the appropriate point the bomb doors opened and 7 seconds after that the bombs cleared the aircraft.
Before the crew could even call bombs gone they heard:
"Stand-by to drop, in 5 -4 -3 -2 -1"
Too late she cried and of course the chase did not have its camera running. No one had told the crew that the ground control would call the drop. The second went without a hitch. A third drop was then arranged at El Adem, this time with HE. I have a photograph from that drop arriving. It was taken by a Daily Telegraph photographer and I have a copy of the original slide somewhere. The picture was in pure black and orange.
