Handley Page Victor Development & Projects
- Thread starter hesham
- Start date
- Joined
- 13 May 2006
- Messages
- 1,039
- Reaction score
- 901
Re: Supersonic HP Victor
More infos (drawing) on Supersonic Victor?
More infos (drawing) on Supersonic Victor?
- Joined
- 13 May 2006
- Messages
- 1,039
- Reaction score
- 901
Re: Supersonic HP Victor
Thanks, you are true
Thanks, you are true
Folks,
A couple of HP Victor questions if I may:
I've read that the Victor had structural provision to carry an additional 28 1000lb bombs in underwing containers. Has anyone got any drawings/pics of such an arrangement? Interestingly, this could have given the Victor a potential conventional bomb load of around 63,000 - 72,000 lb (depending upon how many bombs were carried internally - typical max load being 35 x 1000 lb, though this was apparently a RAF operational limit not the max possible loadout for the bay which was 48 x 1000 lb)! This is I believe even more than the B-52D "Big Belly" which held 60,000lb IIRC.
Also,
Does anyone know if there were proposals to fit the Victor (or the Vulcan for that matter) with a similar tail gun as proposed for the Valiant with the "Eager Beaver" arrangement:
Also, has anyone got any representations of what the proposed (though never implemented) crew escape capsule looked like?
Finally, does anyone have a good quality 3-view line drawing of the Victor - either variant?
Regards,
Greg
A couple of HP Victor questions if I may:
I've read that the Victor had structural provision to carry an additional 28 1000lb bombs in underwing containers. Has anyone got any drawings/pics of such an arrangement? Interestingly, this could have given the Victor a potential conventional bomb load of around 63,000 - 72,000 lb (depending upon how many bombs were carried internally - typical max load being 35 x 1000 lb, though this was apparently a RAF operational limit not the max possible loadout for the bay which was 48 x 1000 lb)! This is I believe even more than the B-52D "Big Belly" which held 60,000lb IIRC.
Also,
Does anyone know if there were proposals to fit the Victor (or the Vulcan for that matter) with a similar tail gun as proposed for the Valiant with the "Eager Beaver" arrangement:
Also, has anyone got any representations of what the proposed (though never implemented) crew escape capsule looked like?
Finally, does anyone have a good quality 3-view line drawing of the Victor - either variant?
Regards,
Greg
Attachments
- Joined
- 11 March 2006
- Messages
- 8,633
- Reaction score
- 3,489
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Harder, than I thought at first ...
The best I could find among my resources may be this one from FlugWelt,
issue 3, 1966. Sorry for the bad copy, it's from a hardcover edition from
the library and the centerfold caused problems .. :-[
Harder, than I thought at first ...
The best I could find among my resources may be this one from FlugWelt,
issue 3, 1966. Sorry for the bad copy, it's from a hardcover edition from
the library and the centerfold caused problems .. :-[
Attachments
silvereagle
ACCESS: Restricted
- Joined
- 30 October 2007
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 2
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
There are a very good set of Victor drawings by Arthur Bentley in SCALE MODELS October and November of '78.
A reprint appears in the November '83 issue.
There are a very good set of Victor drawings by Arthur Bentley in SCALE MODELS October and November of '78.
A reprint appears in the November '83 issue.
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Whilst we are on the subject of V-Bombers I was wondering if anybody has an image of the Phase-3 Vulcan that was proposed prior to the adoption of the Mark-2 design (Phase-2). According to Tony Butlers book it would have basically been the Mark-2 but with a narrower wing of honeycomb construction. The book carries an excellent 3-view of the proposed Victor Phase-3 (HP.104) but not of the Vulcan Phase-3, can anybody help?
Thank you in advance sealordlawrence.
Whilst we are on the subject of V-Bombers I was wondering if anybody has an image of the Phase-3 Vulcan that was proposed prior to the adoption of the Mark-2 design (Phase-2). According to Tony Butlers book it would have basically been the Mark-2 but with a narrower wing of honeycomb construction. The book carries an excellent 3-view of the proposed Victor Phase-3 (HP.104) but not of the Vulcan Phase-3, can anybody help?
Thank you in advance sealordlawrence.
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Furthermore what were the two 30ft sideways looking aerials planned for the rear fuselage of the Victor Phase-3? Were they related to the red Drover planned for the Avro-730 or were they something different? Electronic countermeasures perhaps? Or just reconaissance?
Thank you in advance sealordlawrence.
Furthermore what were the two 30ft sideways looking aerials planned for the rear fuselage of the Victor Phase-3? Were they related to the red Drover planned for the Avro-730 or were they something different? Electronic countermeasures perhaps? Or just reconaissance?
Thank you in advance sealordlawrence.
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
That is my primary suspicion, however the only system that I am aware of in this category is the J-Band version of the Red Drover that would have used a 35ft antennae. Also would a reconnaissance system have been permanently fitted to a Strategic bomber roled as a Strategic bomber?
rickshaw said:
That is my primary suspicion, however the only system that I am aware of in this category is the J-Band version of the Red Drover that would have used a 35ft antennae. Also would a reconnaissance system have been permanently fitted to a Strategic bomber roled as a Strategic bomber?
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Some answers to my original questions:
Proposed crew escape capsule:
Wing bomb containers (note there were proposals for containers under the engines and in the same place as the B.2's fuel pods):
Finally, re the tail gun - no pics, but I did find the following intriguing comment in the Ministry of Supply's Specification (No. B. 128 P - reprint from 1 Sep 1954 incorporating amendment 1 - 6):
"Tail Armament
4.07 Deleted by Amendment No.4."
I wonder - did the original specifications (at least up to Amendment No.4), include a tail gun? Any information?
Regards,
Greg
Some answers to my original questions:
Proposed crew escape capsule:
Wing bomb containers (note there were proposals for containers under the engines and in the same place as the B.2's fuel pods):
Finally, re the tail gun - no pics, but I did find the following intriguing comment in the Ministry of Supply's Specification (No. B. 128 P - reprint from 1 Sep 1954 incorporating amendment 1 - 6):
"Tail Armament
4.07 Deleted by Amendment No.4."
I wonder - did the original specifications (at least up to Amendment No.4), include a tail gun? Any information?
Regards,
Greg
Attachments
- Joined
- 25 June 2009
- Messages
- 14,141
- Reaction score
- 4,333
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
In the late 1950s, Handley-Page put forward a proposal to increase the installed thrust (and hence MTOW) in Victor B.Mk1/1A by adding two booster turbojets in overwing nacelles with intake-doors, to be used for takeoff and initial climb. Bristol Orpheus, Rolls-Royce RB-162 and Armstrong-Siddeley Viper were considered. This proposal was not taken up by the RAF.
In the late 1950s, Handley-Page put forward a proposal to increase the installed thrust (and hence MTOW) in Victor B.Mk1/1A by adding two booster turbojets in overwing nacelles with intake-doors, to be used for takeoff and initial climb. Bristol Orpheus, Rolls-Royce RB-162 and Armstrong-Siddeley Viper were considered. This proposal was not taken up by the RAF.
yellowaster
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 1 January 2009
- Messages
- 135
- Reaction score
- 166
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
GTX,
Interesting diagrams of the detachable pressure cabin. I don't suppose you have a description of how the crew exited when the cabin was under canopy ? Since the parachute attachment is at the rear, I would expect the cabin to assume a nose down attitude. It struck me that this might make it a bit tricky to get out the door. That must have been thought about ...
YA
GTX,
Interesting diagrams of the detachable pressure cabin. I don't suppose you have a description of how the crew exited when the cabin was under canopy ? Since the parachute attachment is at the rear, I would expect the cabin to assume a nose down attitude. It struck me that this might make it a bit tricky to get out the door. That must have been thought about ...
YA
- Joined
- 5 May 2007
- Messages
- 1,272
- Reaction score
- 2,363
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
It is conceivable that the parachute might have a harness-type attachment: the drawing doesn't seem to be very detailed.
If my memory serves me (I don't have my source available at present) the escape capsule was mocked up for sub-scale trials on a glider, and required something like 28 feet of coiled cable to maintain an electrical connection to operate systems post-separation.
The night before the first test, a well-meaning electrician found all the looped cable, decided it was messy and shortened it without telling anyone. The glider went up and dropped the capsule, which promptly fell like a stone and the idea was quietly abandoned.
Of course, this story has all the hallmarks of an urban legend, but that's definitely the gist of what's in the book on this matter. (V-Bomber, V-Force, something like that - lurid orange dustjacket, published in the early to mid 1980s)
It is conceivable that the parachute might have a harness-type attachment: the drawing doesn't seem to be very detailed.
If my memory serves me (I don't have my source available at present) the escape capsule was mocked up for sub-scale trials on a glider, and required something like 28 feet of coiled cable to maintain an electrical connection to operate systems post-separation.
The night before the first test, a well-meaning electrician found all the looped cable, decided it was messy and shortened it without telling anyone. The glider went up and dropped the capsule, which promptly fell like a stone and the idea was quietly abandoned.
Of course, this story has all the hallmarks of an urban legend, but that's definitely the gist of what's in the book on this matter. (V-Bomber, V-Force, something like that - lurid orange dustjacket, published in the early to mid 1980s)
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Some pics:
including this hard to see one which shows the proposed additional engine installation:
Regards,
Greg
stargazer said:
Some pics:
including this hard to see one which shows the proposed additional engine installation:
Regards,
Greg
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Another drawing of the proposed under wing bomb containers - note there were at least 2 proposed versions: one under the engines and one further out on the wing roughly where the B.2's fuel pods were:
Regards,
Greg
Another drawing of the proposed under wing bomb containers - note there were at least 2 proposed versions: one under the engines and one further out on the wing roughly where the B.2's fuel pods were:
Regards,
Greg
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
The radar in question would be the "Red Neck" - seen here in both single and double versions:
Regards,
Greg
sealordlawrence said:
The radar in question would be the "Red Neck" - seen here in both single and double versions:
Regards,
Greg
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Proposed Victor III:
Regards,
Greg
Proposed Victor III:
Regards,
Greg
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Finally, a photo of the RATO pods trialled on the Victor:
Regards,
Greg
Finally, a photo of the RATO pods trialled on the Victor:
Regards,
Greg
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
I actually believe that the radar proposed for the Phase 3 was in fact the Red Setter and that it was part of the red devil blind bombing system.
Is the Vulcan 3 pictured the same as the Phase-3 mentioned in BSP?
I actually believe that the radar proposed for the Phase 3 was in fact the Red Setter and that it was part of the red devil blind bombing system.
Is the Vulcan 3 pictured the same as the Phase-3 mentioned in BSP?
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Thanks GTF by the info.
The bomb bay, cellars bomb bay below the engine and the cellars bomb bay beneath the wings would carry nuclear weapons and other weapons other than bombs and mines?. Any new weapon was designed to be worn by the Victors? New misilles or Bombs?, has propose gun turrets or air missile naceles to the Victors?. which were the weights of the various nacelles bombs? B.3 version of Victor would also have the ability to bring these nacelles?
Thanks GTF by the info. The bomb bay, cellars bomb bay below the engine and the cellars bomb bay beneath the wings would carry nuclear weapons and other weapons other than bombs and mines?. Any new weapon was designed to be worn by the Victors? New misilles or Bombs?, has propose gun turrets or air missile naceles to the Victors?. which were the weights of the various nacelles bombs? B.3 version of Victor would also have the ability to bring these nacelles?
yellowaster
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 1 January 2009
- Messages
- 135
- Reaction score
- 166
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Regarding Red Setter. This was initially proposed as a Q-band SLAR, for use as a fixing-aid when delivering the Red Cheeks weapon. But with the cancellation of Red Cheeks, the Red Setter programme covered general SLAR R&D work (X-band and Q-band), as part of which a number of experimental sets were built. Specific SLARs for service application were proposed & developed under other project names e.g. Blue Shadow, Yellow Aster, Red Drover, Red Neck. I've not come across a reference to the SLAR for the Victor 3, but would guess (a) it would be a recce radar, and (b) it would be some derivative of the Red Neck work (which IIRC actually covered two radars: X-band and Q-band). I suspect recce radar since the Victor already had H2S for navigation and aiming - and using a SLAR for bombing has problems. However, this is supposition.
YA
Regarding Red Setter. This was initially proposed as a Q-band SLAR, for use as a fixing-aid when delivering the Red Cheeks weapon. But with the cancellation of Red Cheeks, the Red Setter programme covered general SLAR R&D work (X-band and Q-band), as part of which a number of experimental sets were built. Specific SLARs for service application were proposed & developed under other project names e.g. Blue Shadow, Yellow Aster, Red Drover, Red Neck. I've not come across a reference to the SLAR for the Victor 3, but would guess (a) it would be a recce radar, and (b) it would be some derivative of the Red Neck work (which IIRC actually covered two radars: X-band and Q-band). I suspect recce radar since the Victor already had H2S for navigation and aiming - and using a SLAR for bombing has problems. However, this is supposition.
YA
- Joined
- 20 January 2007
- Messages
- 923
- Reaction score
- 1,032
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
GTX: tks for model pix. Sequence of events:
31/5/56: R&D ITP Mk.2 Victor+Vulcan to carry Blue Steel (ITP 9/3/56), warhead variant of Mk.1 Victor/Vulcan's Yellow Sun; 60 each ordered 5/3/57. Avro 730 then in design as "recce" because intended replacement was Blue Streak IRBM with heavy UK Orange Herald warhead. Various Super-ASMs in scheming to replace Blue Steel Mk.1.
25/3/57: Bermuda US/UK Collaboration Agreement. Dual-key Thor IRBM.
4/8/58: US/UK Agreement, Atomic Energy Co-operation for Defense. End of solo UK nukes. Delete Orange Herald, cut back Yellow Sun Mk.1. MoD despair at glacial Avro work on Blue Steel; despair at any UK Super ASM.
1/59: UK joins US in Joint ASR for (to be) Douglas Skybolt, chosen 6/59; Avro Weapons Research Division appointed Sister Firm. UK orders 144, 20/6/60 for Vulcan 2: dual fit, U/E 24 each Coningsby and Scampton. Blue Steel to be confined to 24 Scampton and 24 (became 16) Victor 2 Wittering.
So, what skewered Mk.3 Victor and cut back Mk.2 orders? The Received reason was undercarriage incompatibility with Skybolt...but GTX's pics suggest not. By late-59, Sir Fred.HP was seen by MoA as "difficult" in context of the desired measure of coalescence in industry structure; whereas HS Group was merging nicely with Blackburn, DH and Folland, all directed by (ex-RAE) Sir Arnold Hall and Sir Aubrey Burke. Rewarded, I suggest, as good boys.
I don't know why both firms schemed 6-pack Skybolts. UK could not afford such quantities: contemplate trying to generate such things; attrition would make the notion of second targets otiose; reliability/guidance accuracy was intended to be such that 2 ALBMs per target would suffice.
GTX: tks for model pix. Sequence of events:
31/5/56: R&D ITP Mk.2 Victor+Vulcan to carry Blue Steel (ITP 9/3/56), warhead variant of Mk.1 Victor/Vulcan's Yellow Sun; 60 each ordered 5/3/57. Avro 730 then in design as "recce" because intended replacement was Blue Streak IRBM with heavy UK Orange Herald warhead. Various Super-ASMs in scheming to replace Blue Steel Mk.1.
25/3/57: Bermuda US/UK Collaboration Agreement. Dual-key Thor IRBM.
4/8/58: US/UK Agreement, Atomic Energy Co-operation for Defense. End of solo UK nukes. Delete Orange Herald, cut back Yellow Sun Mk.1. MoD despair at glacial Avro work on Blue Steel; despair at any UK Super ASM.
1/59: UK joins US in Joint ASR for (to be) Douglas Skybolt, chosen 6/59; Avro Weapons Research Division appointed Sister Firm. UK orders 144, 20/6/60 for Vulcan 2: dual fit, U/E 24 each Coningsby and Scampton. Blue Steel to be confined to 24 Scampton and 24 (became 16) Victor 2 Wittering.
So, what skewered Mk.3 Victor and cut back Mk.2 orders? The Received reason was undercarriage incompatibility with Skybolt...but GTX's pics suggest not. By late-59, Sir Fred.HP was seen by MoA as "difficult" in context of the desired measure of coalescence in industry structure; whereas HS Group was merging nicely with Blackburn, DH and Folland, all directed by (ex-RAE) Sir Arnold Hall and Sir Aubrey Burke. Rewarded, I suggest, as good boys.
I don't know why both firms schemed 6-pack Skybolts. UK could not afford such quantities: contemplate trying to generate such things; attrition would make the notion of second targets otiose; reliability/guidance accuracy was intended to be such that 2 ALBMs per target would suffice.
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
My reasoning for this being Red Setter is that according to BSP the Phase 3 Victor was to have a fuselage extension for the purpose of taking radar antennae. The only reason I can think of for putting SLAR into the aircraft as a production standard (whilst not sacrificing bomb bay space) is to use it as a targetting system. Furthermore red devil is described as a targetting system that used Red Setter.
yellowaster said:
My reasoning for this being Red Setter is that according to BSP the Phase 3 Victor was to have a fuselage extension for the purpose of taking radar antennae. The only reason I can think of for putting SLAR into the aircraft as a production standard (whilst not sacrificing bomb bay space) is to use it as a targetting system. Furthermore red devil is described as a targetting system that used Red Setter.
yellowaster
ACCESS: Confidential
- Joined
- 1 January 2009
- Messages
- 135
- Reaction score
- 166
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
re: red setter as SLAR for Victor.
It's true that Red Devil would have incorporated Red Setter (or a Red Setter-type radar). But Red Devil was an aiming system and really only made sense for delivering Red Cheeks. Also, I've not seen any mention of Red Devil after about 1952, so suspect it really didn't get very far. It's not hard to see why. A SLAR gives a view at right-angles to direction of flight - which is fine if you want to fly past the target and launch a manoeuverable guided bomb at it - but rather less so for other applications.
The more likely possibility for the Victor SLAR, if not a recce radar, would be a nav radar for en-route position fixes (in same manner as the X-band SLAR in TSR-2) - I guess a SLAR with a long antenna would give a higher accuracy than that obtainable by H2S.
re: red setter as SLAR for Victor.
It's true that Red Devil would have incorporated Red Setter (or a Red Setter-type radar). But Red Devil was an aiming system and really only made sense for delivering Red Cheeks. Also, I've not seen any mention of Red Devil after about 1952, so suspect it really didn't get very far. It's not hard to see why. A SLAR gives a view at right-angles to direction of flight - which is fine if you want to fly past the target and launch a manoeuverable guided bomb at it - but rather less so for other applications.
The more likely possibility for the Victor SLAR, if not a recce radar, would be a nav radar for en-route position fixes (in same manner as the X-band SLAR in TSR-2) - I guess a SLAR with a long antenna would give a higher accuracy than that obtainable by H2S.
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Amazon Uk have it for £13.99 delivered at the moment.
Regards,
Barry
Amazon Uk have it for £13.99 delivered at the moment.
Regards,
Barry
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Yes - awaiting mine on order from Ian Allan - has been on order for some time now.
Regards,
Greg
Thorvic said:
Yes - awaiting mine on order from Ian Allan - has been on order for some time now.
Regards,
Greg
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Some more intriguing information re Victor (or Victor derivatives) tail guns:
The new Aerofax on the Victor by Phil Butler and Tony Buttler (excellent book btw guys) mentions the HP.98 Target Marker proposal as being planned to have "Radar-sighted remotely controlled tail guns...". Does anyone have any further information on this proposal or the proposed installation?
BTW, my earlier request for a good quality Victor 3-view frawing has been satisfied. If anyone else wants a copy, please PM me with your email address.
Regards,
Greg
Some more intriguing information re Victor (or Victor derivatives) tail guns:
The new Aerofax on the Victor by Phil Butler and Tony Buttler (excellent book btw guys) mentions the HP.98 Target Marker proposal as being planned to have "Radar-sighted remotely controlled tail guns...". Does anyone have any further information on this proposal or the proposed installation?
BTW, my earlier request for a good quality Victor 3-view frawing has been satisfied. If anyone else wants a copy, please PM me with your email address.
Regards,
Greg
Hammer Birchgrove
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Messages
- 583
- Reaction score
- 43
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Is this the super-sonic (Mach 1.4) Victor? Thanks in advance.
GTX said:Proposed Victor III:
Regards,
Greg
Is this the super-sonic (Mach 1.4) Victor? Thanks in advance.
- Joined
- 22 April 2012
- Messages
- 2,270
- Reaction score
- 2,045
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
No, As I understand it that is the Phase III Victor that was offered as an option for the Mk2, the Phase II being the one chosen.
No, As I understand it that is the Phase III Victor that was offered as an option for the Mk2, the Phase II being the one chosen.
Hammer Birchgrove
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Messages
- 583
- Reaction score
- 43
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Aha, I see, thanks.
sealordlawrence said:
Aha, I see, thanks.
Hammer Birchgrove
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Messages
- 583
- Reaction score
- 43
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
Thanks, I remember now that the fuselage was more different than the "ordinary" Victor.
GTX said:
Thanks, I remember now that the fuselage was more different than the "ordinary" Victor.
Hammer Birchgrove
ACCESS: Top Secret
- Joined
- 13 May 2009
- Messages
- 583
- Reaction score
- 43
Re: Handley Page Victor projects
I checked http://www.skomer.u-net.com/projects/start.htm to see what the Red Cheeks was. According to the website it's an inertial-controlled bomb, but what does that mean, apart from (seemingly) being some type of early "smart bomb"? Would it have been armed with high explosives or with nuclear warheads? ???
BTW, would it have been possible/practical to arm the Vickers Blue Boar TV-guided stand off bomb/missile with a conventional warhead instead of the proposed nuclear?
Thanks in advance.
I checked http://www.skomer.u-net.com/projects/start.htm to see what the Red Cheeks was. According to the website it's an inertial-controlled bomb, but what does that mean, apart from (seemingly) being some type of early "smart bomb"? Would it have been armed with high explosives or with nuclear warheads? ???
BTW, would it have been possible/practical to arm the Vickers Blue Boar TV-guided stand off bomb/missile with a conventional warhead instead of the proposed nuclear?
Thanks in advance.
