The V-Bombers

[MolliG]

Vickers Valiant
http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/valiant_3vw.gif

Avro Vulcan
http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/vulcan_3vw.gif

Handley-Page Victor
http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/victor_3vw.gif

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/victorb11024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/vulcanb11024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/valscramble1024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/vulcscramble1024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/10victors1024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/blueload1024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/617vulcanb21024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/vulcansr21024.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/3vbombers.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/valiantbbay.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/valiantnight.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/vulcanb2.jpg

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/victorb2.jpg

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Uk/Ysunmk2.jpg
Yellow Sun H-Bomb.

http://www.raf.mod.uk/history/images/bluesteel_t.jpg
Blue Steel stand-off nuclear missile.

www.raf.mod.uk

:D

[Falco]

Good pics woot

[Tengu]

wow that is one weird looking plane. Nice pics man.


http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/vulcanb11024.jpg

[joshfox0]

mmmm old school lovely pics.

[AFACadet]

I saw the Vulcan at Barksdale AFB. I was surprised how small it was (the pictures make it look MUCH larger).


Its too bad that the UK got rid of their bomber fleet. They would have come in real handy during these last couple of years.

[Guttorm]

NICE!

Those be som luverly planes!

[cut]

http://www.raf.mod.uk/downloads/gallery/vulcanb11024.jpg

cheers MolliG this vulcan pic is my new desktop background :D

[Fintin]

i dont know...maybe its just me, but those just look cooler then modern planes....they were designed to look good and work well, todays stuff is all about the works part....kinda like cars for the most part

[jassemon]

Wow! Great pics! woot

[CannibalSquirel]

Very cool pic´s!

[Ian H]

Very, very nice, thanks.

Agree with AFACadet, we could use the Vulcan or an equivalent replacement today.

FYI, Polaris replaced the V-Bomber fleet from the mid to late 60's. Valiant went out of service first, mid 60's I believe, Victor was re-roled to a tanker, served until early 90's, Vulcan kept in small numbers until mid 80's. They were used in the Falklands, flying from Britain, then the longest combat missions ever, dunno about now though. Went out of service in the mid 80's due to the concentration on a European war, and the need for tactical aircraft. And maybe age.

Feel free to correct or elaborate.

[Identity31690]

The Victor is one nice looking plane.

Great pics!

[ronin2172]

I love the vulcan! Ever since i saw it in Thunderball I have loved it.

I was wondering if the premature (In my opinion) retirement of the v bombers was a possible result of the Defence white paper ( i can't remember the year) which i think stated that manned aircraft were obsolete.

i know a lot of promising British aircraft projects were cancelled because of that.

And i agree with everyone else these r great pics!

[Midav]

Nice pics!

The Vulcan is still one of the coolest looking aircraft I've yet seen.

[AFACadet]

Much of the retirement of the world's bombers was due to a few things.


Perhaps the biggest was cost. It is EXTREMELY expensive to build, fly, and maintain a bomber fleet. For example, the B-52 costs over $6,000 dollars per HOUR. The B-1b and B-2 are higher than that.

Very few countries can afford that expense.



Another large reason was shortsidedness of planners. Many felt that the day of the bomber was over because they could be easily shot down and their was no longer a mission for them. Most countries saw bombers as flying only two missions, strategic attack with dumb bombs WWII style or nuclear delivery.


For many of these countries, they saw bombers only having a limited value with carpet bombing tactics and ICBMs did a better job of getting nuclear weapons to the target.


All three (plus a few others) combined to make it that only the US and Russia (plus some other CIS) wanted/could afford a bomber fleet. Of those, only the US puts huge resources in upgrading the aircraft and weapons on a continual basis.

People doubting bombers continued until OIF and OEF when a heavy bomber carrying large amounts of PGMs was one of the most effective aircraft to the war effort.


Now, I think most military planners around the world understand that with proper technology, weapons, and tactics, heavy bombers can be important even in limited wars involving small groups of insurgents or terrorists--be they in rocky or flat terrain.


Plus, there is just nothing else out there that can take out 2,000 guys in a single pass p-)

[ShadowNeo]

I have always liked the look of the Victor, from head on it looks pretty menacing, I loved seeing them at Air Shows :).

The Valiant has always reminded me of the front of a Vulcan stuck onto a Victor's body too ;).

[hank]

That Vulcan sittin on the ocean floor in Thunderball is still one of the first cool "army stuff" in movies memories I have. That was a Vulcan, wasn't it?

hank

[Sabre]

The Vulcan was designed in the "Pre-SAM" era. It was designed to fly high where the air is thinner and fuel requirements lower. The development of Soviet SAMs in the 50's made this impossible as the aircraft would be too vulnerable at altitude. Therefore, the crew had to fly lower and the fuel expenditure was vastly increased. As a result, the Vulcan could not carry enough fuel for a return flight from the USSR. The plan was for the crews to fly to their target, launch the weapon, and then fly east until they ran out of fuel and bail out over the Urals. Then they were to do what they saw fit. Not many options for aircrew in a hostile country on which they just dropped a nuclear weapon, though. :|

NB: The white paint scheme was to aid in reflecting the radiation from the blast. Apparently!

[Ian H]

I was wondering if the premature (In my opinion) retirement of the v bombers was a possible result of the Defence white paper ( i can't remember the year) which i think stated that manned aircraft were obsolete.

i know a lot of promising British aircraft projects were cancelled because of that.


IIRC, that White Paper (1957) only recommended ceasing new manned aircraft development, not immediately withdrawing in service aircraft to a great extent. It didn't last long as a policy though.

It did lead to the cancellation of many promising aircraft, but not the V-Bombers. They continued to serve until it was decided to shift the UK's nuclear deterrent onto the Royal Navy, using Polaris missiles fired from R Class SSBN's.

Hank: Yes, it was a Vulcan in Thunderball. Hope your daughters well.

[big_les]

NB: The white paint scheme was to aid in reflecting the radiation from the blast. Apparently!

If it was to reflect anything, it would be flash rather than radiation, surely? Although I can't see white paint doing that much in that regard, either!

[DeltaWhisky58]

Despite its early nuclear role, the Vulcan carried on in service into the 1980s as a deep penetration low-lever strike bomber, Despite its size it had tremdouse low-lever eprformance and they were a common sight in the Scottish Highlands at 250' and lower.

The Vulcan last flew in 1994, however it is possible that this one (below) may return to the air either this year or next year for a period on the air display circuit.
http://www.f4aviation.co.uk/Oldstuff/vforce/xh558.JPG

[csqnsas]

One of my older friends was a Vulcan pilot in the 60ies. He still won't tell me his primary and secondary targets in the then USSR. The Vulcan was , still in the late 70ies one of the best low level bombers that NATO had. (The bucaneer was better but only carried one nuke).

If you can try to read any of the "Red Flag" reports of those Excersises of the 70-80ies.Even better try to get a few comms tapes. The Vulcan had a 'due to its size and shape very powerfull Radar jamming and EW capability as well as a early form of stealth design. Think about the B2 without the angles for a bit!.

The one I remember was of an American AA commander , in charge of a Chapparal AA system. Basically giving a sit rep of


" Nothing to report, all quiet in the area...........SH*t what the fukc was that " as a Vulcan flew over his location at 100 feet.
Even back then the Vulcan could mix with the best.

My friend also tells many tale of what the aircraft could and could not but did do!

Like full barrel rolls and loops. The idea was to carry out a half loop and use the momentum of that as the relese point of the big bang bomb.
Therefore the aircraft was flying away from the area as the bomb went off.

Also it is said to be impossible to fly any delta wing aircraft on its side. Not so the Vulcan, a good pilot(and they all were ) could use the power of the propulsion on one side to allow flight on the side. Again good pilots could also fly at zero feet across the sea /lakes using the ground lift effect . My friend tells a tale of him buzzing a canadian fisherman in his boat . So low that the guy jumped into the water -more likely he was blown over with the back wash from those fantastic power plants 80,000 lbs of thrust.

[Fenna]

Interesting post csqnsas.

I've read stories about the Buccaneer doing similar things at Red Flag, where the commander of air defence had been saying how impregnable his defences were, when a Buccaneer flew over.

There was a programme on Discovery called Vulcans, Victors and Valiants where former Vulcan pilots were interviewed. They said that each Russian city had 2 bombers assigned to it (not including fleet ballistic missiles or even the Americans own plans).

They also said that despite what people think, they did actually have plans for getting back to their British bases.

[csqnsas]

Fenna,

Just think about it !.

How close we have been to MAD, My friend took off on two occasions with a load of big bang bombs. Both times in the 60ies.

The Vulcan was a superb weapon.

Mind he also told me of seeing birds flying at 40,000 feet plus. That is impossible? or just improbibal?

I trust him to tell the truth touugh.

[AFACadet]

Not impossible, but almost.


The highest recorded altitude of any bird was 37,000 feet in 1975. No one knows what it was doing up there or even how it got up that high in the first place.


The max altitude of most brids is about 20,000 feet.

[DeltaWhisky58]

It's funny you should mention the Vulcan and ground effect. A friend of mine was the RAF's high-time Buccaneer pilot, and he always maintained that the Bucc could be flown at extremely low level over water and it would effectivlety float on a pressure cushion. His contention was that as so much of a Buccaneer's lift came from it's fuselage, it's entire surface was a lifting body and it would maintain its own separation from the water.

They claimed to fly at 550kts 25-30' off the water. Having seen some of their antics over the Moray Firth, I have no reason to doubt it. War-time low level altitude for the Buccaneer was around 50' - this was demonstrated many times on Red Flag. The Vulcans didn't fly much higher!

There was even a story of two Buccaneers flying in VERY close formation with a Vulcan, thus providing only one "iffy" radar signature when they could se them at all!

[Ian H]

Wow!

All there is to say really.

[Hydro]

The V-Bomber fleet were some of the most beautiful aircraft ever to fly, especially the Vulcan. Good ol' fashioned Cold War bombers with freefall H-Bombs :) I have to say, there's something eerie about the "Yellow Sun" H-bomb. Hard to believe something that small contains almost undreamt of power.

[Royal]

They were used in the Falklands, flying from Britain, then the longest combat missions ever, dunno about now though.

I believe some of the B2/B52 missions flown in recent years from ConUS are longer than the Black Buck raids in 1982. The other difference of course is that with modern GPS/LG bombs, they hit the target too (as opposed to turning Stanley Race Course into a venue for a Somme reenactment).

[Flagg]

I believe some of the B2/B52 missions flown in recent years from ConUS are longer than the Black Buck raids in 1982. The other difference of course is that with modern GPS/LG bombs, they hit the target too (as opposed to turning Stanley Race Course into a venue for a Somme reenactment).

I'm pretty sure I read some where that the Black Buck raids that focused on Defense Supression were reasonably successful.

The other thing I recall is a Black Buck Vulcan diverting to Brazil with mechanical difficulty on the return leg I believe......I wonder if the thought of being interned for the duration of the conflict on a Brazilian topless beach played a role in the decision making process ;)

[Royal]

I'm pretty sure I read some where that the Black Buck raids that focused on Defense Supression were reasonably successful.

That's because you believe British propaganda! Their mission was to crater the runway at Stanley to prevent Argentine C130's landing supplies at night (the task force had limited night CAS capability).


The other thing I recall is a Black Buck Vulcan diverting to Brazil with mechanical difficulty on the return leg I believe......I wonder if the thought of being interned for the duration of the conflict on a Brazilian topless beach played a role in the decision making process ;)

Brazil didn't intern any Brits during the conflict. In fact NP8902 were handed over in Brazil by the Argentines after the invasion, allowing them to come back and join the task force as part of M Coy 42 Commando ;)

[Flagg]

Flagg wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read some where that the Black Buck raids that focused on Defense Supression were reasonably successful.


That's because you believe British propaganda! Their mission was to crater the runway at Stanley to prevent Argentine C130's landing supplies at night (the task force had limited night CAS capability).

Flagg wrote:
The other thing I recall is a Black Buck Vulcan diverting to Brazil with mechanical difficulty on the return leg I believe......I wonder if the thought of being interned for the duration of the conflict on a Brazilian topless beach played a role in the decision making process


Brazil didn't intern any Brits during the conflict. In fact NP8902 were handed over in Brazil by the Argentines after the invasion, allowing them to come back and join the task force as part of M Coy 42 Commando

So are the Black Buck raids considered to be a "very low return on investment"?

Royal, I just found this in a quick Google search:


Three more Black Buck missions were flown, two of which included the firing of the Shrikes, with some success. During the last mission, Vulcan XM597 had the refueling probe snap off on the way home. Unable to take on fuel, the crew decided to divert to Brazil, where it was impounded for a week before being released.

EDIT: I think it was Black Buck 3 or 4

Now I'm confused???

[Royal]

Flagg wrote:
I'm pretty sure I read some where that the Black Buck raids that focused on Defense Supression were reasonably successful.


That's because you believe British propaganda! Their mission was to crater the runway at Stanley to prevent Argentine C130's landing supplies at night (the task force had limited night CAS capability).

Flagg wrote:
The other thing I recall is a Black Buck Vulcan diverting to Brazil with mechanical difficulty on the return leg I believe......I wonder if the thought of being interned for the duration of the conflict on a Brazilian topless beach played a role in the decision making process


Brazil didn't intern any Brits during the conflict. In fact NP8902 were handed over in Brazil by the Argentines after the invasion, allowing them to come back and join the task force as part of M Coy 42 Commando

So are the Black Buck raids considered to be a "very low return on investment"?

Royal, I just found this in a quick Google search:


Three more Black Buck missions were flown, two of which included the firing of the Shrikes, with some success. During the last mission, Vulcan XM597 had the refueling probe snap off on the way home. Unable to take on fuel, the crew decided to divert to Brazil, where it was impounded for a week before being released.

EDIT: I think it was Black Buck 3 or 4

Now I'm confused???

If I'm wrong (and I may be) I appologise, but I don't remember an internment being reported at the time (I was an Air Cadet at the time, so followed that side of things pretty closely) and I certainly don't remember reading about it subsequently...

[csqnsas]

Ah , Royal,

So you were also a 'spacey' me too when I came to the UK but then I became a pongo not a cabbage head.

[Royal]

Ah , Royal,

So you were also a 'spacey' me too when I came to the UK but then I became a pongo not a cabbage head.

At least one of us saw the light :lol:

[snapper]

Hey guys the pictures of the V bombers here are fantastic. there are more at this site http://www.militaryimages.net/photopost/showgallery.php/cat/583/password/

I know the webmaster is a keen v bomber fan , maybe the posters of the images here would post them on his site for him.

He doesnt like to steal images, so I thought I would ask on his behalf.